TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

joetheyfit Archive

View 1 posts and 140 comments by joetheyfit on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

breakage does happen, yes - at a rate of about 1%. We're not entirely sure why.. it's usually lube (or lack of) related. Very rarely to do with manufacturing, given the stringent testing every modern condom has to undergo - technically they are medical devices. condom sex is never going to be as good as bareback physically speaking. But.. and it's a big but... sex is as much about psychology as it is physiology. If you're fucking away bareback, but constantly playing through the potential risks …
/r/seduction01/12/13 10:30 PM
2

but also make the feeling not that great get better condoms? Do the lube trick, and make sure they are the right size for your boner. The Condom FAQ might be worth a read too. disc: I make condoms
/r/seduction01/12/13 09:56 PM
1

the question is, do dicks or pussies spread more STDs? I don't have the answer. disc: I make condoms
/r/MensRights07/11/13 06:24 AM
0

just use condoms - maximise your chances of staying clean? Okay it's not 100%, but it's a lot better than zero. And if condom sex is a turn-off, learn how to do it better - especially the sizing & lube tricks.
/r/seduction11/10/13 04:35 PM
1

the guys at /r/bigdickproblems (and I assume the opposite sub for smaller dicks) use a company called www.afewbucksfwd.com to get European stuff, including TheyFit, delivered to the US/Canada for $5. I don't condone that, obviously, but nor can I stop it. And I understand entirely why they go to these lengths to get hold of condoms that fit, as that is truly what makes safe sex enjoyable.
/r/seduction17/08/13 09:42 AM
1

it's getting there.. I'm looking for a big update before the year is out
/r/seduction17/08/13 09:35 AM
1

not all, but certainly plays a part - sex is as much psychology as it is physiology (if not more). The most powerful example of this is "last longer" condoms. In trials, we can make guys last longer simply by telling them, or insinuating, that the condoms they are using are the last longer variety, even when they're not.
/r/seduction16/08/13 03:06 PM
3

polyisoprene is latex btw, we just remove the allergy causing bit disc: I make condoms
/r/seduction16/08/13 09:46 AM
1

you just need to find the right nominal width of condom for your girth. Sites like CondomSizer show you how, it's really straight forward.
/r/seduction16/08/13 09:45 AM
1

question - how do you deal with the smell? I remember my first experience of lambskin.. it was.. yes, it was interesting :-)
/r/seduction16/08/13 09:45 AM
1

the real issue with "large" and "XL" condoms is that they aren't that much bigger, if at all. Here: regular Trojan condom: length 205mm, nominal width 52/53mm Trojan Magnum condom: length 205mm, nominal width 54mm regular Durex condom: length 205mm, nominal width 55/56mm Durex Comfort XL condom: length 215mm, nominal width 57mm. see? all basically the same! What you need is something like CondomSizer to show you the actual sizes of condoms, and also the size you need for your requirements. disc:…
/r/seduction16/08/13 09:44 AM
1

yep, it's the FDA regulations. FDA says all US condoms must be at least 160mm long, with nominal width 47-57mm (in reality, commercially available = 49-57mm). Until 2008 the FDA rule was 50-54mm, which is why Magnum is 54mm. in Europe, no FDA. Our condoms start at just 80mm (up to 240mm) and nominal widths 41-69mm. disc: I make condoms and often post over at /r/bigdickproblems. Those guys found a way to get European condoms into the US/Canada for $5 using www.afewbucksfwd.com which I don't condo…
/r/seduction16/08/13 09:42 AM
1

a regular Trojan condom: length 205mm, nominal width 52/53mm a Trojan Magnum condom: length 205mm, nominal width 54mm a regular Durex condom; length 205mm, nominal width 55/56mm a Durex Comfort XL condom: length 215mm, nominal width 57mm Europe's largest condoms: length 240mm, nominal width 69mm! disc: I make condoms
/r/seduction16/08/13 09:40 AM
1

you might be surprised to learn that this (Magnum/thin) is mostly myth/marketing. From the Condom FAQ, 2 things: Q. Tell me about THIN condoms – are they just marketing? Pretty much. There’s no evidence (meaning independent clinical study data) that guys feel more when using thin condoms. That might seem counter-intuitive until you learn that: the difference in latex thickness between regular and 'thin' condoms is approximately 1/5th the thickness of a human hair - about 20 microns there’s up to…
/r/seduction16/08/13 09:38 AM
4

read every word of the Condom FAQ. It will save your safe sex life. disc: I make TheyFit condoms
/r/seduction15/08/13 09:41 PM
2

