Slashdot Mirror
Birth Control For Men Edges Closer
ananyo writes "Developing oral contraceptives for men has not gone as swiftly as researchers imagined in the early 1970s; they suggested at the time that a 'male pill' was not far off. But researchers now report a new way to make male mice temporarily infertile. Although the treatment is not ready for human use, the method avoids some of the pitfalls of earlier attempts. The technique appears to have a much more specific action than previous methods: it impairs sperm production by blocking a protein called BRDT. This protein was singled out as a potential therapeutic target five years ago because it only occurs in the testes, where it is required for the division of sperm cells. If the approach proves safe in humans, it would be an improvement over hormone-based methods of male contraception, which are not completely effective and cause side effects such as mood swings, acne and a loss of libido (abstract). On the downside, however, the compound 'shrank the mice's testes.'"
"No major side effects; it'll only shrink your testicles!"
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
As if there is a single man in the world would would take a contraceptive that shrank their testes....
I don't think this is close at all, more like a story of a drug with horrific side effects that thankfully they caught before human trials.
I could imagine that much of a testicle's volume is composed of hydrated protein and whatnot. Perhaps the loss in volume vanishes when the drug is discontinued.
Its not like most slashdotters are getting any.
Oh, and to achieve the maximum result repeat as often as it takes.
You can't handle the truth.
I get this strange, uncanny feeling that it won't catch on. From my own experience and opinion, men get squicked-out when it comes to changing one of their body functions. Women are "meh, okay," when it comes to oral contraceptives (in SOME cases--me, it didn't work out at all) simply because they have to put up with major, stupid-ridiculous body issues over their entire lives (menstrual cycles, D-cups, pregnancy, menopause--just to name a few) while a man's changes are more subtle, quicker, and easily controllable (facial hair, voice changes, etc.). It'd be nice to, as Samwise says, 'Share the load,' (har har) but it'd take some time and re-thinking of roles.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
It's like every new discovery ignores the last.
In other news it turns out that Men can not actually give birth.
.... of hammers or knives anywhere. (that hurt to write, yes)
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
I don't know what you are talking about, I wasn't listening.
You can't handle the truth.
What is this, this putting his wallet in involuntarily? Are you talking about the woman getting pregnant and the man having to pay child support? Well... um, if the man in this hypothetical situation was raped for that there sperm, then sure--he shouldn't pay a red cent. If he wasn't, then he needs to re-enroll in his sixth grade health class to learn that when you stick your junk in a vagina, it may produce a pregnancy.
Seriously. This argument is so old and so tiresome. If you get a woman pregnant, that's your kid. You need to take care of your kid. Is that too hard a concept to grasp?
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
I researched the availability of male birth control after the first time I ended up in the bedroom with a woman who was all "Oh you don't want kids, that's okay, I'm on the pill. No need to use a condom. NO. NO CONDOM! OKAY THEN, BUT USE THIS CONDOM, NOT YOURS! YOURS IS TOO UNBROKEN!"
Sounds silly, right? Apparently it's not that rare, and the older I get (or rather the older the girls I date get), the more common it gets.
So, I had to choose between exclusively dating girls half my age, find a way to put birth control under MY control since I don't want to procreate, or well, just live with it. A lot of guys choose the latter, which I suppose is why a lot of guys become fathers once their luck runs out. I'm not that kind of stupid.
So I just went with the other two options. Girls half my age are usually quite happy when they hear I've had a vasectomy, while a lot of older girls suddenly remember they need to wash their hair this saturday. Sunday. Every day. Every possible day I could ever meet them on, ever. They will have the cleanest hair ever, but they're not risking having sex with an infertile guy. Even though they supposedly are okay with that I don't want kids.
And women are surprised that we're confused by their behaviours...
Anyway I probably would have gone with the vasectomy anyway, but it would have been awesome to have a pill for when I was too young to legally do so. (25 here in Sweden.) So I really do hope that this thing takes off... This time. In difference of all the other ones, that have been in development for decades, and even undergoing human trials.
On the flip side that whole shrinking testes thing is a bit of a marketing problem if it persists in guys. Not for me per se, but generally guys seem to put a lot of stock in their nuts. I mean it's even made the language: "You've got balls." Having smaller balls makes you less of a man. No logic about that either... So most guys wouldn't buy this pill, even if it did work.
And men are surprised that women are confused by their behaviours...
