525
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/canada@lemmy.ca

In over 30 years of practice, Dr. Errol Billinkoff rarely saw a man without kids come into his Winnipeg clinic to get a vasectomy. But since the pandemic began, he says it's become an almost daily occurrence.

And he's not alone.

"At first, I thought I was the only one who was noticing this," Billinkoff, who brought a no-scalpel vasectomy procedure to Winnipeg in the early 1990s, told CBC News in a November interview.

"But I am part of an international chat group where doctors who do vasectomies participate and the topic came up, and it's like everybody notices it."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DiabolicalBird@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 day ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

I got one because the idea of having kids has always filled me with a keen sense of dread. Any time I hear that someone is expecting a child my first thought is "oh no I'm so sorry" before saying the expected congratulations.

Both my partner and I don't like or want kids, why risk accidents happening?

[-] stepan@lemmy.ca 7 points 16 hours ago

More people seem to be choosing child free living because of the state of the world and economy rn. I don't blame them.

Get pets like me!

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago

I bet they don't get the same amount a shit a childless woman would going in to get her tubes tied.

[-] Hathaway@lemmy.zip 5 points 17 hours ago

I’ve (27m) been told no by multiple doctors. So, sorta? Granted. Last time I tried I was 24 but I hasn’t been easy. Maybe it would be now. I stopped trying.

[-] Canonical_Warlock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Weird, you need to find yourself a new doctor. I got mine at 23 and the first time I ever spoke to any doctor that seemed like they were against it was actually only a few months ago, I'm 28 now. Even then they didn't really seem like they were against it so much as they didn't seem to understand why anyone would want one so young.

When I first asked my gen prac about getting snipped he said it was a little unusual for someone as young as me but he said that while actively putting in the referal so it isn't like he was trying to talk me out of it. At the urologist he just asked the standard quick questions of "you understand that it is permanent?" And " you're sure?". Then he put me on a table and got to work.

As a humerous side note, there is one thing I didn't like about getting mine done so young. My urologist (and likely urologists in general) are used to performing vasectomies on much older guys who have a fair bit more scrotal droop to work with. Young perky me didn't have that much droop. It also didn't help that the sterilizing wash the sadists used was ice cold and the room where it was done was freezing. So my poor frozen bits were trying to ascend to party with my tonsils meanwhile this doctor was pulling on them like they were excalibur and he was itching to be crowned king of england just to try and get some slack to work with. Definitely did not enjoy that part. Still worth it though.

[-] Apytele@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

When I do smoking cessation education and I talk about how nicotine paralyzes your cillia (little hair / whip things that keep your respiratory tract clean) so when you quit they wake up to all this cigarette gunk, I like to describe it thus: imagine somebody came into your work and roofied you then smeared shit all over the floor walls and ceiling. You'd wake up like WHAT THE FUCK. Anyway that's why you're hacking up tar-mucous balls right after you quit; your cillia are PISSED. More medical education needs more memorable descriptions to increase retention.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The female procedure is a lot more invasive than the male procedure. That's why I had mine done instead of my wife undergoing the surgery.

.

And, yes I do realize that's not the point you were trying to make. But it is a factor.

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

The factor is the self appointed managers of women's biology. They don't want them women to steal kids from some future man. This is the basic line fed a woman I knew who wanted to be sterilized since her family carried the genes for a deadly dehumanizing genetic disease and some shithead doctor told her she was selfish for not wanting her future man to have a choice about kids. She left the southern us and went up north to get he procedure done. When she returned she found a new doctor. This was over twenty years ago. Long before this latest batch of idiots.

[-] nevetsg@aussie.zone 1 points 17 hours ago

There are plenty of socially acceptable ways a woman can use to prevent pregnancy.

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 8 points 17 hours ago

Yes like tubal ligation. Its very socially acceptable procedure unless your society is a bunch of freedom hating trash. Its only the immoral right that think they have the right to freedom of choice. Their choice only of course.

[-] nevetsg@aussie.zone 1 points 8 hours ago

Going off the negative reaction to my comment, I guess people don't know about the multiple different versions of the pill. There is also that thing that gets inserted in their arm... I am sure there are plenty more that I don't know about.

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

You still sound like you are trying to make a decision for them.

[-] JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee 22 points 1 day ago

I think this is a great thing to see happening. Men are taking birth control into their own hands. Why take the risk of an unwanted pregnancy? Sometimes other methods fail.

The peace of mind must be amazing too

[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 74 points 1 day ago

I've decided I don't want to have kids at all.

My wife is taking it better than my son and daughter are.

[-] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 1 day ago
  • No right to abortion in the United States
  • Giving someone who didn't get asked or consent to being born, the forced existence of life.
  • A child for a parent is expensive, mentally draining, and you have to be a good parent
  • You also have to be the parent for a child with any special needs, from allergies to mental issues to being born without limbs
  • If the child is any form of "other" to society, they will be picked on, and then possible harmed by the rise of Neo-Fascism
  • Work or starve, work or be cold, work until you die. Another tax number, another corporate slave.

