[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 18 KB, 250x237, 1285768865001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4986610 No.4986610[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Do rape victims have biological defenses that prevent pregnancy?

>> No.4986614

>>topical political jokes

>> No.4986618

when a woman orgasms her muscles contract in a way that virtually lapps up sperm from the side of the vagina wall. this aids in the sperm's journey to the egg.

its not a defense mechanism as much as it is a non-activated benefit and a highly confused politician

>> No.4986631

only when it's a legitimate rape though

>> No.4986634

Are we talking about legitimate rape here or rape where she starts to like it?

>> No.4986665
File: 53 KB, 550x400, 1329141599852.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4986665

Do Americans have biological defenses against Republicans?

>> No.4986668

>>4986618
>>4986614

I'm guessing I'm missing a story on one of your zany politicians.

What happened this time?

>> No.4986689

The politicians is 100% correct assuming its not rape if she enjoys it.

>> No.4986694
File: 92 KB, 504x604, descent-tea-bagger.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4986694

>>4986668
>republican goes on national TV and said it's biologically impossible for a woman to get pregnant through rape

BONUS: The idiot in question is on the House Science committee. But then, Bachmann's on the Intelligence committee, so I think Republicans just choose committee assignments ironically.

>> No.4986722

>>4986689

so if a rape victim gets pregnant she wasnt truly raped?

>> No.4986727

>>4986722
This is what republicans actually believe.

>> No.4986738
File: 269 KB, 2048x1529, 1345499576084.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4986738

>>4986665
Fuck off, Commie.

>> No.4986744
File: 613 KB, 632x435, tumblr_m8u3wlIsVT1qhno7oo1_1280.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4986744

>>4986718 here. Rachel Marrow spent twenty minutes talking about how Republicans are against abortion and claimed that trauma during rape prevents pregnancy.

Can someone please elaborate on whether or not such claims are scientifically true?

>> No.4986772

Bump for a real answer.
If sexual stimulation and orgasm heighten fertility, does the lack thereof decrease fertility?

>> No.4986774

>>4986744

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSaBGbuWn5Y

>> No.4986781

>>4986772
>>4986744
if you need to ask again you shouldn't be here

>> No.4986785

>>4986618
i came

>> No.4986799

>>4986618

>implying women can never orgasm during non-consensual sex (rape)

>> No.4986816

>>4986774
>one act of rape is more than twice as likely to result in pregnancy than consentual sex.
>5% of rapes lead to pregnancy
Is the proposition that a single act of rape is more than twice as likely to lead to a pregnancy than consensual sex only from a lack of an attempt of contraception, or are other factors involved.

Also,

>> No.4986819

>>4986816
>forgot to finish
Also, considering the subjective value of the word "rare", isn't 5% a pretty low probability for pregnancy? How high or low is this when compared with consensual sex with contraceptive measures, and compared with consensual sex without contraceptive measures?

>> No.4986860

>>4986694
I lol'd
Also, he didn't say impossible. He said they have defense mechanisms to prevent pregnancy, not that they work 100% of the time.

>> No.4986886

>>4986610

No. they fucking dont. anyone else who says otherwise is a fucking retard, and should be ignored. close book. end of fucking story.

that physicians for life bullshit is just that bullshit. oh boy if i do wacky statistical analysis with fucking wacked out assumptions i can prove anything as well~!

>> No.4986892

>>4986886

>oh boy if i do wacky statistical analysis with fucking wacked out assumptions i can prove anything as well~!

Don't diss man. Psychology is a respectable discipline.

>> No.4986899
File: 194 KB, 588x427, KorraReally.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4986899

>>4986892
>psychology is a respectable discipline

>> No.4987012 [DELETED] 

>>4986819 5% low

Well considering women are only fertile about 16-25% of the time.

I would say 5% is fairly high.

>> No.4987015 [DELETED] 

http://www.theonion.com/articles/pregnant-woman-relieved-to-learn-her-rape-was-ille,29258/

>> No.4987021 [DELETED] 

>>4986892
No
No it's not
Your post was bad and you should feel bad.

>> No.4987025
File: 38 KB, 472x390, 1337354887335.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4987025

>>4987015
What the actual fuck, people is becoming more stupid every day or 2012 apocalypse is real.