I did just that in December 2011. Unfortunately we are still waiting for the FDA to approve us.
/r/MensRights09/07/13 06:04 PM
1

50/50
/r/MensRights09/07/13 07:31 AM
1

tricky. Sex is as much psychology as it is physiology. For example, you can make a test group of men last longer simply by telling them you are supplying them with "last longer" condoms (even when you're not). Personally, I think fit trumps all. Are you sure the fit/shape/size between the latex/polyisoprene is constant? Also, if regular condoms suck for you, consider checking you have the right nominal width for your needs - CondomSizer has the 'technique'.
/r/seduction14/05/13 05:41 PM
1

yep, that would be latex (with allergy causing bits) vs latex (with allergy causing bits removed). Lifestyles (called Mates in some countries) did a big launch of polyisoprene Skyn a while back. edit: fun fact - some medical regulators are pushing back against the claim of "latex-free" used for polyisoprene condoms, given in reality they are actually latex
/r/seduction14/05/13 04:42 PM
1

it's my secret shame :-/
/r/seduction14/05/13 02:23 PM
1

salesman is so demeaning. Google Joe TheyFit to find out about me :-D
/r/seduction14/05/13 02:23 PM
1

As a larger guy, I find polyurethane far superior, the latex stretches out are you thinking polyisoprene? polyurethane isn't latex, but polyisoprene is (with the allergy causing bit removed)
/r/seduction14/05/13 02:21 PM
2

you hit on a great point. Why isn't the first step in buying a condom, measuring your dick? We wouldn't buy shoes without measuring our feet, or clothes without measuring out bodies. Ladies don't buy bras without measuring their boobs. Always struck me as odd, given how sensitive dicks are.
/r/seduction14/05/13 02:20 PM
1

personally, I recommend going online and buying a condom that matches your size - length & girth. Why compromise?
/r/seduction14/05/13 07:40 AM
2

you can get nominal widths up to 69mm in the UK. I'll send you some free samples.. just PM me.
/r/seduction13/05/13 08:20 PM
25

we're not FDA approved, that's correct (the process is taking a long time). We are however European medical regulator approved (something we call the CE Mark) - which means we can be sold to 500,000,000 people in 27 European states (50-ish countries), and ISO-4074 compliant which allows sales everywhere else on planet Earth (ex-UX/Canada). I'm not a rep btw - I run the company... :-D
/r/seduction13/05/13 08:18 PM
27

Here's my question: are the free condoms distributed from Planned Parenthood reliable? yes, completely and totally safe - well, certainly just as much as anything you can purchase. From the Condom FAQ: Q. Which brand of condom is the SAFEST and least likely to break? Do condoms break? Why? All condoms sold in the EU/US (and other developed countries) have to undergo normalised testing during manufacture (as dictated by the ISO and other regulations, which also dictate what sizes/thickness they c…
/r/seduction13/05/13 06:25 PM
2

focus on the fit. Which shoes feel the best? The ones that fit the best. Same thing with dicks/condoms. CondomSizer has sorta-NSFW illustrations.
/r/TheRedPill08/05/13 07:33 AM
1

sorry, secret shame. I make condoms.
/r/TheRedPill08/05/13 07:30 AM
3

have you considered.. getting.. better condoms?
/r/TheRedPill07/05/13 06:42 PM
1

I'm just going to put a dash: -
/r/MensRights07/05/13 06:42 PM
1

yes, that indeed is the "worst case". I do obviously feel that, I mean, I basically said that exact thing didn't I. Welcome to an adult conversation.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 05:46 PM
1

is that really the retort? to paraphrase myself.... "oh my".
/r/MensRights07/05/13 05:26 PM
1

I asked, you answered. I then expanded my point, using your answer. Hey, it's almost like a real conversation. I said, sarcastically, that 3 (or even 9, with the new information about your friends) was a great frame of reference for concluding that sex, in a relationship, is a given, and rarely a problem (or as you put it "Getting laid is not a problem faced much in relationships".) And you're completely wrong. So there, that was neat wasn't it? For the record, when you ask your friends whether …
/r/MensRights07/05/13 03:18 PM
1

well, 3 is a good sample of all the relationships in the world I guess. just for the record, "sex" in relationships (quantity, quality, frequency) is one of the biggest problems that counsellors have to deal with.
/r/MensRights07/05/13 06:57 AM
1

all I can say is "oh my" again. Had many relationships much?
/r/MensRights06/05/13 08:43 AM
-1