A good way for women then to check if men are using the pill or just don't care!
Meh. Smaller potatoes make the steak look bigger.
Makes the whole thing a bit redundant.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
It's estimated that 1/2 of all pregnancies in the US are unplanned. Really, every child should be wanted by both parents. Willing parents are the best parents. If this world only had children that were wanted, the quality of child rearing that each child gets is going to be far better. Population explosion could possibly come under control as well.
-- Knowledge shared is power lost. -- Aleister Crowley
it's called try being married for twelve years.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Have a look at RISUG:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_inhibition_of_sperm_under_guidance
Development is much further along than this drug, RISUG could be available within the next five-ten years. It's available right now if you're in India and willing to be a guinea pig. No testicle shrinkage, though the Wikipedia article say there might be other drawbacks. The article says that there's no evidence for adverse effects though... which makes me wonder why it brings that up at all.
You see, that's why male contraceptives are a big deal. Currently, the only way for a man to have sex and have any say in whether the woman gets pregnant is either irreversible with some significant probability or ineffective with some significant probability: You can get snipped or use a condom. That's it. Woman can use the pill, and since that's a relatively reliable contraceptive that also doesn't prevent the woman from getting pregnant later when she wants to, it's the most widely used method of birth control. It's however 100% in the control of the woman, who can therefore basically unilaterally decide to get pregnant. So yes, it does take two, but the realities are such that women can and do get pregnant to get a commitment out of men, even if it ends up being just financial commitment.
Is is really a good thing to give people more options to only block pregnancy instead of pregnancy and STDs?
Blocking pregnancy is really not good enough for any contraceptive. When/if this came out I predict a significant increase in STDs.
Also we men really do not have the best track record for honesty related to sex. And "I am on the pill" is a statement that cannot be verified.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Wonderful idea.
Won't catch on
Too many men identify themselves as men through their ability to father children.
The testosterone undecanoate that is the longest acting testosterone esther commercially produced is not good enough to effectively supress endogenous serum LH and FSH production in a significat amount of people. And you must get a whooping 4ml deep intramuscular shot every 10-12 weeks.
A somewhat longer acting esther with a better pharmacokinetic profile is the testosterone buciclate but so far seems that the WHO couldn't find any commecial partners to keep developing and testing it. In any case with these steroid treatments the sperm production falls from 20M/ml to ~ 0.2M/ml IIRC for most males.
Because, as the news keeps reminding us, it's a scary world out there. Drug-Resistent Gonorrha If you need me, I'll be in my parents' basement.
Make love, not reality television.
Quiet down and put your nuts in the TSA scanner!
I'm sure it works better than trying to block the DDRT protein.
the new pill in spam emails?
By making your balls smaller it will make other things in that area appear larger.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
On the downside, however, the compound 'shrank the mice's testes
Without commercial potential, what is this going to be used for?
This didn't stop FaceBook going public, did it?
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
I hope they hang lower when they shrink due to less static acceleration of the ball bag.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Right now one big social problem is unwanted kids, public welfare, and family courts. The problem is there are lots if incentives for poor single women to get pregnant. They get better preferential treatment for things like housing, WIC, college, ect. If there was a male pill or reversible chemical vasecomy the change in social dynamics would change as severely as when the pill for women came out.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
But researchers now report a new way to make male mice temporarily infertile.
- it's called a swift kick in the balls. It works by blocking the ability to fuck for a little while.
I don't understand... I can't get off unless I get kicked in the nuts. Is there something wrong with me?
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
I get monthly allergy shots that total 1.8ml. Can I add this to the mix?
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
yes that's right.. and when she wont' shut up, lets just smack her across the face...as many times as necessary..
is the joke still funny now? or is your white knight I'm-sorry-for-being-a-man knee jerk reaction kicking in right now?
We're talking about fucking, not "knee"-jerking.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
WHY? but FUCK WHY is this Flamebait?!
I invite you all to think back to the many times the gov't said something was safe...
OR even how many people the gov't killed during experiments.
Its called testosterone.
One problem with testosterone and its derivatives, is their status as a controlled substance, and potential for diversion (at the distribution level; IM injections being immune to patient diversion). While I think the panic over anabolic steroids is ridiculous (hauling baseball players in front of congress?), I'm sure it ends up increasing paperwork and costs, and the big pharma companies may decide the potential political/legal circus is not worth it.
I'm sure there are plenty of opportunistic 3rd-tier companies that wouldn't mind if the potential profit were large enough (as they apparently are for a number of other controlled substances) -- but it's possible the WHO may be asking for restrictions on profit margin.
Have you ever seen mice balls?!
If my Rat was still alive I would give him this stuff. I would usually carry him around while at the pet shop and his gargantuan balls always became a conversation piece. Especially to the immature teens.
"That's right...I said it."
I have to agree with AC. When the gov't says it's safe........
"That's right...I said it."
What do you say to a woman with two black eyes?
Nothing, shes already been told twice...
"That's right...I said it."
as always it is with violence and alcohol, if it doesn't solve the problem, you aren't applying enough of it.
You can't handle the truth.
You'd probably run into this problem much less if you quit being a misogynist.
I always love how some people are adamant advocates of equality between the sexes, but still think that treating men and women equally is misogynistic.
I always love how some people are adamant advocates of equality between the sexes, but still think that treating men and women equally is misogynistic.
How is suggesting that women bear full financial responsibility for a child advocating equality?
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
That is what I did back in 2006....w/o insurance it was only 600$, with only 40$ :D
My count is officially '0' and I couldn't be happier.
"That's right...I said it."
Ever heard of giving up your parental rights? Was like never having a kid. that is what my father did to my mother when I was two and they divorced. She didn't get half his shit, she didn't get alimony and he didn't have to pay a dime in child support. Now he wants to be in my life...FUCK HIM!
"That's right...I said it."
You know that the Church will forbid it's use especially in areas of the world where it will do the most good.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
While RISUG looks like a great procedure to me, intellectually, I am much more comfortable emotionally with taking a pill than with having a doctor inject a spermicide into my vas deferens.
I explicitly release the above into the public domain.
I'll stick with condoms and "Hey, it's your body, I can't tell you whether to have an abortion. But be aware that I wont pay a single penny towards a child that doesn't live in my house."
In what fantasy land can you make that stick?
is structured in a way to implies that the government making things safer is a bad thing. It's a loaded comment with a surprising amount of things implied, and the sentiment behind it is why we get stuff like this.
Plus it's ridiculously well documented that the government makes things safer.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I believe the "parent" was suggesting that when two consenting adults agree not to have children and select female contraceptives as the means to ensure that decision, the female is responsible for applying the contraceptive. This was the agreement. If said female chooses to break the agreement then the resulting pregnancy was her choice, not her male partners choice.
When this or another reliable male contraceptive is available both parties will be able to ensure the agreement is respected without resorting to an irreversible procedure.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
The reproductive imperative for all males of all species is to create offspring that will in turn reach reproductive age. I think there will be a deep seated reluctance to use anything that interferes with that.
How is suggesting that women bear full financial responsibility for a child advocating equality?
My body implies that it's my choice which implies that it's my responsibility. Without the third part you aren't treating women like adults.
And while making her solely responsible might seem like overkill, it can't be any more absurd than holding him equally responsible for something he has much less control over.
Didn't realize that I was talking to Antonio Cromartie! I've been inspired. I'll trade in the minivan for a bitchin' camaro, ditch the wife and kids, and try to be more like you every day. Thanks for setting me straight.
"Have you ever seen mice balls?!"
Yes, back in the day before optical mice we had to clean them (and the rollers) regularly if you want a smooth moving pointer.
Of course this was before most people on this forum were born
now get off my lawn
Women, who now have essentially the ability to get pregnant when they want to, will have to ask a man for permission to become pregnant, maybe even beg for permission to be a mother. Do they actually understand the shift in reproductive power that unthinking feminists have been pushing for for so long? Do they realize they lose control of their own pregancies? No more Tom Brady and Giselle kinda thing. No more babies by philandering pretty-boy candidates. No more rock star accidents. No more (oops) having that second child because you want one and hubby maybe isn't so keen. And can a silly woman who depends on a man to take his pill trust him to do so? No. Think of pregnancy as revenge etc., an act of aggression. Male contraception empowers men in a way that women may not find so "fair." Nobody really knew the society-wide changes female contraception would bring starting in the 1960s. Perhaps we are not really projecting the changes easy male contraception in pill form will bring in the future as its benefits to men become widely perceived by them.
E Proelio Veritas.
