Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3

[bits]

I actually agree with this. Darkness put it very well and you too k-train. It’s like the anti sniper argument. We can always make sure we’re using protection during sex.

That's pretty much my thoughts as well. If its not going to do any harm, then just let it be. If a guy does sleep with a woman without protection (which we on this board on several occasions have said he should be using) that's honestly on him and if he falls for the old line of "I can't get pregnant, blah, blah, blah" then that's also on him if he buys that line. Obviously, there are women who can't have kids but I can't tell you how many times I've heard of guys falling for that when the woman knows full well she can get pregnant.

While I'm not worried about getting manipulated into having more kids, my concern is the women we're disqualifying b/c they have no interest in having kids, ever, with anyone. A lot of women are just looking to have a good time. At the least, adding in "fun" instead of going full-court-press on "baby rabies" seems like the better route to me.

I'm for whatever Shannon deems best after modeling the options.

I wouldn't look at it as a disqualifier, if a woman has super high attraction to you she's going to want your babies, all life is driven towards reproduction and humans are just sorting out who they want to reproduce with. I guess there could be a "no babies" module added but now again more and more is being added to the program that's likely going to cause more energy use and possible resistance.

How in the world one can be both highly attracted towards somebody to the point of "reversing the roles" and chasing sex with a guy and also think "eww no i wouldn't want babies with THAT guy" is beyond me.

Not to mention, ONE person has mentioned it, we don't know that girl so we can't say if she had baby rabies before meeting him, she felt he was her 1 soulmate, if she was using it as a joke/metaphor as many young girls do, or if she was just flat out insane.