I love the downvotes my comments get - almost exclusively in /r/mensrights. I should come here more often :-D
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:18 PM
1

Getting laid is not a problem faced much in relationships oh my
/r/MensRights05/05/13 05:10 PM
-5

We did not have sex if I did not see her take her pill you actually had to see her take her pill each day? Personally, I think that's extreme. Did she watch you put the condom on correctly? Or was seeing it on your erection enough for her? Did she have to see the expiry date for the condom etc? I think the seeing part is an unhealthy/extreme approach to risk. And, it's before we even think of the reality. You may watch her take the pill, but did you watch her poop, to see if she had an upset sto…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 01:28 PM
2

the product is here and the pertinent info is in feedback, 91% of users consider themselves "more likely to use a condom in the future" as a result of their experience. We're looking to fund a clinical trial to prove this categorically (literally - give 1000 men a fitted condom and a regular condom, ask them their preference and whether or not their behaviour in the future will be influenced), so actually Bill's $100k would be really useful for that! the clause re: commercially available product…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 12:35 PM
2

it was a a strange reaction indeed. I wrote to Bill asking for the $100k, as in Dec 2011 I launched a condom men enjoy wearing. But not for the US, because the FDA won't give us permission. Bill said the money wasn't available for commercially available devices, which was weird.
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:05 AM
2

it's so obvious that condoms impact sensitivity. From the Condom FAQ: Q. What can I do about sensitivity? Does a condom impact on my sexual pleasure? I can't feel ANYTHING AT ALL when I wear a condom First, check that your condom fits you correctly. A tight condom will kill sensation because the opening will act a little like a tourniquet (rubber band) at the base of your erection. Since it's at the base that all the nerves and blood vessels exit, tightness at this spot is a really bad idea. But…
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:03 AM
3

hmmm, if 4% is a statistical nonfactor (do you mean 'insignificant'?) then WHAT CRAZY KINDA MATH CLASS DID YOU TAKE! (in perfect use, if 100 couples rely just on withdrawal for 'contraception', after a whole year of sexy times 4 of the couples will get pregnant. Compares to 2 couples for condoms, and 0.3 couples for the b.c. pill).
/r/MensRights05/05/13 09:01 AM
-6

We did not have sex if I did not see her take her pill. wow, what trusting, caring relationships you must have had
/r/MensRights05/05/13 08:59 AM
1

yep - this
/r/seduction02/05/13 05:28 PM
3

inside jacket pocket, or your jeans (most of which have a condom pocket). The problem isn't carrying condoms in your wallet per se, it's doing so for long periods of time.
/r/seduction02/05/13 02:58 PM
1

it's not really splitting a hair is it? You said something, and the truth is something completely different. 20% of gross is a real arduous pain (it might as well be an additional income tax). 20% of net on the other hand, is closer to a tax on your disposable income. Now, the payment % you can argue over, and in fact whether it should be a % at all (given a child typically costs $x to raise, regardless of income). But to just say incorrect things really doesn't help your cause at all. If you fa…
/r/MensRights14/04/13 07:43 PM
1

"1 child 20% of Obligor's Net Resources" is not the same as "20 to 25% of his gross income... right off the top, no tax breaks, etc."? In fact, it's not what you said at all: From your link: Sec. 154.062. NET RESOURCES. (a) The court shall calculate net resources for the purpose of determining child support liability as provided by this section. (b) Resources include: (1) 100 percent of all wage and salary income and other compensation for personal services (including commissions, overtime pay, …
/r/MensRights14/04/13 07:45 AM
2

exactly. Therefore I'm not sure it (the case of paying child support for a child that you didn't father) belongs in the OP's post, really.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:11 PM
3

different to say, a one-night stand followed by a claim against you as the supposed father of a baby that is later born (but which isn't yours). step-parent liability makes sense to me, especially if the period pre-separation/divorce is long
/r/MensRights13/04/13 10:00 PM
3

you mean step-parent liability
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:55 PM
1

can you source/link to those generic % numbers?
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:31 PM
1

Let me get this straight, your view is that children are so great they should be forced on people? Anyone who doesn't want that is 'ignorant' according to you? not sure how you took any of that from the words I used, but there you go, I guess that's the internet for you
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:29 PM
2

Even if the person claimed to be the father is not the biological father, he may be, in some cases, forced to pay child support anyway as it will be termed that it is “what is best for the child” can you provide a source for this claim?
/r/MensRights13/04/13 09:28 PM
-2

is the age of heterosexual consent 18 in the US? The small payments due, relative to earnings, to support the cost of raising a child almost certainly pale into insignificance when compared to the new human being you guide into adulthood. Not saying unplanned children are a great thing to happen, just that some perspective is needed.
/r/MensRights13/04/13 06:01 PM
-6

why would a child "fuck your life"?
/r/MensRights13/04/13 05:14 PM
1

your maths is off, but the point is actually valid. There are better ways to stop babies than condoms (which remain the most effect way to minimise the risk of STDs). If it's just baby-making that's the concern, something like the b.c pill or implant is more effective but, critically, fails in a different type of way too. And I make condoms, LOL!
/r/MensRights18/02/13 08:22 AM
-40

you had unprotected sex with her, you have to deal with the consequences. If you're making "over 6 figures" it's really not that big a deal.
/r/MensRights16/02/13 11:20 PM
1

arguably the "point of sex" is procreation - in which case the lack of a vagina in the transaction might, philosophically speaking, cause some issues... :-D
/r/MensRights12/01/13 07:59 PM
1

LOL phil·o·soph·i·cal adj. Of, relating to, or based on a system of philosophy. Characteristic of a philosopher, as in equanimity, enlightenment, and wisdom.
/r/MensRights12/01/13 07:46 PM
1

can you expand on "I have philosophical objections to condoms except to prevent overpopulation"?
/r/MensRights12/01/13 07:20 PM
4

the b.c pill is 100% effective for the vast majority of women. Condoms certainly work (and are better than nothing), but the failure vectors are much different to the b.c pill. If stopping babies is your goal (and you don't want something 'intrusive') then I'd recommend the b.c pill. And advise learning how to take it correctly.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:40 PM
7

I make condoms, and would recommend the b.c pill over condoms, if stopping babies is your goal or aim. If it's stopping STDs, or having care-free sex outside of a monogamous relationship, then I'd recommend the latex condom. The b.c pill is significantly more effective (both in perfect and actual use) than condoms. We also get things like the patch, injection, coil, IUD for free too.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 03:06 PM
8

no one minds one little bit, in fact we take it for granted that the government helps us control when we have babies
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:54 PM
11

are you in the UK? it would take seconds to find some. We also have something called the C-card for teenagers, so they can just walk into a pharmacy and get free rubbers.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 02:14 PM
16

once it's perfected it probably will be free (in countries where the female pill is). Giving citizens access to free birth control makes economic sense (that's why they do it in the UK, at least). It wouldn't be hard to track down free condoms either.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 01:45 PM
82

in the UK b.c pills are free for women and nobody cares one bit. It's not a controversial thing, not even a little tiny bit.
/r/MensRights01/01/13 01:38 PM
1

it's different because the legal definition is different. That's really all I can tell you. In the UK for example, it's an "offence against the Person" covered by a specific act of Parliament. The crime is "reckless inflicting of grievous bodily harm".
/r/MensRights30/12/12 11:54 PM
1

it's the legal definition of rape. I forget what this is actually called, in legal terms (some sort of assault).
/r/MensRights30/12/12 06:37 PM
0

One of my fears has been for a woman to extract my sperm from a used condom and inject it inside of her. choose your women better, or consider only having sex with men.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 09:05 AM
1

a woman marries Steve who has a twin brother named Rick. Consents to sex with Rick under impression it is Steve. This is called rape because she was not informed of all the details. that is rape. Rick has raped her. Would also apply if the woman's twin sister did it to Steve. woman consents to sex with man wearing a condom. Man has poked holes in condom. Is rape because he sabotaged the birth control and changed the context of the consent. that isn't called rape, however it is a crime. Similar t…
/r/MensRights27/12/12 09:03 AM
2

in which country is sex for a non-married man a right (this point is sort of moot btw.. there are a handful of countries where sex in marriage is considered a "right" but let's just say in the context of those countries, "rights" perhaps take on a different meaning to what we consider respectable. Not just for sex). edit: "to"
/r/MensRights27/12/12 08:58 AM
3