Not always possible. Some women cannot use condoms due to skin allergies to the material. My wife and I found out the hard way that they lead to an unbearable burning.
I can't say that I agree, but I can't see this as flamebate. WTF mods. Again, it's not about _your_ personal opinion. It's about the merrit of what is said.
*flamebait. oops :)
OK, then perhaps you shouldn't stick your pecker into things it can get pregnant. Grasping that?
slashdotters have proven over the last decade that hands don't become impregnated, so there is no need for them to use birth control. Hands never go on the rag, never cheat, and never think of marraige. Hands don't care if you watch porn or look at other hands.
It's all stuck to his wall at this moment.
Of course she needs to take care of her kid. And single mothers who don't have the dads stick around DO. Are you saying they don't? Saying that it's a 50/50 deal makes me misandric? I'd say the opposite. Children need a father in their lives, imho, and the world would be a better place if more men stepped up to the plate. it's *getting* better, but it needs work.
I don't know what women you've met in life, but I assure you, I ain't one of them. Neither are many. Have you ever thought that your selection and choices are messed-up and you're honing in on the WRONG chicks? I hooked up with a great guy, a real, 100% geek, while nearly all of my friends decided to moon over the Bad Boys. I get jealous looks from them, especially from the single mother demographic, but I don't say, "Yea, men are assholes," but "Well, you made the choices."
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
I heart you.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
Probably more to that story...
Mexico.
The FDA is motivated to approve drugs to support the drug companies, then found the drugs cause adverse side effects or death, supporting the ambulance chaser lawyers with their annoying TV commercials.
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
"I also think that a father has the right to know if he has a child, so I'm completely in favour of paternity testing"
Absolutely. The only times I'd say "Oh, c'mon," is if it's obvious he's just being a dick. Some men will do anything to get out of that responsibility, even if it takes lying, calling her a 'whore'. But even then, fine, have your paternity test. In that case I'd say that the father would have to pay for it, unless it turned out it wasn't his kid. That's to prevent defaming the woman he's accusing of cheating on him.
I think what a lot of men who bitch and accuse women of "trapping them with a kid" (because women can control the sperm count and what it does after it gets up in her uterus; let's face it, most women who get pregnant didn't have some master plan to keep the guy around. Some? Sure, but...) don't think on is that they've created a human, who will one day know that the man who fathered them saw them more as a trap than an actual person. I can't imagine that kind of feeling, especially if when I turned 18, they'd suddenly want to be in my life. What a hurtful, psych-bill inducing insult, knowing that your entire existence was spit upon by the person who should have loved you most.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
http://www.neystadt.org/john/humor/IBM-Mouse-Balls.htm
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
The only way I would agree with you is if it was decided beforehand that she WOULD have an abortion if she got pregnant. I mean... honestly, do you understand what most women go through in having an abortion? It's not a flippant contraceptive, but something that can destroy you mentally, emotionally, etc.
I'm being serious now, really, because the two options you have here is something that involves instant gratification: "abort the baby, done," and "she had the kid, I'm outta here." Do you understand how either one of those can affect you later on in life? Do you really and truly understand that 18 years later, you're going to be loathed and reviled by the person you fathered, or that maybe, just maybe, you might regret the abortion? It's not to say "THIS WILL HAPPEN!" it's to actually think. I'm a scientist at heart, and calculate every single little thing, not just how I feel at this very moment.
In the end, if you don't want a kid, don't have sex on the first date. Maybe not even on the second. Get to know the person you're interested in, let them know how you want things to go and see if you match. Not every woman is out to get you, you know. It's about being selective. I think this about friends of mine that hooked up with losers, thought they were great but ended up being abusive deadbeat-dads that won't take care of the kids they gave life to. I feel for them, but I went for the geeky guy all THEIR 'love interests' teased for playing violin instead of going to keg parties. "Well, you made your choice, even knowing what kind of person they were."
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
IIRC, they felt rubbery on the outside and had quite a surprising heft to them.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Just eat enough genetically modified corn and you'll become sterile. Save $$$ It is already mixed into the public food supply so it shouldn't be hard to do.
It's doubly bizarre you believe that meme when almost certainly the FDA forcibly dragging the feet of drug companies, and costing them billions in testing, has lead to slower drug development, and thus more deaths than the FDA has saved.
All it takes is delaying one drug that saves 10% of heart patients annually around the world by one year and ffft! There goes several million needless deaths.
