A New Birth Control Pill for Men?
Is a new male birth control pill the answer for guys who don't want to be parents? (Hat tip: Salted Slug)
Yes, it's all for the women, but sexism aside, any guys out there who would feel comfortable taking this pill?
British scientists have developed a revolutionary pill that men could take as a one-off contraceptive just before a date.
The tablet would prevent a man from being able to impregnate a woman, but within a few hours his fertility would return to normal......Rebecca Findlay, of the Family Planning Association, said: "It gets really tiring for women to always be the one in charge of fertility.
"For women, it would be another form of liberation. It's great."
Yes, it's all for the women, but sexism aside, any guys out there who would feel comfortable taking this pill?
posted by Helen at 4:53 PM
47 Comments:
Not that I need it, but I would have no problem taking it.
I can't help but give the economist's answer: it depends. What are the side effects? The article says it works by preventing ejaculation; does that mean a difference in sensation? How well tested is it?
let's do a thought experiment. You, a young sexy woman, out on a date with a gentleman with whom you are considering sex. he says, "I'm on the pill." you respond,
a. ok, great, let's have sex.
b. yeah, right, put the condom on buddy.
the Male pill is a solution in search of a problem. those who risk the actual pregnancy would be stupid to trust their contraception to others.
the man who intends to make damn sure that he doesn't get "oops'd" into marriage needs something longer term than a few hours. some sort of reversible, side effect free sterilization. the only thing it would be good for is preventing women from "forgetting" to take their pills and trapping men into marriage, but THAT is an actual problem. trying to have casual sex without a condom isn't going to fly if you claim to be on the pill.
sean
I wouldn't have a problem taking it. But, I'm not inclined to rush right out and try any new thing coming out of the pharmaceutical market until it has been around for a while.
Since it is the woman who actually gets pregnant, she would be a fool to trust someone else to "take a pill". Guys will say anything and that doesn't change.
I'll stick with tried and true, thank you. Condoms are simple, cheap, have minimal impact on my experience if used correctly, and provide the added protection from STDs.
I think that they're really stretching it when the makers imply that it's all about the women. We all know good and well that the motivation for this research wasn't to liberate women, but to liberate men from the condom.
Why is shifting responsiblility for one's own fertility to the person who can't have the baby called "liberation"?
You also have to consider its use within a marriage, for instance, not just the single life.
I never join the first adopter crowd. Whether its plasma television, lasik treatment or the male pill I prefer to wait and see.
I'll wait long enough to make sure there aren't any unforeseen side effects. STD prevention is more important.
Maybe I'm a little more devious than most but I can see the situation where a couple "agree" to have a baby but the guy secretly takes this pill in order to have more sex but no baby.
I'd be ok with taking this pill IF and only IF women will agree that if the pill fails to prevent her pregnancy or if I forget to take it, and even if I LIE about being on that pill and intentionally don't take it, SHE the woman will pay child support until the kid is 18.
Why?
Because when women who take the pill get pregnant anyway or become pregnant because they forgot to take their pill or simply lied about being on the pill, the man has to pay for child support.
Fair is fair.
I wouldn't trust it until its been on the market for 10+ years. And then it still doesn't do anything for STDs. So I'd probably just use condoms and make sure I washed them out.
Wash them out?
A guy I know did better than that. A bit of tabasco sauce or similar on the inside, then treat as normal. If a woman tries anything funny with it... more than likely the reaction will be quite clear to all within yelling range.
I don't think I'd be an early adapter either, and I'm skeptical that I'd like this in any case. But I'd give it a whirl and see what's what, so long as there's no weird side effects. No ejeculation doesn't seem very appealing though.....
Condoms aren't so bad and make me feel safer.
One thing I don't get. If you take the pill before or during your date, as the article suggests, and the pill wears off within a few hours, won't there be a lot of cases where the pill wears off too soon? And how long does it take the pill to kick in? I guess this could encourage more foreplay if you have to wait for it to take effect!
100% definatly, anything to reduce the chance of pregnancy, condoms are 97% effective, this adds maybe a few more points. spermicidal gel same thing..
not becauae of the financial thing, but because i know it would kill me and my fiance. we are not mentally able to have kids.
i would use any means to stop it until i could afford a vasectomy (and she wants a tubal if not a complete hysterectomy she is that passionate in not having kids)
I find it incredibly patronizing that these questions are always posed to men like they might not have a vested interest in not getting someone pregnant. Who frigging cares if women would trust a man to take this pill?? Why does that have ANY bearing on whether or not this things is developed?
