Posts by Thomas Roberts9

Sophia Martin41 said:I’ve only experienced a true clitoral orgasm a handful of times, and honestly, it feels somewhat "small" to me—it’s just too localized and doesn't feel particularly profound. In contrast, when I have a vaginal orgasm via the G-spot, it seems to surge through my entire pelvic region, my uterus, and even my lower abdomen; the intensity of those contractions is just incomparable to anything else.

👍 exactly what I mean... 😁 😍

I find myself agreeing with Sophia Martin41... personally, I feel like vaginal stimulation is much more fulfilling... ever since I've focused on that, I haven't even given much thought to clitoral orgasms 🤣
I also can't help but think that perhaps there is a bit too much pressure put on reaching a clitoral climax. Maybe it would be more rewarding to simply focus on your partner, the physical sensations, the touch, and the intimacy itself rather than fixating on whether or not you can achieve a specific result. Besides, if you are already experiencing vaginal orgasms, I really don't see why anyone should worry about the clitoral aspect?? 🤷

Ultimately, the decision rests entirely with you 🤷 I personally visit the hospital on a regular basis and always have a wonderful experience, though I suppose that really depends on which specialist you happen to be assigned. It might be wise to check the rates at a private clinic like Mayo Clinic and compare that against the potential wait times at a public facility to see which option makes the most sense for your situation 🤷

Hmm... I actually had the exact opposite experience myself, where I felt like my vision was always on the lower end of the spectrum, and I noticed those same visual distortions once I finally started wearing prescription glasses. If you truly feel like you possess "above-average vision" in whatever way 😁 😉, it’s possible that your sight is being slightly compromised by the lenses in your sunglasses. It might be worth scheduling an appointment with an eye doctor just to get everything checked out... I'm not quite sure what else to suggest 🙄

Ashley Price57 said:I also find myself wondering, whenever I hear people claim it’s "normal to have a mom and a dad rather than two moms or two dads," just how many children have actually been raised in what some might call "abnormal" circumstances—you know, by a single parent, or perhaps by a grandmother and grandfather? It seems to me that instead of focusing on the actual love provided, or the genuine desire to nurture a child and ensure they have everything they need both emotionally and physically... no, apparently that isn't the priority. Instead, there is this insistence that a child simply needs one male and one female figure in the house, regardless of who they actually are, as long as they satisfy those gender roles to meet a certain definition of "normal." 😂

👍👍👍

Well, when she goes back on her own word like that, I suppose she really ought to take a moment to "reflect" on what she previously claimed versus where she stands now...

Anyway, did anyone catch the corner today? They had one of the secretary from the Governor's office and a representative from an AARP affiliate there. It was honestly a disaster... the guy was completely out of his depth. He just kept rambling nonsense, repeatedly insisting that "since this country is this way, we have to be this way too." As if that's some valid excuse to follow a path that's already ruined the people living here—we'd just be following suit... it was truly dreadful. I know this isn't strictly a political debate, but the incompetence of our cabinet members is going to end up costing us dearly... 😠

slyscout192 said:Does it truly matter what any one of us thinks, or even what we all believe collectively? Even President George W. Bush finds himself standing against this legislation. In the end, I suspect the law will simply be repealed, leaving everyone feeling quite content and satisfied. It seems as though none of us who actually support this legislation will be given the chance to voice our perspective. It is much the same with you all. What truly frustrates me, though, is how people immediately turn around and lash out at the church and their faith the moment something goes wrong.

I honestly can't quite wrap my head around why you're backing that legislation, especially when considering how... This doesn't apply to you, given that you mentioned yourself that you have no desire to have children. If you aren't planning on actually following the law, I can't help but wonder why you even care about it in the first place. 😕 😲 If we follow that logic, then laws only serve to harm others while leaving you untouched, and I truly find that a troubling way to view our justice system.

slyscout192 said:I have been reflecting quite a bit on the potential connections between fertility treatments and the management of other underlying medical conditions.:
After I was discharged from the hospital, a priest mentioned to me that refusing medical treatment is actually considered a sin. I’ve been reflecting on that quite a bit lately, thinking about how it’s truly a sin to act in direct opposition to one's own health, and I feel there is a profound connection between those two ideas.I tend to look upon doctors as if they were an extension of God's own hand.Even if they were genuine physicians rather than mere pretenders, I believe their primary motivation would still be to ensure the patient's well-being. It stands to reason that the same principle likely applies to the MPO as well.