Compare that to the sum total of lives the FDA may have saved before issues became obvious and the drug companies would pull the drug anyway.
But a death in front of the camera is worth hundreds of theoretical deaths because drug tech is behind where it otherwise would be.
Who gives a fuck, it's all game.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Appropriately sized is key, and different sizes are hard to find. Probably partly a result of the social stigma of asking for extra small...
I know there's an obvious response that if you need extra small you probably won't have much call to use them anyway, so maybe it's a moot point
Sigs are so 1990s. No way would I be seen dead with one.
Then there are guys like this fine man.../s........... he needs to be neutered period. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/18/desmond-hatchett-30-kids_n_1528850.html
Everything above is my opinion....YMMV
How is suggesting that women bear full financial responsibility for a child advocating equality?
Because they bear full decision making power. It's either a joint responsibility, or it's not.
Ah, that fine gentleman! Yes, indeed. I can see him now, going to his spawn... "Okay kids, do Daddy a favor: don't eat for the next seven or twelve years 'til I figure this shit out."
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
One look and she'll know the pills are working. No stopping you now.
You do know there are latex free condoms on the market?
We used to use them because of the allergies.
-- The Internet is a too slow way of doing things, you'd never do without it.
fuck a pill, RISUG is a cheap, painless procedure. I think it can solve all unwanted pregnancy if it not artificially over priced in the US. It is in stage 3 human trials in multiple countries now. Also, no way do I wanna take something that can chemically or hormonally affect me. I feel bad when my gf has to be on birth control as it is the best option currently.
Balderdash!
ok, then by that attitude, women shouldn't have birth control either.. if they choose to have sex, they should just have to deal with the consequences.. same as the men. fair?
people like you deliberately misinterpret the issue. I cannot grasp why. It's in your interest to have control over the outcomes of actions you are held accountable for.
well if this is a viable treatment, maybe it's time to change stupid laws instead of treating them as immutable reality.
I think it might make the world a better place.
One more thought..
Your statement is easily rewritten as:
Well if the woman in your hypothetical situation was raped, then sure, she shouldn't pay a red cent. If she wasn't, well then she needs to re-enroll in her sixth grade health class to learn that when you let a penis enter your vagina, you can/will get pregnant."
That's just it. He didn't 'get her pregnant.' Both of them got her pregnant. So, if she's going to have the unilateral say in taking the fetus to term, then, by default, she should be solely responsible for it. With power comes responsibility, with no power, comes none. Ideally, she should have to enter into a contract with him (or get married) for financial support/fatherhood, but otherwise he should have the same right of refusal she does. This keeps the table balanced and encourages children only when both parents are truly ready to be parents, financially and mentally. It prevents her from using the kid as a battering ram to get him to commit when he's clearly not ready to, which happens a lot in today's society. This would eliminate a ton of highschoolesque melodrama that surrounds pregnancy today. Dr Phil would go out of business which would be a benefit to everyone..
The rules you're conforming to come from a time when women didn't have a choice. It was fair as women, especially pregnant ones, weren't allowed to work all that much and were very dependent on men for support. Today, things are very different, and it's about time that women gave up the privileges of chattel status if they want out of it.
Nancy, we remember you still...
"The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
roman_mir isn't. he's talking about assault, which in this gynocratic/mangina run society, is an international outrage when it happens to women, but a funny joke when it happens to men.
"Birth Control For Men Edges Closer"
I see what you did there.
You're missing one important aspect of drug testing: without sufficient testing, we can't actually know that the drug will save 10% of heart patients. Until we've tested the drug in large-scale, well conducted clinical trials and then carefully checked those trials over for the usual drug company shenanigans, for all we know it actually kills 5% of patients that would otherwise survive.
Well... um, if the man in this hypothetical situation was raped for that there sperm, then sure--he shouldn't pay a red cent.
Under current US law, it doesn't make one iota of difference whether he was raped, or even if he was way under the age of consent and the adult woman in question was in a position of power over him - child support is for the benefit of the kids, and everyone knows it benefits kids to be brought up by a kiddy-rapist enough to justify making one of her victims pay for it.
If he wasn't, then he needs to re-enroll in his sixth grade health class to learn that when you stick your junk in a vagina, it may produce a pregnancy.
Seriously. This argument is so old and so tiresome. If you get a woman pregnant, that's your kid. You need to take care of your kid. Is that too hard a concept to grasp?
That's just it. He didn't 'get her pregnant.' Both of them got her pregnant. So, if she's going to have the unilateral say in taking the fetus to term, then, by default, she should be solely responsible for it. With power comes responsibility, with no power, comes none. Ideally, she should have to enter into a contract with him (or get married) for financial support/fatherhood, but otherwise he should have the same right of refusal she does. This keeps the table balanced and encourages children only when both parents are truly ready to be parents, financially and mentally. It prevents her from using the kid as a battering ram to get him to commit when he's clearly not ready to, which happens a lot in today's society. This would eliminate a ton of highschoolesque melodrama that surrounds pregnancy today. Dr Phil would go out of business which would be a benefit to everyone..
The rules you're conforming to come from a time when women didn't have a choice. It was fair as women, especially pregnant ones, weren't allowed to work all that much and were very dependent on men for support. Today, things are very different, and it's about time that women gave up the privileges of chattel status if they want out of it.
sorry, I shouldn't have broken my statement into two posts, but it happens.. there's another reply somewhere on this poor excuse for code
Here is one example of this. There's more on google too.
"You are only young once, but you can be immature forever." -www.animemusicvideos.org
Flamebait
1. trying to start an argument just for fun
2. going against social norms enough that someone gets mad
Women have rights, men have responsibilities. That's just how our society works.
I mean... honestly, do you understand what most women go through in having an abortion?
That's irrelevant because it's not her only option. Can you at least agree that as women have gained more options (contraception, emergency contraception, abortion, safe haven laws) while men have lost some (paternity tests), women bear an increased responsibility for choosing wisely? Or do you not believe that women can make decisions and be held accountable for them?
I don't see how my saying that a man should support his child means that I think total absolutes about women getting everything they want with no accountability. I'm honestly trying to find the words to say to this, because I'd said I wasn't going to say anything else (I've raped this topic comments-wise today), so I want to make everything clear in these "final words". Or what I HOPE are final...
Never once have I said anything about women getting everything and men getting nothing, but that doesn't seem to matter; to some men, it seems that anytime someone brings up a disadvantage in the 'Woman's World', they jump up and start pointing fingers, saying "we have it bad, too!" What's funny is that while I have a small feminist side, I see the bullshit that goes on on my side of the court. I could give examples, but I've been too wordy already. Fact is, I try my best to be a reasonable, well-rounded and deep-thinking individual. I can shoot off the mouth and be opinionated, but if no one did that, there wouldn't be anything interesting on the internet.
We DO have a little more responsibility. And in a lot of cases, that's what fucks us up the ass without the benny of a reach-around. We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. If you're a pregnant teenager, some schools will try to bar you from attending but let the baby-daddy (gah, hate using that, but it seems right here, dunno why) roam the halls without repercussion. If we choose to abort when the man doesn't want us to, we're baby-killing bitches. If we choose to keep the baby, we're money-hungry bitches. If we choose to not have sex on the first or second date, we're labelled prudes. If we DO have sex on the first or second date, we're sluts. We do have options, and we DON'T have options, simply because we can be vilified for any one of them. Saying this, I'm not trying to play the tearful, "WOE IS ME, I'M A WOMAN!" card, it is what it is. How do we win? Give the man the decision entirely? Compromise, when it's already too hot to touch? What about the families on both sides, do they have a say? I DO side with women on this issue a little more, yes, because the products of both abortion and pregnancy will stay with her forever. I know the latter well; I had to have a c-section, because my son was born at 11.6 pounds, no lie. I've never recovered from it, even when I joined a gym and went through serious fitness and dieting routines. I'd never take it back, however. All this doesn't mean the man doesn't get a say in what happens, but it IS hard to say how it's finalized, as yes, the woman is the most affected. Sorry... you might not like it as a man, but it's just fact. Sometimes I don't like it either, because I'm a person who wants to be completely impartial, even in things like this. But I always keep coming back to the "who's affected the most by this?" point.
