Bloggin' about pre-cum

It tires me out having to converse with men who are aggressively self-assured and totally wrong. This type of behavior bothers me in women too, but I tend to favor women, and the number of stupidly self-assured men out there seems disproportionately higher than the number of stupidly self-assured women. Yeah, I'm biased.

This afternoon, I was spending time with a textbook case male friend. I mentioned that I had recently gone off the pill and cracked a lame joke about condoms. After congratulating me on my decision to stop poisoning my body (mistake #1), he launched into a tirade about the myriad ways in which the medical establishment polices our bodies via capitalism. See, I *know* that the medical establishment polices my body. I am reminded of this fact daily, so I don't disagree. What I did disagree with was the framework around which he based his argument, which was (drumroll) that condoms are equally as effective as "pulling out."

Now, I don't claim to know everything about sex. In the grand scheme of things, I imagine I know very little, but I'm *fairly* certain coitus interruptus saw its heyday sometime during the 16th century.

My self-assured buddy blathered on about pre-cum before proving his point with time-tested *evidence,* which included a TMI story about fucking his girlfriend three times a day for over a year without a condom and never once having a pregnancy scare.

I told him that I'd hop online to fact-check his fascinating find, but he told me not to bother, as his claim was already backed by extensive research. I hopped online nonetheless, but I must be lacking in the Google search department, as the fruits of my labor have yielded no results. I know there are studies out there that can prove or disprove just about anything; when I find one that fits the bill, I'll let you know. In the meantime, I'm making up for wasted time by blogging about chauvinistic retards.

I even made art. It's a magical penis spraying magical, spermless ejaculate.