Hacker News Reader

Comment by raverbashing | Hacker News Reader

"The primary drawback from the male perspective is that condoms decrease pleasure as compared to no condom,"

Hummm really?

Condoms are a usability nightmare:

- Fragile

- Comes in few sizes, beyond that, you're in 'specialty shops' territory. (Really, I don't care about shapes, flavours, bells and whistles, I care that it fits!)

- It's lubricated on the outside. Good for when you're using it, AWFUL when it comes to applying it.

That "teaching kids how to put on a condom using a banana" thing? It's good intention, but someone needs to come with a realistic model. Maybe put a condom on a banana then try putting another over it: closer to the real thing.

View on HN

You forgot that they are a giant mood killer. Anyone who has been in a long term relationship where condoms are the primary source of birth control knows what I'm talking about.

Want to have sex in the shower? Forget that. Want spur of the moment sex anywhere in the house? Not unless you want to carry some condoms with you all the time. etc.

I hate condoms, but I hate the idea of being a father more.

In Sweden you get to put a condom on a realistic dildo. I was 12.

Well, that's the way it should be, sexual intercourse is a fact of life.

But it's not so much about the shape, it's about the consistency, sensibility of the surface and the fact that the outer skin is not simulated in those models and it makes it harder to apply the condom.

- Fragile

I've never had a condom break or leak in 20 years of sexual activity. I tend to think of them as pretty much unbreakable. Maybe I've luckily chosen only good quality condoms in all that time? (Mostly Durex Extra Sensitive, but I try new ones all the time, in hopes of finding something better.)

- Comes in few sizes, beyond that, you're in 'specialty shops' territory. (Really, I don't care about shapes, flavours, bells and whistles, I care that it fits!)

This is absolutely valid criticism. Fit makes a big difference in how pleasurable their use is, and also whether there is risk of the condom slipping off (and probably poor fit increases risk of breakage).

Let's not forget that condoms have a failure rate, given perfect use, of 2%.

I've always wondered about how they calculated that.

If they just taught people how to use a condom and then sent them off to their merry romps, and then checked how many of them got pregnant after a few months, then the statistic is highly suspicious - after all, it could just be from misuse (put it on the wrong way, then remembered how to use a condom and put it on the right way) or just omitting to use them (and then lying about it).

In this case, that would mean that the 2% statistic just indicates that 2% of the participants were not capable or willing to use a condom.

If that's not the way they did it - then how did they do it? Because beyond having every participant followed around by a man with a clipboard, I don't see any ways to reduce the chance of misuse or lying...

I would not be surprised is some of the issue was simply continuing after the first orgasm. Ideally, you should dry yourself and then reapply, but I don't think that happens add that much.

it's calculated as percentage of unintended pregnancy during one year of use. http://web.archive.org/web/20080531095926/http://www.contrac...

Yeah, the failure rate is due to misuse, but that still matters.

Alcohol has an extremely low risk of death (overdose), but alcohol misuse (driving, etc) is much mor common, and that is critically important when assessing the risk.

Nope, the 2% is considering 'perfect use'. Now, if that involves lying (I promise! I was using a condom, and perfectly!) I can't know, but I think statistics usually involve some corrections for these cases.

The failure rate for 'typical use' (which always involves too much cases) is 15%. These statistics come from wikipedia [1], but I knew some rough numbers from sexual education at my school and were around that. For casual sex, yes, condom is the way to go (both for birth control and STDs).

That's a big bummer, because that usually means involving hormone birth control methods in stable relationships, and I hate them and the effect that can have on my partner.

I am looking forward to see the advances in male contraception [2]. But I am afraid it will be something for the next generation.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_met...

[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_inhibition_of_sperm_...

I've had that particular 'uh-oh' moment on about 3 occasions. Pretty sure it was a major brand, no idea what caused the break, but it seems to be entirely possible.

I've had one break exactly once over many years of use. As far as I can tell, there was nothing special about that time. So less than 2% in my case anyway, but not zero. 2% is low enough though that I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who have had zero breaks just due to randomness.

>I care that it fits!

Many men don't maintain a constant level of hardness during sex. The condom fits great while harder, but slips off while softer.

So you are clutching the condom to make sure it stays on. Great usability, right?

Ideally the solution should work for porn too.

At the moment condoms aren't really any good for sex that spans 3-4 hours, and as porn is such a substantial influencer the solution should use that influence to it's advantage.

Condoms are the norm in US produced gay porn. Durability can't be the issue.

Are there many porns that have 3-4 hour continuous takes? If not, there's nothing stopping them from replacing condoms between shots. I highly doubt most pornos are shot like reality TV.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com