Being born is fine, once you're here you should try to live life to its fullest. But I don't want kids, I would be a horrid father.

[-] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 4 points 23 hours ago

Giving someone who didn’t get asked or consent to being born, the forced existence of life.

I’ve never understood that argument. Simple logic states nobody would exist if we asked every sperm and egg before having sex.

[-] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 20 hours ago

Correct, you can't ask. It's a question of ethics.

It's something to just ask. No one was asked to be born. Some where cheated out of a good life. There's people born into poverty and disease who don't know a good life. They feel that pain and suffering without the option to go out that isn't killing themselves.

You weren't asked, I wasn't, our parents weren't, and so on. It's not evil, it's just the pure simple fact of "No one was asked to be born into a world where you need to earn money or you will die."

[-] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 3 points 19 hours ago

I still don’t understand.

I’m good with making life less shitty for everyone though.

[-] Canonical_Warlock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 13 hours ago

This is one of those philosophical questions that have no "correct" answer but heres my take on it. Also sorry, this turned into an essay but I was on a roll

The main thing is that having a child isn't something the parents do for the child. You can't do anything for a child that doesn't exist. Having a child is something parents do for themselves; they want a child so they have a child. Plus an unborn child can't possibly consent to being born. Put those two things together and you have two people doing something that they want to do for their own benefit which fundamentally changes the state of being of another person who can't possibly consent to it.

When you have a child you are also taking a gamble on how their life will turn out without consulting them. They could wind up being the happiest person in the world who lives a full perfectly fulfilled life. Or they could wind up absolutely miserable for the rest of their life wishing that they have never been born. Both of those things are largely up to random chance.

For example my brother in law was born to a homeless single heroin addict and grew up on the street even after his mom died. He is now a professional engineer with a doting wife, a loving family, and a large house with a white picket fence in a fairly nice neighborhood. He now literally lives the steriotypical american dream except he has a cat instead of a dog. Sure he worked for all of that but even he will tell you that it also just required a lot of luck. Meanwhile my foster brother was born to a happy, healthy, loving, and even relatively wealthy family but due to a freak illness when he was barely a toddler he now has next to no motor function. He can only slightly move one eye and eyelid but even that is taxing for him. He can kind of control a tablet with eye tracking for brief periods of time before it exhausts him and he likes to wink at people to say "hi" but that is the extent of agency he has in the world. He will almost certainly be like that for the rest of his life.

When you have a child you are taking that chance without consulting them. Some people see the chance of their child living a good life as being worth the risk, which is a perfectly acceptable opinion to have. Don't take this as me saying people need to be ashamed of having children. Like I said, there is no correct answer here. Other people (myself included) see it as unethical to take that risk for someone who can't consent to it. I obviously lean that way due to personal experience. I also don't see much point in creating more children when there is even one child that doesn't have a happy home. My genes aren't anything special, why make a new child when I could even possibly help an existing child have a better life.

[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

Let's not forget about child care, cause you know, in this economy both parents typically need to work to keep their heads financially above water.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Giving someone who didn’t get asked or consent to being born

How do you signal a desire to be born, practically speaking? Who do you contact to indicate your desire to begin existing?

If you don't want to exist, why not simply surrender your place in line to someone who does?

[-] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago

I would argue that the hardest working sperm fertilizes the egg, so technically it IS the one who wanted it the most.

[-] codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

It's not some big gotcha: it's unethical because consent is impossible to achieve. You have to have been alive for quite a number of years before you even have the cognition and experience to form an opinion about existing.

But that doesn't just mean creating new beings is good because it's impossible to consent. How would that apply to anything else?? By some logic (if you ignore obvious pain signals) animals can't "tell" us they don't consent to being butchered and eaten but that doesn't make eating meat ethical either (I'm not vegan btw.) Having sex with an unconscious person is rape, because they can't consent.

There may be suicidal animals who want to be eaten and there are certainly people who enjoy non-consensual sex and people who like being alive and believe their existence is a gift. The outcome still doesn't excuse the act in these cases.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

it’s unethical because consent is impossible to achieve.

That doesn't logically follow. Ethics isn't predicated on a universal consensus.

But that doesn’t just mean creating new beings is good because it’s impossible to consent.

There are a host of arguments for and against childbirth in the modern era. Much as there are a host of arguments for and against industrial mining or nuclear power or second hand smoking. But "the non-existent entity can't signal consent" isn't a material consideration, its a theological one. You're assuming an entity capable of consent that isn't available to converse with.

It's also totally unprovable. How do you show pre-born people didn't consent. If we're going into the idea of unborn souls being dragged out of the ether into mortal bodies, what means to have to prove they weren't volunteering to be here?

