Clarification please

[Anon87]

Hey there. I know you're not able to answer questions about pregnancy risks etc, and i really don't want to breach those rules (so if this counts as doing so, please don't waste your time and resources replying to this post at all as I completely understand).
However, would you be able to answer this? I've taken a look at your website to answer my own question and assess my own risk, but there's something I'm not 100% clear on... in this link, http://www.scarleteen.com/cgi-bin/forum ... tml#000000 it says there's no risk if you 'Had any actual or possible contact with pre-ejaculate but NOT during intercourse or direct (where people are naked, with no barriers) genital-to-genital contact', but lower down it says there may be a risk if you touch your vagina with ejaculate on your hands. Can I just ask why fingering someone with pre-cum on hands/ touching one's vagina with pre-cum on their hands is no risk, but doing so with actual ejaculate is? Thank you.

[Sam W]

Hi Anon,

The reason for that distinction is that pre-cum poses less of a risk, period, than ejaculate. That's the reason the withdrawl method is in any way effective with preventing pregnancy. The only time ejaculate on a hand poses a risk is if there is a deliberate, immediate insertion of that hand into the vagina. Otherwise, the sperm are not going to survive that trip.

[Anon87]

Thank you for such a quick response! You guys do great work educating people. I thought the reason might be that ejaculate is generally a bigger quantity than pre-cum which seems to be less liquid, but I see. Thanks again.

[Anon87]

So to clarify, that would mean pre-ejaculate on a hand (even if it was inserted in the vagina) poses no risk? And does that also mean that traces of ejaculate wouldn't pose a pregnancy risk but that it would literally have to be a lot of fresh ejaculate stuck up there immediately?

[Onionpie]

That's exactly right, anon87!