Happy Fathers' Day, /co/
Is this subtle GLC marketing?
Man, I really don't find these funny. Is that intentional.
>>93293996
Humor is subjective, I get a sensible chuckle from these myself
My dad dies nearly 20 years ago.
I smiled at this.
>>93294190
>>93294670
wait wut?
Party crashers gonna crash.
http://the-conservatory.wikia.com/wiki/Holiday_Lanterns
>>93295154
>>93295154
>>93295182
sometimes, my favorite moments in these threads are these moments.
>>93294109Well, that's a tick on the fetish card.
>>93295154
not unless you've got a time machine i can borrow
>>93295506
>>93294109
>>93295598
>>93295598
>>93295775
>>93295832
>>93295547
Vasectomies can fail?
>>93296763
Yes. Various reasons - tubes regrow, doctor didn't do a good job, live sperm is still there from before your operation - but the failure rate is very low. Still can happen though
>>93293599
I love these, thanks OP
>>93297414
Oh....I might need to make a call and apologize to someone...
>>93297414
>>93296763
modern procedures generally clamp the seminal vesicles before they enter the prostate (rather than after, which means you still ejaculate normally as most ejaculate isn't spermatozoa); this is intentionally a reversible procedure, unlike castration (removal of the testes) or severing the seminal vesicles entirely; ejaculation occurs normally, and the sperm are simply contained by the clamp and eventually reabsorbed by the body (which is the fate of many sperm normally)
there's no real risk of infection because the volume of cells is low and lack of foreign microbes within the body prevents rot; however this is a less-guaranteed method than severance of the seminal vesicles and not preferred by some physicians as a result
however
no system is infallible and vasectomy, as a form of birth control, has a failure rate around 1% across all types (most of these failures happen in the early months after the procedure, when viable sperm may linger within the seminal vesicles above the clamp, or where a clamp has been improperly fitted or dislodged itself); comparable to the overall failure rate of condoms (which is about 12%, but that figure also takes into account human-induced failures such as petroleum-based lubricants, failure to fit properly, and failure to replace during sex if damaged)
>>93300288
so *overall* you have about a 1 in 100 chance of conceiving after a vasectomy, but far higher than that in the early months after the procedure (during which time your physicians will have told you to use additional protection anyway), though the risk never truly goes away - even if, 10 years later and without intervention, it's a minuscule 1 in 00000000's chance of conception
vasectomy is a surgical procedure, and no surgical procedure is without risk, so my advice (and general medical advice) would be avoid unnecessary surgeries and use backup protection - for example, the combined risk of contraception using both oral contraceptives (for women) and male condoms is about 0.0108 - 1 in 67,500 or three fucks a day every day for the entire adult life expectancy of the average American
>>93300019
yeah you should, ya dummy
send flowers too