READ ME FIRST - This isn't what they said!
Updated 12-24-17
You may have noticed that the advice given on this site is not always the same as on other sites. True. But why is this exactly?
Most traditional swaying advice is based on four sources. Shettles (timing, abstinence, and pH), Ericcson (pH), O+12 (timing, abstinence), and the French Gender Diet people. (calcium and pH). Please read these differences in more detail here: http://genderdreaming.com/forum/gend...sh-anyway.html
We'll take a closer look at these over the course of time, but for now, there is some pretty compelling evidence against ALL of them. Most of the studies that supports them (if any) are done by the promoters of the theories themselves or by people selling products based on this "evidence" and some of them are done in very very small groups of people and are essentially worthless from a scientific viewpoint. Some of them are decades old and others were not double-blind studies (meaning, the researchers and the subjects knew in advance the result that was "supposed" to happen - that is a major no-no for studies). Yet others rely 100% on self-reported information which is inherently unreliable - one person may know exactly when they ovulated, but then again, they may have Oed early that month and therefore claiming that they conceived 2 days prior to O is completely wrong. Please read more about issues with swaying studies here: http://genderdreaming.com/forum/sway...12-8-17-a.html
Only the favorable studies seem to find their way onto most gender swaying sites. On one of the most prominent swaying websites, it is clearly stated that NONE of the studies that disprove any of these things are posted. All that is presented, is the case FOR swaying using these methods, while the cases against them is never discussed.
Consequently, everything that follows is based on the unquestioned validity of these four notions and if they are all true, hey, that's great. We will end up with a great sway and it really IS our fault when sways fail. (On some sites, when people get opposites, they are all too often chastised for "not doing everything" to sway and their sways are picked apart and criticized mercilessly.) But if they're not true, then swaying is like trying to build a house on shifting sand - everything placed on top of them will be unreliable and unpredictable and swayers are setting themselves up for a huge disappointment.
So in this site, one of the goals is to provide a safe place to be able to question these sacred swaying cows because if they aren't true, then all swaying is crap and a complete waste of time. NO ONE will yell at you if you don't want to douche or drink massive amounts of Crystal Light, or try to scare you into swaying a certain way here. Please read more about that here: http://genderdreaming.com/forum/gend...Fault-Swaying= and here: http://genderdreaming.com/forum/gend...s-swaying.html
The downside of all this is, it can be confusing to people trying to plan a sway, to hear the arguments against the traditional swaying methods. It would certainly be easier if we just went with the crowd and ignored the evidence against traditional swaying. It might feel better in the short term because we would feel in control of our sway and that we were guaranteed success. But people's sways fail http://genderdreaming.com/forum/gend...12-8-17-a.html and the main reason they fail is because of bad information, because we keep repeating the same stale things and blaming ourselves when it doesn't work out. Unless we are willing to question again and again and assume nothing, swaying will never be any more reliable than it is now.
So please, any time you come across something that doesn't seem to mesh with what others have claimed, please ASK! There is always an explanation for everything and atomic (ME) is always happy to explain the reasoning behind why we give different advice from other sites.
Welcome and I am ready and waiting to help you have the sway you have always wanted.