why is it off topic? the first sentences of the OP are: First of all, I think having sex is a human need. I'm not sure if they include psychological well being as a human rights issue, but I guess torture and solitary confinement can be considered depriving one of basic rights. Btw - there are no countries where sex is a right. There are some obscure laws concerning sex in a marital relationship (in some countries), but hey, we don't want to get off-topic.
/r/MensRights27/12/12 08:57 AM
3

in which country is sex a right?
/r/MensRights27/12/12 12:38 AM
4

sex isn't a "right", it's nature's way of making more of us.
/r/MensRights26/12/12 10:48 PM
1

use condoms, but critically use them correctly as with all things in life, nothing is 100% - but you can sway the odds massively in your favour
/r/seduction25/12/12 06:57 AM
4

condoms are the best - best for minimising STDs (minimising, not eliminating) and up there with the best for contraception too. If you're in the UK then look at that crazy guy who made custom fitted condoms, I hear they're great. seriously, PM me and I'll hook you up.
/r/MensRights22/11/12 05:42 PM
3

in Europe they manage it. Same (arguably higher) quality testing and control but: US condoms, nominal widths 47-57mm (50-54mm until 2008) EU condoms, nominal widths 41-69mm disc: I make condoms
/r/MensRights15/11/12 08:56 AM
1

"I know that such information would be suppressed in the media" are you insane?
/r/MensRights24/09/12 08:43 AM
0

"Those who rape do not do so out of ignorance." in the UK we needed to launch an advertising campaign, mostly in men's toilets (bathrooms) to highlight that consent is needed before having sex, and you can't just have sex with girls who are extremely drunk or passed out. So in some cases, ignorance (of the law) definitely plays a part. edit: spells
/r/MensRights12/09/12 09:15 PM
-9

seatbelts, condoms and bike helmets are hardly analogous to penetrative rape. It's physically harder for a woman to defend against rape than it is for a man to resist raping someone. Most rapists are known to the woman who is raped (for clarity's sake I am ignoring MoM rape) so it's hard to defend against that in the sense of changing behaviour or being aware of one's surroundings. why not ask on /askreddit?
/r/MensRights12/09/12 08:08 PM
0

yes.. totally (that's British sarcasm in case you missed the.. implicit.. nature of it)
/r/MensRights03/09/12 07:28 AM
0

there was a point to this? I assumed you were just trying to be cantankerous, in a mildly ignorant way.
/r/MensRights02/09/12 09:10 PM
3

yes they can. And no, your defence is unlikely to work. Which also goes for the condom-holes scenario. if you want to be safer, withdraw to ejaculate
/r/MensRights02/09/12 04:41 PM
-8

what if she has more than you during the marriage? you "win" when you divorce? what about pre-nups? what is the point of existing, if you don't procreate? you get about 1,000 months and then that's it. Before you, billions of people/organisms procreated to get to the point where you exist. You're just planning to stop that dead? For silly things like money? have you had much sex? refer to 3 this rule doesn't exist in most of the world. In fact, it's a common myth ("common law marriage") in most …
/r/MensRights01/09/12 08:09 AM
1

can you expand on "..can be as effective as.." ?
/r/MensRights27/08/12 02:40 AM
1

I always thought it was a bit over-engineered, there was also another system called quickstrips. I'm not really sure what happened to either. I do know that when your condom is custom fitted, it just isn't an issue. I am hopelessly hopelessly biased, because I make custom fit condoms!
/r/seduction23/08/12 05:40 PM
2

yes, that's how I got addicted to Reddit actually! http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/se1hl/iama_joe_nelson_condom_revolutionary_i_launched_a/
/r/seduction23/08/12 01:53 PM
5

it's a calculated risk. My completely biased advice given that I make condoms, is to get a better condom!
/r/seduction23/08/12 09:17 AM
2

it's my secret shame :-(
/r/MensRights18/07/12 08:05 AM
3

personally I'd be most worried about catching an STD! disclosure: I own a condom company
/r/MensRights17/07/12 06:31 PM
6

"Mutilating gentitalia with a passive aggressive device.. What do we have in comparison? Mockery and back patting." you're either trolling or just a bit thick. It's pretty clear how this device works.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 03:26 PM
2

there are >in development< e.g. male pill, but nothing available as of yet there are also plenty of 'magic herbs' that civilisations like the Romans used to use, but effectiveness is about 50% at best, with some nasty side effects like.. death :-)
/r/MensRights09/07/12 07:37 AM
1