Doctors are essentially the ones who make it much easier for women to reach their children, so I truly believe that making comparisons is necessary here. 😳

slyscout192 said:I realize that I am currently contradicting much of what my husband and I previously wrote.
Even if I decide that I have no desire to attend the town hall meeting, I don't believe anyone truly has the authority to force my hand.And likewise, if any of you should ever choose that path, I truly believe you would hold the exact same rights to freedom as I do.

Look, nobody is actually forcing you to do anything, nor is anyone trying to push you into it. Under current American law, women who wish to make that choice are perfectly free to do so.

I say this again—if the law doesn't concern you, there is simply no reason to make things difficult for anyone else. 🙂

🙂

Melissa James70 said:And now we find out that the famous little troll—who clearly doesn't even know how to spell troll correctly—is suddenly male. If this was just some attempt at trolling, I could handle it, but honestly, it’s just a bit pathetic.

It wasn't a troll, it was slyscout192 😉
and as for the whole gender confusion thing... it turns out a woman was originally posting, and then her husband joined in, so it's really just a whole family affair 😁

electricsailor13 said:I'm curious, since it's late: what is the actual health impact of sleeping without a pillow? I am not asking about comfort levels. Specifically, regarding sleeping face down—is it more or less stressful for the cervical spine to use a pillow versus going without one? I have the same question for side sleepers. 👍

I'm not entirely sure, though I personally tend to ditch the pillow altogether when I sleep on my stomach—or at least I flatten my standard one until it's practically flush with the mattress 😁. When I sleep on my side, however, I always use an orthopedic pillow, as I've found it quite uncomfortable to let my head hang too low, yet I also dislike having my head elevated significantly above my shoulders when lying face down 🤷

At this point, we aren't even really debating the merits of the law itself, but rather seeing who can pile up more—whether they be brilliant or just plain foolish—arguments to tear the other side down. It feels like it’s quietly shifting toward a critique of personal character rather than substance.
Defensive mechanisms have always been the most potent weapon in any debate, and I suppose slyscout192 is a prime example of that. As for me, I think I’ll step back for a moment; my psychologist is on vacation and deserves some peace, so please direct all further inquiries to whoever is on call. 😉

slyscout192 said:I’m perfectly fine, really.
And please, feel free to direct all that expert psychological insight of yours my way.

I actually happen to be a psychology major.

slyscout192 said:If people truly don't believe in marriage, then they should just opt for a civil ceremony. Do you even realize how simple that is? You just go to the courthouse, handle the legal paperwork for the state, bring along two witnesses, and that’s it.
My wife and I have acted as witnesses before; there isn't even much signing involved.

You can decide when to separate or which last name to take whenever you feel like it.

There really isn't anything to "believe" in here. It's purely a matter of administrative record...
You're all just lying to yourselves. In many ways, you seem to hold a stronger belief in the sanctity of marriage than those who actually walk down the aisle.
Perhaps the reason you aren't marrying at all is out of fear, rather than a lack of faith.

Again, I'm talking about a legal civil union. Everything is wrapped up in five minutes.

I suppose I'll never be able to find common ground with you.....
Honestly—goodnight... I simply haven't the energy, nor the desire, to try and convince someone who is so stubbornly committed to their own perspective and insists on seeing things only through their own lens... once again.

slyscout192 said:I can only observe that this isn't really about you personally; rather, it seems you simply lack a reliable partner to lean on. I understand how difficult it must be to navigate everything while being on your own and needing companionship.

Please refrain from applying your amateur psychology to us.
In much the same way, I might suggest that you are merely acting out of frustration, attempting to soothe your own insecurities through these endless, marathon messages—even though, deep down, you likely realize you aren't actually achieving anything...

Just as you and your wife are navigating the challenges of adoption—specifically knowing exactly what lies ahead—women face similar struggles when trying to conceive. In that sense, you are both facing comparable hurdles.

slyscout192 said:When two people share a tender, deep love, they choose marriage. And for them, assisted reproductive technology is an option.
So, where is the issue here?

Love really does provide the answer to everything.

As I mentioned before, some people simply don't believe in marriage, and you can't exactly stop them from living their lives that way.
It's the same with those who are married; while assisted reproduction is legally available to them, you seem to be consistently overlooking the heavy reality this process imposes—specifically the immense pressure and the profound physical and emotional toll it takes on a woman... and if it doesn't work out, then suddenly, it’s just "too bad" for her.

I think I'll head to bed; there is little point in continuing such a strained conversation.

feralwolf30 said:I can't help but feel there might be a touch of masochism running through this entire forum, given how much energy everyone seems to expend debating with fools or wading through those endless, rambling posts when we could be focusing our attention on a much more meaningful discussion regarding that ridiculous new bill.

