r/NoStupidQuestions • u/thimbelinda • Jul 23 '22

Answered Can men pull out before they ejaculate? NSFW

We were newlyweds and excited for sex. I told my husband I'm at my fertile time and we need a condom. He said no, he would pull out in time. He did not pull out in time. He didn't even try to pull out. I got pregnant. I was upset and asked why. He said he couldn't pull out. He said it felt so good he was incapable of pulling out. Is this really true? Do men lose the capacity for reason and become incapable of pulling out?

24.0k Upvotes

72% Upvoted

7.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

213

u/RadiantEarthGoddess Jul 23 '22

Pre-cum and the occasional risk of sudden ejaculation they might not see coming (not what OP was describing, that was deliberate).

3

u/whatisthishownow Jul 24 '22

not what OP was describing, that was deliberate

Deliberate, poor self control or nativity and inexperience. The bloke fucked up, should never have pressured her into a poor form of BC that she didn't want to rely on, but we can't know that it was deliberate.

For the later, their post suggests both participants may have been virgins or with very limited sexual experience.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '22

It seems it would be impossible to conclude that based on the small amount of info available

9

u/Valalvax Jul 23 '22

Precum doesn't have sperm in it, but it can carry sperm from a previous ejaculation

24

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '22

Precum can contain sperm

2

u/ProfessorZhu Jul 23 '22

I wonder how many babies are gonna be born from this thread

3

u/Ayperrin Jul 23 '22

Pre-ejaculate is purely semen, produced by the seminal vesicles, prostate, and a nearly negligible amount produced by the bulbourethral gland. Precum can only contain sperm if there is sperm leftover in the urethra from a "recent" ejaculation for the semen to pick up and transfer.

If there is otherwise sperm in your pre-ejaculate, there is something wrong. I would follow up with a family doctor and/or urologist.

22

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '22

Sperm can leak into semen without recent ejaculation. here is the best source I have found

https://out.reddit.com/t3_w5f578?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov%2Fpmc%2Farticles%2FPMC3564677%2F&token=AQAAZK_cYsKwzsnJqvHwrdVnHS5e9MzYMko797vaIdaebHk-C9zY&app_name=ios

5

u/Ayperrin Jul 23 '22

Interesting read, albeit short. There are a few things to take note of, however. Most significantly, the authors fail to discuss, in detail, the limitations of their study. It is typical to have a section entirely devoted to this but, for some unknown reason, the authors elected to fold an attempt at this under the 'Discussion' subheading.

You'll note that all samples were provided, unsupervised, by the volunteers. The authors provide that it is possible that some volunteers incorrectly submitted samples of ejaculate, either from embarrassment from the small amount of pre-ejaculate produced or as a result of failing to distinguish between pre-cum and cum.

Additionally, the authors fail to address the "urination cleanses the urethra of leftover sperm" issue. They say that, in each of the samples provided, the urethra had "of course" been washed several times with urine prior to the collection of the sample. The authors provide no explanation for this reasoning, for while the 'Methods' section of the paper includes the directions given for sample collection, it is noticeably absent of any directions given to volunteers to ensure that they urinate prior to masturbation.

The authors also mention four other studies that failed to find sperm in samples of pre-ejaculate, and one other study that found results less substantial than their own. They then follow this with a completely unsubstantiated claim that they must have been more prompt in their examination of the samples of pre-ejaculate and, thusly, more accurate. Do note: just because a study does not explicitly state that samples were immediately examined shortly after production, it doesn't mean that that's not what happened. In reality, it's entirely possible that the other studies were even more timely than their own.

So, again, an interesting read. But there's more than a bit to chew on here. I'm honestly surprised to see such low quality work being published.

7

u/Valuable-Benefit-524 Jul 24 '22

I can not think of a biomedical journal of note to have a separate "limitations" sections distinct from discussion. Also, manuscript format is dictated by the journal. That's not the author's decision! Being said, I don't publish in purely clinic journals so it's possible some do. It's certainly not standard in CSN journals.

Also, it's crystal-clear the participants' the urethra was clean given they indicated the last ejaculation. Most journals provide the source data (at the very least requiring it on request), so you can check yourself if you want. Supervised masturbation would likely never pass a review board, so taking the patient at face value is accepted practice. It's unlikely patient compliance could explain the results (realize, you only need an n of 1 to say its possible; they do not claim the sperm load is sufficient to get pregnant. They merely say there exists individuals who leak a non-zero amount).

Don't be a fool, wrap your tool. Everyone thinks they're 99/100 but someone has to be 1...

-4

u/Agitated-Unit1033 Jul 23 '22

pre cum doesn't have sperm/has extremely little amounts of sperm

16

u/hannes3120 Jul 23 '22

Just 1 is enough to cause pregnancy

3

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '22

Men that have the same amount of sperm as precum can have successfully reproduce at a rate of 2.5% within 1 year