LOL, I'd love even more to see the link to that one! if there were a link, it could be hypothesised that circumcision interferes with the desire/ability to learn to crawl, and therefore learn to walk, and therefore general foot/eye co-ordination.. ultimately, all professional footballers would be found to be non-circumcised. :-)
/r/MensRights08/07/12 10:52 AM
1

thanks for the link, I'm not sure how credible that is - what do you think? sample size of 9, and a little odd how the question of impartiality is pre-empted.
/r/MensRights07/07/12 07:41 PM
1

I would love to hear more about the hip flexibility and what the hypothesised mechanism for such a link is, if you can find the source links?
/r/MensRights07/07/12 06:04 PM
2

surely, you can see, that being circumcised as an adult (fully developed genitals, sexually active, sexually aware, frequent erections, adult immune system and healing time) is not comparable to being circumcised as a baby? which country are you in?
/r/MensRights07/07/12 06:03 PM
3

"tor·ture/ˈtôrCHər/ Noun: The action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment or in order to force them to do or say something." the 'pain' of circumcision is not part of the procedure, or the reason for doing it. At best, it's a by-product. Ergo, circumcision != torture. further, you don't know if it's insane amounts of pain or not, or that it lasts weeks. Totally subjective (but handy for the emotional, non-rational side of the argument). the vast majority of religions …
/r/MensRights07/07/12 12:44 PM
1

I must have missed the box marked "as a punishment or in order to force them to do or say something" bit that parents have to tick on the consent form? EDIT: loose apostrophe
/r/MensRights07/07/12 12:31 PM
2

using words like torture just clouds what could otherwise be a rational debate. Good luck with your kids.
/r/MensRights07/07/12 12:26 PM
1

just some regular, run of the mill medical professionals, not connected to any 'movements' or new devices for performing circumcision.
/r/MensRights07/07/12 12:22 PM
2

completely wrong. If a child is born with a malformed (or extra) limb, you as the parent/consenting adult legally approve its removal. Less extreme, if children are born with webbed digits (fingers/toes), you as the parent/consenting adult legally approve (or prevent) the corrective surgery. Parents essentially make decisions on behalf of their children until they reach an age, defined by law, where they can make their own choices/decisions. "large chunk" 2cm squared? "silly superstitions" relig…
/r/MensRights07/07/12 12:14 PM
2

do you have some more objective sources? Both Boyle and Hill are members of "Doctors Opposing Circumcision".
/r/MensRights07/07/12 12:03 PM
2

Ignore wisdom teeth - look at "teeth" in general. The number of people who don't need any intervention by a dentist, to ensure they have comfortable, functional teeth (add on aesthetically pleasing if you like) is effectively zero. Clearly, sometimes mother nature needs assistance. Q.E.D?
/r/MensRights07/07/12 11:59 AM
2

that's quite a bad argument actually. As adults we make lots of decisions about/for/on behalf of our children, because they aren't old enough to. Dental work, for example. we also vaccinate against HPV/cervical cancer pre the typical age of sexual activity. EDIT: clarity
/r/MensRights07/07/12 11:56 AM
2

mine :-) EDIT: the best condom in my opinion is the one that fits you correctly. Fit trumps all. I use the analogy of shoes. Fancy $1,000 Prada loafers made from the finest Italian leather are really bad shoes, if they aren't your size.
/r/MensRights07/07/12 08:42 AM
1

it was one of the first things that popped up when "foreskin hiv transmission" was googled, to find one of the hypothesis why the foreskin appears to aid HIV reception. Personally I don't like the style of how it is written. The proposed mechanism would appear to be logical enough. are you aware of something called cognitive dissonance?
/r/MensRights07/07/12 08:41 AM
2

I'm not even sure it's relevant to the OP's question? The number of people who don't experience some kind of dental problem that needs correction/intervention is effectively, zero.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 11:08 PM
2

the most obvious response (for me) would be "while that may be true, the law of unintended consequences teaches us many things. For example, the mandatory introduction of car seat belts in Europe led to a spike in car accidents, as people drove faster, thinking they were safer. With circumcision to prevent/reduce HIV infection rates, arguably this could lead to circumcised men thinking they are immune, and therefore having 1. more sex and/or 2. less safe sex, in turn increasing the rate of HIV t…
/r/MensRights06/07/12 10:04 PM
2