I find myself in complete agreement; that legislation needs to be overturned immediately.

Casey Palmer5 said:http://www.fda.gov/publications/mpo_information.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/news/medical_updates/article_link

👍

I feel like this has drifted quite a bit from our original topic... 🙂

slyscout192 said:I find myself in agreement with the legislation.

First, let me offer an apology—I really should have phrased that as "if you support the law, then it doesn't apply to you." That was my mistake, and I certainly didn't mean to come across as being overly defensive. It’s just that my reaction was somewhat reflexive, mostly because I personally do not support this legislation at all.

slyscout192 said:I sometimes find myself wondering how one could possibly feel such deep resentment toward the law. It is merely ink on a page.

You really have to learn how to read between the lines.
I truly believe in the sanctity of marriage. However, I realize that not everyone shares that conviction, and to some, a marriage certificate is nothing more than a legal formality, much like how some view the law itself. Ultimately, we cannot impose our own definitions of right and wrong onto others.

slyscout192 said:And how would you say that women and their partners typically describe things?
I think I finally understand everything now...
I sometimes find myself wondering if you all would actually have a preference when it comes to choosing who the father should be...
I have to wonder if everyone here has truly lost their sense of reason.
I find myself wondering what kind of sickness must possess a person to be unable to accept the simple gifts that nature provides us.
It seems you simply lack the inner strength or perhaps even the luck required to embrace even the smallest gesture, no matter how insignificant it might appear to others.

It’s only natural that you would want to choose your own partner. From an evolutionary standpoint, we are fundamentally wired to be selective if we want our lineage to survive. Historically, women have gravitated toward strong men who can provide security and stability, while men tend to seek out young, healthy partners as a sign of fertility.
Please, try not to get hung up on my every single word; instead, I wish you would just look at the broader context of what I am saying. It feels as though you have become so preoccupied with defending yourself that you are twisting every little thing I say to suit your own narrative. You’ve written such an exhaustive amount of text that I suspect even you have lost the thread, and frankly, I doubt anyone else is reading these posts anymore because the core message has been buried under so much noise. It seems you came here looking for a fight rather than simply sharing an opinion.

slyscout192 said:I have this colleague of mine whose mother essentially handpicked his father for her; she had a child with one man, only to end up marrying someone else entirely.
There she is, just lounging around naked on the bed while her guests arrive, while her husband is stuck doing all the dishes and she’s just there shouting orders at him.
And even with that other individual, having children just isn't an option.

It’s impossible to make broad generalizations. These things can happen to anyone, really. I’ve even seen couples who seemed to function perfectly together only to eventually drift apart. There is no sense in trying to predict anyone's fate.

slyscout192 said:It's me, the husband here.
....
We all understand what IVF entails and the deep emotional toll it can take on a woman. Forcing such a process is certainly not an option I would support, nor do I believe it should be encouraged.

I suspect the greater trauma actually lies with the woman who desperately wants children but cannot conceive—whether due to biological hurdles, being single, or any other circumstance—rather than the woman who has the opportunity but must endure the rigors of assisted reproduction. I truly hope that, in the end, she finds success.🙂

slyscout192 said:Regarding gay couples, I feel that adoption is a wonderful path for them, especially since they won't be attempting to alter the sexual orientation of the child they raise.
It seems much better for a child to have two fathers or two mothers than to grow up without a stable family structure.

Regarding this point, I can say quite freely that I am in complete agreement.

slyscout192 said:But just consider this one possibility if all women struggling with infertility turned to IVF, and if at least 50% of children were conceived through those methods, who would even think about adopting an additional child? I suppose we all dream of experiencing that small miracle within ourselves, yet on the other hand, there are those who are capable of having children but choose to reject them.

I think it is important to recognize that not every woman is wired for adoption. While I personally support it, many others simply aren't, and it isn't just because they want to experience that "miracle" you mentioned, but also because of deep-seated fears regarding what they might receive or concerns about different genetics... it sounds a bit harsh, I know, but most people naturally desire to have their own biological child first.
And there really is no need to take offense when others hold a different perspective. No one was attacking you, yet you found yourself becoming defensive, which seems unnecessary to me. 🤷 It is perfectly fine to share your opinion, but there is no reason for a confrontation. If you support the current legislation, then it doesn't truly affect you since your path involves adoption rather than biological children, so please don't lecture others on how they should feel or which laws they ought to support. Everyone is entitled to their own view.
Personally, I find the law quite distasteful and cannot support it, and it feels wrong to me that a single individual in this country should have the power to dictate the fate of thousands of people (primarily the women battling infertility and their partners)!!!