I want the choice, I'm sure there's enough men out there that do that the market will be plenty large enough to be profitable. If women don't like it, then they can - quite frankly - have a Coke and a smile and shut the fuck up.
Comfortable? Birth control that _I_ can control that doesn't involve wrapping my member in so much latex that I can't feel anything.
You bet your well-credentialed buttocks.
It would leave women unable to "nudge" men into fatherhood because the female biological clock is ticking. Or "nudge" them into marriage.
Lamont
I wish they'd had this when my Dad was on the job...
Well, as a woman, I certainly applaud the efforts and look forward to this drug's release.
As I have said before, however, a man telling me that he's on the pill doesn't relieve me of the responsibility to protect myself. If it's a serious, long-term relationship and I wouldn't mind having kids with the guy, I might very well take my chances. But if it's not a serious, long-term relationship and/or I REALLY don't want kids, then I will still use methods of my own. If a woman doesn't make efforts to protect herself-- then, yes of course, the child that results is the responsibility of both parties and the non-custodial parent should be required to pay child support.
And as several here have pointed out, this pill still does not protect against STD's, which should clearly be an issue for those having sex with folks they don't trust or know well enough.
Yes, this pill may have side effects, but so does hormonal contraception. There are always costs. Millions of women around the world accept the financial costs, weight gain, increased risk of certain cancers and decreased libido in exchange for the relative convenience and efficacy of hormonal contraception.
"Preventing ejaculation" doesn't mean it prevents orgasm, right? Not entirely sure I admit.
Andrea
Andrea,
I don't know either, I would hope it wouldn't prevent orgasm because that would make it a fairly worthless product. I hope that more details on this male pill are forthcoming.
Yeah, that question seems to be the main one amongst the various talk stations I've heard covering this over the past 2 days. No one seems to have an answer.
To answer your question, though: I too am no early adopter, and won't be popping these for at least several months after they reach the commercial stage. By then I'll be properly snipped anyway, but even barring that, sure, I'd give 'em a go once I was sure they were safe - and after Andrea's question is properly answered.
This reminded me of something Mark Steyn wrote recently:
If you measure the births of the Muslim world against the dearth of Bishop Kate's Episcopalians, you have the perfect snapshot of why there is no "stability": With every passing month, there are more Muslims and fewer Episcopalians, and the Muslims export their manpower to Europe and other depopulating outposts of the West. It's the intersection of demography and Islamism that makes time a luxury we can't afford.
A solution looking for a problem, indeed.
Well, the article says "sexual satisfaction is not affected", so I'm assuming the answer is, "No, preventing ejaculation does not mean preventing orgasm."
Because I'm pretty sure orgasm is a primary component of sexual satisfaction.
Though... though--it still seems so odd. I mean, ya...but...ya don't....How.....? D'OH!
Andrea
an orgasm doesnt require ejaculation for men, imagine its a cascade of sensations that turns off the brain, you can have those feelings, regardless..
so anonymous 225, we have to breed to beat the muslims, its an open leg race then..
making women only useful if they have kids, i dont think thats what you meant..
Yipee!!! It's finally out!!!! Actually, I am married and female and have no use for this now, but perhaps someday it will be of interest to my husband? This "male pill" is not new, only new to the market. For a long time no one thought it would be a great seller. But the male pill actually has far fewer side effects than the female pill. Side effects are also much less deleterious than the female pill, which can kill and cause serious side damage.
How do I know all this? I took the pill as a young woman and had very serious side effects, so bad that I was unable to work or lead a normal life for almost 3 years. I learned about the dangers of female contraceptives the hard way. I also learned how complex the female reproductive system is as compared to the male reproductive system. This accounts for why the "male pill" is much easier on the bod than for a woman.
So if the world is so cavalier about woman taking dangerous contraceptives, why not then a safer contraceptive for men? But honesty, if I could do it all again, I'd prefer to go au natural.
Ali
A man can orgasm without ejaculation. I've heard it's even possible without a pill, though I don't actually know anyone who's pulled that off. But they're two separate things even though they happen together.
I just find it hard to believe it would be as satisfying without the accompanying ejaculation. IMO, eculation makes the orgasm better. For example, isn't that why orgasms seem better if you haven't had sex for a bit? Because you're building up a bigger ejaculation? Is that my imagination? Without it it might be weird, or incomplete, or half-assed, or something. But I guess we'll find out when this pill comes out!
No wet spot! Sounds great to me. I'll get him the pill just to save me on the laundry. Is that a selfish-woman thing to do?
Call me crazy, but the idea of orgasm without ejaculation sounds like a recipe for really really really bad blueballs.
Orgasm without ejaculation!? I can't imagine what that must feel like. What are these people thinking of?