"are on their way out" - source? is that like saying dairy tolerance for most Asians is "on its way in"?
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:40 PM
2

we give children the HPV vaccine pre age of usual sexual activity EDIT: clearer
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:38 PM
3

they're about 98%, in perfect use, against pregnancy. disc: I own a condom company
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:36 PM
1

the cells of the inside of the foreskin >are< different to the skin cells of the shaft the foreskin doesn't encourage transmission of HIV, it increases the ability to receive it i.e. through the cells of the inner foreskin, the virus is thought to gain easier entry to the body/bloodstream EDIT: adding source from another comment reply http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1002100 "HIV-1 Efficient Entry in Inner Foreskin Is Mediated by Elevated CCL5/RANTES that …
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:35 PM
2

say that when you start your holiday of a lifetime, only to have appendix/wisdom teeth flare up on you and fuck your plans.. :-)
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:33 PM
3

um, I think I immediately "tried again" two words later, with 'wisdom teeth'? Your appendix does nothing. EDIT: "does nothing" = there are some theories about its purpose, but the only "fact" is that appendicitis can kill you
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:31 PM
4

http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1002100 "HIV-1 Efficient Entry in Inner Foreskin Is Mediated by Elevated CCL5/RANTES that Recruits T Cells and Fuels Conjugate Formation with Langerhans Cells"
/r/MensRights06/07/12 10:13 AM
2

you are wrong - the cells on the lining (inside) of the foreskin are particularly good at receiving the virus from an infected person. EDIT: emphasis
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:59 AM
1

it's not transmission per se, it's receiving it. The cells on the lining of the foreskin are particularly good at receiving it.
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:58 AM
3

could say the same about your appendix, or your wisdom teeth?
/r/MensRights06/07/12 09:58 AM
1

you're either not reading what I'm saying, or choosing to ignore it. I am NOT saying height (or any other metric) is related directly to penis size. I AM saying that height (and other metrics) singularly vary by themselves per race. Penis size is another such metric and to expect it to remain constant (as an average) across races is absurd. If, in a particular country, the shoe sizes sold were 4 sizes smaller (on average) than another country, would it be reasonable to assume that country (on av…
/r/seduction21/06/12 08:17 AM
1

this defence is becoming more desperate. If you accept that average heights differ by race then you simply must accept the possibility that average foot/hand/leg/arm/PENIS size differs too (could be larger, could be smaller). EDIT: "I'm saying that you have no evidence of penis size by race." apart from the fact that condoms sold in Japan (by way of example) are consistently smaller than those sold across the EU/US, your statement is correct.
/r/seduction16/06/12 08:17 PM
1

you have mistaken what I said. There do exist cultural variations in average height, average weight and average shoe size. I am not saying any is vaguely related to average penis size, I am saying average penis size is another 'metric' and it would be counter-intuitive to think that, on average, cultural variations do not exist for it (while existing for all the other metrics). Technically, there's nothing to say that, on average, the cultural variation for penis size couldn't be larger amongst …
/r/seduction15/06/12 09:09 AM
1

hmmm, I'm a little dubious about "..the nominal width is when the condom is inflated, which the Japanese leave off of their packaging.." and the reason is I own a condom company. The term nominal width is short for an industry term "nominal lay flat width" with the emphasis on 'lay flat'. I've asked the guys to get some of these so we can get to the bottom of it. Looking at the site you linked, the Okamoto appear to have a flared tip. If so, my front-runner theory is 72mm is the flare (there's a…
/r/seduction15/06/12 07:47 AM
1

it's those Japanese millimetres vs American millimetres again
/r/seduction14/06/12 11:28 PM
1

sure thing. Okamoto, the largest supplier of condoms in Japan. Their standard condom is a 37mm nominal lay flat width. Their 'biggest' is 46mm. Europe: a snug condom is 49mm. A standard 56mm. An XL 57mm. US: a snug condom is 49mm. A standard 54mm. An XL 55mm. Money talks - markets adapt to what is demanded by consumers. This is the single strongest evidence that Japanese men are (on average) buying smaller (thinner) condoms than European men, or Americans. Asian guys on average appear to have sm…
/r/seduction14/06/12 09:22 AM
1

that is correct. The difference in thickness is minuscule.
/r/seduction14/06/12 09:10 AM
1

this isn't correct. There are 2 different types of study when it comes to penis size: self-reported - the men measure themselves. Two big problems, they measure wrong and they 'round up' their measurements clinically-measured - doctors (nurses? :-)) measure the erections. Solves the problem of (1) but is harder to do on a large scale for obvious reasons. There >are< cultural variations in average penis size (just like there are for height, weight, shoe size etc) but the bigger question is who re…
/r/seduction14/06/12 09:06 AM
1