In other news, Mexico's new educational system allow kids to approve school year with 4 courses failed.

>> No.4987028 [DELETED] 

>>4986772
Sexual stimulation and orgasm do heighten fertility. However (female) victims of rape often experience sexual stimulation and orgasm (not cite, look it up if you want). So we *might* expect pregnancy to be rarer in ("legitimate") rapes, depending on how important orgasm and sexual stimulation are for pregnancy, and how common/rare this is during rape.

>> No.4987048 [DELETED] 

>>4986634
Women always love rape

>> No.4987068 [DELETED] 

>>4987025 calls other people stupid
>thinks the onion is real

>> No.4987073 [DELETED] 

>>4987028

Sex where a female is likely to reach orgasm, or be aroused, is different from sex where she is not for a lot of reasons, so that is a very sketchy claim to be making, without several repeatable large studies, actual fucktons of data, as there are just so many things to control for. Assume though, shall we, that arousal does increase fertility, you still cannot apply that knowledge to rape as there are an unknown number of uncontrolled variables that might also screw with fertility.

tl;dr you cannot make any connection between sexual arousal and fertility in consensual sex and apply it to rape, without controlling for every variable between the two.

eg, if you do a study and find that rubbing apples makes them bigger, you cannot conclude that rubbing bananas will make them bigger. Apples and bananas are different, like rape and consensual sex, and you have not taken into account other variables.

>> No.4987083 [DELETED] 

>>4987025
>taking the onion seriously
>calling other people stupid

lel

>> No.4987094 [DELETED] 

>>4987028
There's not a lot of actual /sci/ence on this. Masters and Johnson, blessed be their names, did actually do some studies on the "orgasm causes cervix to lap up semen" theory and they decided it didn't hold, er, water. Most of the other theories are kind of reverse logic: "Why does the human body do this weird thing during orgasm? I dunno, it must help fertility somehow!"

Anyway, even if all the theories are true, they'd just mean a slight increase in fertility if the woman responds. Getting from there to the idea that pregnancies can only come from willing sex takes a special kind of stupid. The kind of stupid that is oh so electable in the Southern US.

>> No.4987214 [DELETED] 

>>4987073
>>4987094

Can I suggest a course in reading comprehension. I already stated that during *rape* women sometimes experience orgasm. My point was that even if a link between orgasm and pregnancy was established, this still wouldn't imply a link between consent and pregnancy. Both comments ignored this when replying.

>> No.4987218 [DELETED] 

>>4987083

doesn't know about senate republican that actually makes those remarks

>calls other people out on calling people stupid while being stupid

>> No.4987229 [DELETED] 

i don't think the reason so much of today's population is related to Genghis Khan is because he was so good at romance

>> No.4987233 [DELETED] 

>>4987214
>So we *might* expect pregnancy to be rarer in ("legitimate") rapes

I merely explained why this is an incorrect comment, given what you said.
Either you are implying by *might* that the evidence points towards it being more likely than it not being the case, or you are saying *might* to mean you literally have no idea, not even a vague clue. If you meant the former, then you are wrong, I am right. If you meant the latter, then correct way to phrase it is 'we have no idea', or 'might or might not, we have no idea', and if that is the case, then what the fuck was the point in posting?

>> No.4987238 [DELETED] 

>>4987233
Can I have a third option or am I really stuck with your false dichotomy?

>> No.4987264 [DELETED] 

>claiming link between arousal and fertility
>"So we *might* expect pregnancy to be rarer in ("legitimate") rapes"

Either you are saying there will be a slight decrease in pregnancy rates in legit rapes (wrong), or are suggesting we don't know, which you phrased badly and is a null point.

If you can find another interpretation, go for it.

>> No.4987291
File: 97 KB, 425x282, 132452345.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4987291

>>4986892
this nigga Serious?

>> No.4987292

No.

Also, what would be the point of rape then? When caveman A murdered caveman B he raped his wife - somebody needs to keep the reproduction going.

>> No.4987307

>>4986618
Women can and do orgasm during rape. Part of what makes it rape is that your body is reacting outside of your control.

>> No.4987311

There has never been a recorded instance of rape where the girl was pregnant that can be proven with something other than "I swear it was rape! Really!"