On the other hand, semen without sperm sounds like a great idea, sort of like a temporary and easily-reversable vascectomy.
anonymous 2:25
It's also true that Republicans have more kids than democrats. Yikes.
i think sean made a great point like 20 comments ago...
it is also true that republicans get married and stay in marriages more often. include all the facts
All that's left now is for Helen to host a "Name that Drug" competition, get linked by some major blog, and get more of that mad blog traffic.
Motilaze
ad: We're married, two grown children, and there's no way in hell Mary or I want to have another kid ten years before our retirement. So I take Motilaze before we're intimate. Now Mary and I can boink to our heart's content without the risk of our life's plans being shot all to hell.
and whats wrong with being responsible, and not bringing more kids in if you dont want too, or any kids, into this over populated world.. a world that uses more resources than can be replenished.
If the pill allows men to orgasm without ejaculating...wouldn't that open up a man's ability to fake orgasm without a condom? A true move towards gender equality!
I read about men having orgasms without ejaculating, and I still can not imagine how tha tis possible.
When I was in my thirties I was lucky enough to be with a woman who liked sex as much and as often as I did, and we tried a lot of things, and we could stay in bed for 3 or 4 hours doing all sorts of things.
She eventually had -occasionally- multiple orgasms, and I could ejaculate 2 or 3 times within a couple hours , but never ever did I have an orgasm without an ejaculation.
To me it sounds completely impossible for a man to have an orgasm without an ejaculation.
Maybe some people are made in a different way you know like some peopel are double jointed, so maybe some men can orgasm without ejaculating, but it is impossible for me to even beging to imagine how that could be possible.
Oh , and if anyone is curious, I have not seen that woman in 12 years and have never met a woman since who was as much into sex as she was.
Now my sex life is boring me to tears...
It's not really an issue for me.
These days the bulk of my sex life consists of people telling me to go screw myself...
control of the PG muscles (essentially those you tense in order to hold in urine; if you were to start peeing and then stop the stream, you would be using your PG muscles) is the goal of tantric sex practices. once a man achieves sufficient control he is able to achieve orgasm without ejaculating, and this apparently allows him to have multiple orgasms in the manner to which women are so happily accustomed (so they say. I've never seen this myself but it appears to be quite well documented). if that's the side effect I think we can agree the drug company has got a real moneymaker on their hands ;)
in a committed relationahip, which should reduce std's, (and some stds bypass the condom, genital herpes, could be spread any other flesh to any other flesh etc).. the pill should be invaluable,
Reading all these posts confirms that our modern age is insane. When did having sex become divorced from having kids? That is the function of sex - reproduction. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. If you can't live without sex, then be prepared to become a parent. Taking all kinds of drugs to prevent pregnancy, whether it is the man or the woman doing so, seems to indicate an addiction of some kind, don't you think? Perhaps it is an addiction to sex?
Do you know that it is actually possible to live without sex? The body must breathe, eat, and drink fluids to survive, but it does not have to have sex to survive. If your body is saying, "must have sex," then it is also saying "I want children." Guess what? You don't have to be a slave to your body's cravings - wow, what a concept!
Rob,
Sex is not a crime except if one rapes someone.
Rich,
That sounds sad, are the potential partners you meet that bad or do you set people off?
To me it sounds completely impossible for a man to have an orgasm without an ejaculation.
I can confirm that it is possible. Husband can do it. Nifty.
so if 2 teenagers have sex the cant control their urges, as a lot of teens cant, and they havent left school then they should have a kid.
making love in the old fashioned sense is being close to someone, to be with them and making love is the ultimate show of trust in someone you love. you are there naked emotionally, phsyically and mentally, you trust that person when you are your most vulnerable.
humans are not animals, we have self control, we decide when to have kids, when it suits us, rather than having a kid and expect to be paid by the government.
there are millions of unwanted, unloved children in this world, kids who die or are abused, or locked in homes, unwanted children, do they deserve it no, so anything to reduce the number of unwanted births, should be rewarded.
not everyone should be parents, for the potential kids sake.
sex isnt evil, it isnt a deviation, if you want to bring religion into it as i know some will, why did god make sex so much fun. if he didnt want us to enjoy it..
I wonder if "Yea, I took the male pill", will become the new version of "I'll respect you in the morning".
It's not an issue now, but back in the day when my worst fear in life was that my girlfriend might get pregnant, I'd have taken this pill no matter what the side effects. Short of death, anyway.
yes i would take , I become uniterested in sex and go limp when the comdom gets whipped out. I would rather have no sex than have to use a comdom.......the pill idea is great.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
Post a Comment
<< Home