there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that Asian men on average have smaller penises. The bigger question is - who really cares? They, on average, make better cars and technology than the rest of the world too. I'd rather have that skill than a big cock!
/r/seduction14/06/12 09:03 AM
1

the Japanese have their own version of the FDA (US) or CE Mark (Europe) for condoms, which are regulated medical devices. There is no evidence that thinner condoms are more likely to break. When you understand that the difference in thickness is about 1/5th of a human hair, that starts to make sense. Strangely, one study once concluded that thicker condoms were MORE likely to break during certain types of sex. It didn't get much publicity at the time.
/r/seduction14/06/12 09:02 AM
1

this link http://en.gigazine.net/news/20090127_mega_big_boy/ is for the launch of the mega big boy condom and says "According to this press release, Okamoto is releasing the new condom "Mega Big Boy" on March 16th. The diameter is 46mm (1.81 inch), which would be the biggest in mass-produced condoms of Japan and one of the biggest in the world. Recommended retail price is 2100yen(about 23 USD, including tax) for 12 pack." a diameter of 46mm means a circumference of 92mm? I'm starting to think th…
/r/seduction14/06/12 08:54 AM
1

not just very large, so large that it doesn't sit inside the ISO testing standards (water/air burst). Can you link to the article?
/r/seduction14/06/12 08:45 AM
0

what circumference are you? that's all the matters, and when I say matters, it really doesn't.
/r/seduction13/06/12 06:20 PM
0

I own a condom company. Condom science/math is pretty straight forward. Unfortunately, the market is clouded by complete horseshit marketing and brands. Some examples: 'large' brands like XL, or <insert very popular US brand> that are physically smaller in width than most standard condoms a UK 'XL' condom that is precisely 1mm wider than the same manufacturers standard condom ultra thin condoms where the difference is sub-mm (1/5th the thickness of a human hair) extra thick condoms where the dif…
/r/seduction13/06/12 05:57 PM
1

they have a nominal lay flat width of 72mm? or 46mm? diameter = nominal lay flat width. Multiply by 2 to give circumference. I would be amazed if a condom existed with a nominal lay flat width (diameter) of 72mm. Why? Because our biggest condom has a nominal lay flat width of 69mm. And that accommodates, VERY comfortably, a dick circumferences of.. wait for it.. 8 inches.
/r/seduction13/06/12 05:54 PM
1

"Condom thickness does matter" standard condom: 0.07mm (7 hundredths of 1 millimetre) ultra thin condom: 0.05mm (5 hundredths of 1 millimetre) super Japanese ultra thin: 0.03mm (3 hundredths of 1 millimetre) width of a human hair: 0.1mm (1 tenth of 1 millimetre) it's just maths? I can't find a single clinical study that, in blind trials (i.e. test candidates do not know which condom they have been given - normal or 'thin') there is statistically valid link between thickness and extra sensation? …
/r/seduction13/06/12 05:48 PM
2

they are marked L but have a nominal lay flat width of 46mm, and length 185mm. A normal EU condom is width 56mm and length ~200mm. Love how they brand them L :-) EDIT: those dimensions are for the XL version, so who knows how much smaller L is than that
/r/seduction13/06/12 07:14 AM
1

a 46mm nominal lay flat width will physically hurt you if you are average size, because the latex will be stretching so much Typical EU condoms are 56mm. Magnum XL is 54mm (so is Magnum). if these are 185mm long, then a standard EU/US condom is about 200mm by way of comparison. TL: DR - these condoms are very small EDIT: follow the thread lower for more measuring fun
/r/seduction13/06/12 07:12 AM
2

a standard condom is 0.07mm, and ultra-thin 0.05mm. You are talking about a difference in thickness of less than a human hair, which you likely aren't feeling but think you are. That's normal - sex is as much psychology as it is physiology.. given this is a throwaway, and given those condoms are available everywhere, including Amazon, it does make me wonder.... EDIT: re-post from below: a 46mm nominal lay flat width will physically hurt you if you are average size, because the latex will be stre…
/r/seduction13/06/12 07:11 AM
12

quite the conspiracy you've drawn there, it seems the world really is against men?
/r/MensRights01/06/12 08:25 AM
1

LOL @ image of "spray & clean" of the girl
/r/MensRights21/05/12 03:57 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter