Donate Now
We've Moved! Check out our new boards.
  
my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Scarleteen Boards: 2000 - 2014 (Archive) » EXPERT ADVICE » Emergencies and Crises » Common Situation or a Legit Risk?

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Common Situation or a Legit Risk?
WithPleasure
Neophyte
Member # 109716

Icon 1 posted      Profile for WithPleasure     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hi
Id like to ask 2 question regarding a possible pregnancy risk we had yesterday.

After ejaculating and having removed the condom, I wiped my penis down with a tissue but did not shower. I did wash my hands thoroughly. My partner then asked me to have sex again (after 4-5 minutes).

I am concerned that, as I placed the fresh condom on the penis for the second time, that the outside of the condom as it was being rolled down, came in contact with the head or shaft of the penis during adjustment. Normally this isn’t a problem, but as I had already ejaculated once, and only wiped my penis not washed it, Im worried this may have inadvertently transferred small amounts of leftover semen from the penis to the outside of the condom.
Does this sound like a risk I should be worried about?

From the same situation, I am also concerned about possible trace amounts of semen not easily visible that may have been on my fingers. If there was semen on the penis from the first ejaculation and I then put on a fresh condom with my hands which must have touched the bare penis while doing so, including squeezing the tip of the condom with my fingers to prevent air, this could mean the tip which is the part that touches the vagina the deepest may have had trace semen on it.
Does that sound likely?

I know that sperm can live outside a hospitable environment for at least longer than before we had sex again, and although I did wipe myself down beforehand I cant be certain my penis was dry or completely free of semen. Are these scenarios common and at all likely to pose a risk? Thanks for all you do on this website.

Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sam W
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 108189

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Sam W     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hi withpleasure,

So, can you take a look at this article and see what it says about the behaviors that CAN cause pregnancy and then see how they compare to your situation?
http://www.scarleteen.com/cgi-bin/forum/ultimatebb.cgi?/ubb/get_topic/f/10/t/002611.html#000000
Also, I think you may find this article a useful read
Who's Afraid of Sperm Cells?

Posts: 1292 | Registered: Aug 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WithPleasure
Neophyte
Member # 109716

Icon 1 posted      Profile for WithPleasure     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hi Sam W and thank you so much for your prompt reply and for the 2 articles which Ive not come across before.

Im a bit unclear about your answer, but I guess what you mean (from the first link you posted), is that I should consider myself in the 'May have had a risk, but not a likely one' category?
(The first 2 bullets under that heading: 'Having someone ejaculate on hands and then immediately....
as well as
'You had intercourse or direct genital rubbing or direct contact with ejaculate...')

On the other hand, from the article 'Whos afraid of sperm cells?' I am not sure if I meet any of the 3 requirements to actually be worry-free:
Is the area hotter/colder than body temperature: the semen was on my penis - I suspect that counts as 'body temperature' so I guess No.
Has it been sitting out: Not really, as it was 4-5 minutes
Is the area more acidic: No, as it was on the genitilia, not on a foreign object.

To make things more worrying, while waiting for your reply I happened to ask a friend in medicine about this and he said I should think carefully about the risks and went off tangent about agricultural animals purposefully inseminated this way without direct genital-to-genital contact so it isnt unheard of. Although I hope he is misjudged my scenario with the one he brought up. :-(

Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Redskies
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 79774

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Redskies     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think this piece may help it all make some better sense to you: Human Reproduction: A Seafarer's Guide

Having intercourse and using a method of contraception correctly does put you in the category "may have had a risk, but not a likely one": you can reasonably expect to be protected from pregnancy, but it's not 100% guaranteed. If you'd like more information on correct use of condoms, we have that here: Condom Basics: A User's Manual.

The other things that you're asking about sound like indirect transfer of small or trace amounts of semen. Pregnancy is just not going to happen that way - the first article I linked you to has thorough explanations of why.

I have to say, I hope your friend isn't hoping to inseminate animals in the way you originally described here, because your friend would be waiting forever, disappointed! [Smile] With artificial insemination, semen is deliberately and carefully collected, stored and injected into the vagina, which is a world away from what you described.

--------------------
The kyriarchy usually assumes that I am the kind of woman of whom it would approve. I have a peculiar kind of fun showing it just how much I am not.

Posts: 1786 | From: Europe | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WithPleasure
Neophyte
Member # 109716

Icon 1 posted      Profile for WithPleasure     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hi and thank you for your reply. I understand this point of view better now.

As a follow on question from what you have said, if you don’t mind my asking:
You wrote that indirect transfer is unlikely at best, but from the first link that Sam W posted, under ‘May have had a risk but not a likely one’:

Having someone ejaculate ("come") on hands then immediately rub it on a vulva or put those semen-covered fingers right inside the vagina

My question is, doesn’t the above scenario also constitute indirect transfer (via hands)?
Perhaps I misunderstand, but it seems in this case, the risk is not just considered among the unlikelihood associated with “indirect transfer” but instead is considered a legitimate risk and therefore, higher on the risk scale?


One more thing – I should probably clear up my lab scientist friend’s reputation. [Big Grin] I didn’t mean he said my own situation as described was used to inseminate animals, I just meant he told me that in general, indirect transfer was a common method of insemination among agricultural animals!

Thanks again for the links and your replies. Both have been helpful.

Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Redskies
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 79774

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Redskies     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As you'll have read in the Human Reproduction article, sperm are pretty delicate. There's a big, big difference between a sizeable clump of semen and trace amounts of it. Sperm in trace amounts of semen is going to be useless and incapable of co-creating pregnancy. Sperm in the centre of a big clump of semen have some chance of being undamaged and still viable - although the chance of pregnancy is still very low, because as you read, those sperm would have an incredibly tough job travelling through the vagina without any propulsion. And truly, no-one is going to take a handful of semen and insert it into a vagina without meaning to.

"Indirect transfer" is usually used to describe small or trace amounts of semen being passed around accidentally. I see how artificial insemination is "indirect" in the sense that it doesn't involve intercourse, but again, the deliberate processes needed for successful fertilisation are so very different to anything that could happen by accident or unknowingly that it doesn't make sense to categorise the two together.

--------------------
The kyriarchy usually assumes that I am the kind of woman of whom it would approve. I have a peculiar kind of fun showing it just how much I am not.

Posts: 1786 | From: Europe | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WithPleasure
Neophyte
Member # 109716

Icon 1 posted      Profile for WithPleasure     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I understand. Thank you for your answers! [Big Grin]
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Redskies
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 79774

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Redskies     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
You're very welcome.

--------------------
The kyriarchy usually assumes that I am the kind of woman of whom it would approve. I have a peculiar kind of fun showing it just how much I am not.

Posts: 1786 | From: Europe | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Get the Whole Story! Go Home to SCARLETEEN: Sex Ed for the Real World | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1998, 2014 Heather Corinna/Scarleteen
Scarleteen.com: Providing comprehensive sex education online to teens and young adults worldwide since 1998

Information on this site is provided for educational purposes. It is not meant to and cannot substitute for advice or care provided by an in-person medical professional. The information contained herein is not meant to be used to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease, or for prescribing any medication. You should always consult your own healthcare provider if you have a health problem or medical condition.

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3