There may be suicidal animals who want to be eaten and there are certainly people who enjoy non-consensual sex and people who like being alive and believe their existence is a gift.

How do you take a breath without asking permission from everyone around you by infringing on their supply oxygen? How do you take a shit without first verifying everyone in your neighborhood approves of the turd you're adding to their groundwater?

So much of this really does boil down to "My only ethical move is to kill myself". Like, you're deliberately backing yourself into this corner, and then complaining that someone else hasn't relieved you of the burden of pulling the trigger. It isn't ethical, its infantile. You are, in effect, bemoaning the fact that every aspect of existence isn't shaped to your personal beliefs.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Legally speaking, and ethically too, I suppose, parents typically consent for their underage children. They make decisions based on what the parent thinks is in the best interest of their offspring. For some children, their best interest is to never exist. Forced birth is taking medical decisions away from the mother for both the mother and the potential child.

[-] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 20 hours ago

Underpants, you're pretty smart and I almost always agree with you, but there's no option for refusing to be born. There's only one option to stop living willingly, and it's called suicide.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago

there’s no option for refusing to be born

There's no option for volunteering to be born, either. The argument can just as easily be turn on its head.

The idea is anti-natalism is one you develop as a mature rational adult, not one you held prior to your birth.

Think of it as being in a roller coaster. Two minutes into the ride you decide "Too scary, I don't want to be here" but also acknowledge how it is impractical to get out of your seat in the middle of a loop de loop. So you turn to your friend in the other seat and say "Past me didn't get consent from future me to be here! That's unfair!"

You're asking for something nobody can provide you, even if they wanted to indulge your demands.

Antinatalists aren't suicidal, most likely living, they just understand that life isn't a gift.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Starbuncle@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

Ah yes, the classic "just kill yourself" argument. You totally destroyed that antinatalist.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] blindbunny@lemmy.ml 61 points 2 days ago

Why would I force another human into this shitty existence?

Also condoms suck and raw dick is just better.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 70 points 2 days ago

When animals are over stressed, unable to provide the basics of survival, and constantly dealing with external threats they tend to not have babies.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago

Can anyone here who's gotten one comment on the vasectomy process? I've been pretty nervous seeing a lot of the comments about it. I don't even do well with a normal blood draw. I feel like I'd need general anesthesia for this.

[-] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I've never had kids. Got it done down in TX. Told the doc I've never wanted them and didn't want to pay for anymore abortions.

I did it fully conscious with local anesthesia because I had no one to pick me up and look after me if I took the knockout gas. There were a couple tiny pricks of pain next to the base of my penis, then numbness. An unpleasant tugging sensation in each testicle when he positioned my vas deferens to cut, cauterize, and clamp the ends. That was the worst part, but like I say, it didn't hurt. Aside from that, I nervously wisecracked with the nurses, who politely laughed and joked back. Then I put my pants back on, paid the bill (ouch!), drove myself home, and spent the weekend getting high and playing video games with frozen gel packs under my balls. All that felt like was the dull tenderness you get a little while after a blow to the junk. Totally manageable. I took some Advil or something.

Against advice, I returned to my strenuous job 3 or 4 days afterwards, and jerked off repeatedly much sooner than suggested. I've experienced zero complications, but ymmv. Taking my wisdom teeth out was much worse. Getting a tattoo is far more painful. It was a bit worse than getting my ears pierced, but healed faster.

8/10 Would totally repeat the experience just for the days off with zero responsibilities. My only regret is I didn't do it at 18.

[-] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 day ago

Mine was almost painless.

I took, paracetamol only after ward for a day. I was walking around with no issues after the local anesthetic wore off.

My brother had a really shit time, severe swelling and major pain for a week.

I think skill plays a big factor!

Go for a doctor that has a great reputation, ask people that they have done the procedure on!!!!!

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

Mine was pretty bad. The doctor was really stingy about pain meds. I was miserable the whole procedure and two weeks afterwards.

If I ever get a scheduled surgery again, I'm going to buy gray market pain meds ahead of time.

~For search engines: Alexander Gershman Los Angeles~

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 97 points 2 days ago

This is what happens when the conservatives threaten the right to an abortion. Drastic measures have to be taken.

No kid should be born unloved or a woman have her life threatened because too many ignorant folks think she is sinful for getting healthcare or evil for not raising more wage slaves for the bourgeoisie.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] atro_city@fedia.io 31 points 2 days ago

Continue not taxing the rich and making conditions worse for the 99%. Let's see how it works out.

[-] veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

The rich don't care. They only want people to have kids insofar as to depress the value of labor relative to assets. Once the automation of lower skill services are complete, they will happily give every poor as many vasectomies and abortions they want.

[-] stepan@lemmy.ca 2 points 16 hours ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2024
525 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7270 readers
507 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS