Slashdot Mirror
German Carpenter's Testicluar Valve Could Mean An On/Off Switch For Sperm
Press2ToContinue writes: A German carpenter has invented a valve which he claims will revolutionize contraception, by allowing a man to turn the flow of sperm from his testicles on and off at the flick of a switch. It (the switch, of course) is nearly an inch long and weighs less than a tenth of an ounce. It is surgically implanted on the vas deferens, the tube that carries sperm from the testicles, in a half-hour operation, and controlled by a switch beneath the skin of the scrotum.
So far Bimek is the only man who has the switches implanted, one for each testicle. I wonder what other switches we will see implanted into humans in the future? I think I'd like a valve for adrenaline control.
So far Bimek is the only man who has the switches implanted, one for each testicle. I wonder what other switches we will see implanted into humans in the future? I think I'd like a valve for adrenaline control.
Presumable the decision to produce offspring is not something one would toggle on a weekly basis.
Once the Human Brain-Machine Interface tech matures, we will be able to have just-like-the-real-thing sex with virtual women and zero risk of pregnancy, as much as we want without having to pay the women (or buy dinner for them) since they aren't real.
Of course...a surgery that distributes neuron-interfacing machines throughout the gray matter of the brain is even more invasive than this one....but the potential benefits go way beyond the crazy sex.
Your wife AND your mistress will love you for it!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
No, I'm saying that if the switch is on or off depending on various rubbing of your nuts ... unless there's a blinking light or some other cue to let you know the state it's in, there's a very good chance that at any given point it may not be in the same state you thought it was.
So, if before and after coitus you can check that it was blinking, and know it didn't change (not sure how) .. great, run wild. You can selectively inseminate.
But if you can't tell, it doesn't serve much purpose.
I guess you count have it emit a loud beep when it switched state. Otherwise it's just Schoedinger's nuts. ;-)
I have no idea if this is meant to be "I can knock up with wife but not the mistress", or you must book several months in advance to have the doctor flip the switch on your balls.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Plenty of research demonstrates that friendship cures loneliness whereas romance does not
I call BS. I don't sleep (and I mean actual sleep, not sex) with my friends, and that's one of the best parts about a relationship. Sounds like some researchers spiked their studies with narrow word definitions.
Sex is not necessary. To overcome the desire, just masturbate.
If you think masturbating in any obviates the desire for sex, you've clearly had some pretty shitty sex in your time.
From a female's perspective....
1) Sex is biologically expensive. Either you are taking hormonal supplements to disrupt your biological processes to prevent contraception, which is a health risk, or you are risking 10 months of your life flushed down the john for 10 minutes (if you're lucky) of pleasure. And after the 10 months you get to raise some rugrat for the next 16 to 18 years, 'cause heaven forbid the mother handing the brat over to the baby-daddy, signing a support agreement and just walking away saying 'watch for the check in the mail, hon!'. That's not a woman's place in the world, son.
Or...you can try to convince the asshole you're with that "bareback ain't where it's at", and watch him have a tantrum like a two-year-old (ooh, is that foreshadowing?)
2) Sex is time-consuming...well, it is if your partner knows what the hell he's doing. If not...well, at least it's quick.
3) Sex is dangerous. It spreads disease. It makes you vulnerable to rape, which is life-destroying. It risks pregnancy which (if unwanted) can be life-destroying.
4) Sex never satisfies...well, see point 2.
5) Sex is gross (your opinion may vary, but the more you learn about biology the more disgusting it becomes).
6) Sex is not necessary. To overcome the desire, just masturbate. To overcome loneliness, hang out with friends. Plenty of research demonstrates that friendship cures loneliness whereas romance does not (and in fact can make it worse). Google it.
There, FTFY.
The stigma associated with being single is gone.
I really don't know where you get that idea from. I don't recall much of a stigma for single guys, but the 'spinster' image for women is all too alive, I'm afraid.
Consider this: A single guy in his 40's who's never married is a bachelor, a playboy, a swinger, etc. while a woman in her 40's who's never married is...a spinster. What else? Cat lady? Cougar? MILF? None of these terms have very positive overtones, and some are downright insulting.
Yeah, exactly. That sounds like it was written by someone with a personality disorder that makes them not really crave human contact (I mean besides sex, though including it as well). There's probably a DSM-IV name for it. The simple fact is: normal people want to be touched. Babies that aren't touched enough either die or develop major personality disorders when they grow up.
Hey there Mr. armchair psychologist. I see you ignored my request that you skip the ad hominem fallacy and respond to the content of the post.
Incidentally, you are wrong in your assumption that I don't crave physical contact. I have several friends whom I hug very often. I just don't have sex with them.
People tend to jump in to the personal attacks, like you did, when they are threatened by the content of the post. What is so threatening about the possibility that you could, if you choose, live a sex-free life and still be happy?
I see you ignored my request that you skip the ad hominem fallacy and respond to the content of the post.
The thing is, the content of your post was a combination of "I'm a special snowflake" adolescent cynicism and retarded MRA talking points.
It's only the ad hominem part that's amusing.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it