The best solution is what a lot of men (and some women) do not want to hear: this can allllll be avoided in NOT having sex with someone on the first, second or even third date. This goes for both sexes. If Jane and Joe have sex on the first date and Jane gets pregnant, neither one of them can bitch about the decisions being made on either side, whether or not the woman's insisting on it being her way. If Jane got to know Joe, she'd learn he didn't want kids and would want an abortion be done and nothing but. If Joe got to know Jane, he'd learn that she didn't want an abortion, even if it was with some guy she just met. Would this seriously kill anyone? I'm not talking "Wait for marriage," crap, just KNOW the person you're going to sleep with before you sleep with them. Neither side can feign ignorance. And it doesn't even have to be a two-hour lecture on 'Why Joe Doesn't Want Kids: Part VII, Money'... just, "Not without a condom--too young for kids *wink*" or the like.
It's not hard. In the end, it's 50/50, because someone else isn't responsible for another person, no matter how deceitful the man or woman may be. If a man has sex (especially unprotected sex, taking her word tha
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
Sorry, didn't mean to be taken seriously. Just couldn't resist trolling on this, just this one time. Here is a better explanation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPZ5boriRtE&feature=player_detailpage#t=362s
I know several professional Mistresses who make quite a (dis)respectable living from CBT. It's not that uncommon.
Sara
Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
I, for one, welcome our new ball-shrinking overloards
Hormones.
Assuming you are male and heterosexual then you will know how powerful the drive to have sex is. So strong that if a woman is really determined to sleep with you the only way to avoid sex is to avoid her. Boy, they only have to indicate that they wouldn't say no if you asked and it's hard not to give in to temptation.
You should understand that hormones have as dramatic an effect on women. Women's hormones change on a monthly basis and their desires, and mood changes as a result. Even more dramatic is the effect that pregnancy does to them. Their body is overwhelmed by hormones that many will never have experienced before. For many of them the difficulty in having an abortion, even if they said they would previously, is as hard as a man turning down sex from a beautiful woman who is really pushing the issue and doing everything in her power to seduce him.
So remember, it could be easier for you to remain celibate for the rest of your life than your partner to have an abortion once she's pregnant.
Tim.
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
Then don't use it? Granted, I wouldn't use it either if it messed with my hormones. But condoms suck royal donkey balls, and from the summary, it sounds like the whole reason it's taken so long for proper male oral contraceptives is because they were holding out for something that -wouldn't- mess with your hormone levels.
For men who are just in it for the sex, I suppose it wouldn't be an issue, but I like to think positive and imagine that isn't "most" men. Many, perhaps, but I like to think not "most". For those of us in actual relationships who don't want kids at the moment, but who wouldn't just say "oh well" and ditch the person if something happened, this would be pretty great (if it -doesn't- muck around with hormone levels, being a distinct disadvantage of existing pills for the purpose.) It's not a financial issue, it's a "you have a kid, congratulations, you now have no time!" issue.
I wouldn't use it if the side effects were as significant as they are for women, though.
There is no global overpopulation. Some places (such as Japan) are already experiencing population aging and decline, which is bad in many ways. Other places (such as the USA and specially Europe) already have sub-replacement fertility rates, and their population only grows because of demographic lag and immigration. It is predicted the the European Union population (now at 503M) will reach zero natural population increase by 2015 and zero total population increase in 2035 (at 520M), then start declining.
The USA will grow from 310M in 2010 to 403M in 2050. [1]
Asia will increase from 4.2B in 2010 to 5.1B in 2050, then start declining. [2]
The only region that is really growing is Africa. It will increase from 1B in 2010 to 2.2B in 2050. [2] Then its population density will be 73/km2. [3] Compare that to the current population density in Portugal (115/km2), in South Korea (487/km2) and in Taiwan (641/km2). [4]
Global population is predicted to grow from 7B in 2011 to 9B in 2050 and 10B in 2100 [5] and start falling soon after [6].
And according to [7], 40-50% of America-produced food is thrown away. According to [8], 1/3 of the world food is thrown away.
And this does not take into account that people eat, just for pleasure, excessive quantities of resource-intensive food (such as meat). If Americans/Europeans want to help the poor, an easy way would be to decrease (say, by 30%) their diet of meat. This will immediately reduce food demand and, for double bonus, the saved money can be donated to charity. And much arable land is wasted on subsidized inefficient corn-based ethanol. You can lobby your government to stop that.
Plus, there does not seem to be a negative correlation between population density and GDP per capita. [9]
African hunger is not caused by overpopulation. It is caused by corrupt and authoritarian governments, and by guerrillas/terrorists motivated by Marxism, violent Islamism, ethnic hate or simply greed.
Overpopulation fear-mongering is very old - at least as old as Malthus. One of its more recent incarnations was the 1968 book "The Population Bomb", which predicted mass starvation to occur in the 1970s.
Anyway, for better or for worse, there is already strong action taken by individuals, foundations, and Western governments to restrict fertility in Africa.
1 : http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_11.htm
2 : http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_2.htm
3 : According to [2], Africa will have 2.2B people in 2050, and according to Google[10] and Wikipedia [11], the area of Africa is 30,221,532 km2
4 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density
5 : http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_1.htm
6 : http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_6.htm
7 : http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?id=56376-us-wastes-half
8 : http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/74192/icode/
9 : http://sanamagan.wordpress.com/2011/03/10/population-population-density-gdp-per-capita-ppp/
10 : https://www.google.com.br/search?q=africa+area
11 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa
You went from "unplanned pregnancy" to "unwanted child" without justification.
Some men who might take the pill may care about this issue, even though they will never taste their own ejaculate.
Some people (either gender) who do not take the pill might also care about if there is any effect on the taste.
If there is any change in taste, how would this affect product advertising for the pill?
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
I think what a lot of men who bitch and accuse women of "trapping them with a kid" (because women can control the sperm count and what it does after it gets up in her uterus; let's face it, most women who get pregnant didn't have some master plan to keep the guy around. Some? Sure, but...)
Obviously most pregnancies are planned, but women "forgetting" to take their pill in order to have kids with a man who does not want kids (oh, he'll love the kid once he holds him/her!) happens all the time.
Giving men more birth control options is a good thing. It's good for couples (some women get unpleasant side effects from the pill), and it's good for men who want to be extra careful.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
You HAVE control, and it is you misinterperting the issue. She cannot get pregnant if you don't put it in. It's very very simple.
I don't understand what this means.
I am not encouraging anything at all. I'm simply pointing out the obvious.
LOL, well that's actually unfortunate. Sex is a wonderful, beautiful thing. I'm mainly responding to the nonsensical complaint the OP made here. Mainly that he can't grasp that engaging in risky behaviour caries a *gasp* risk.
Just to clarify further. I'm not at all anti-abortion. Anyone, whatsoever, should be able to control what is within their bodies if the means are there. Anything beyond a medical necessity is pretty much by definition self mutilation.
I'm not making the argument for celebacy. I'm making the argument that risky behaviour carries a risk. That is all. To complain about women doing such aweful things to this individual, I'm surprised he didn't figure out that he is the cause of his own suffering.
Grasping that?
That is an alternative, yes.
I don't see how this is a response to anything I wrote, let alone the actual question I asked, but anyway:
Never once have I said anything about women getting everything and men getting nothing, but that doesn't seem to matter
Because regardless of what you say, that does seem to be the situation we're in (with allowances for hyperbole).
We're damned if we do, damned if we don't.
And you think it's any different for men? "Slut"/"stud" is the opposite of "good girl"/"virgin who can't get laid". Want kids when she doesn't - "Patriarchal oppressor!", don't want kids when she does - "How could you be so cruel as to deny her that?"
And don't miss the big ones: "Don't you trust me that I'm on the pill?" ... (all the stuff you wrote)
Yes -> gives up what little control he had over his fertility
No -> you're a misogynist who thinks all women are out to get pregnant, gold-diggers,
How do we win? Give the man the decision entirely?
Don't recommend that. Men (for the most part) did exactly that, and look at the mess we have now!
this can allllll be avoided in NOT having sex with someone on the first, second or even third date
No. It's a sweet idea, but with half the pregnancies in the US unplanned, completely naive. People change, people lie (even to themselves), people fall for peer pressure and society's rationalizations ("men are never ready for babies, he'll be mad for a bit, but once he sees his child, it'll all be OK").
In the end, it's 50/50, because someone else isn't responsible for another person, no matter how deceitful the man or woman may be. ...).
Where I'm from, if you lie in order to get money, that's fraud (unless you lie about being on birth control, who the father is,
if I don't reply, it's only because I've done this one too many times for my tastes
That's fine, I won't take a lack of reply as a 'win'. I'm replying mostly because I think both perspectives deserve equal time.
The men's birth control pill is rather large, about the size of a 1 cm gumball.
You don't take it orally, you just put it in your shoe and it makes you limp.
F.
If your only tool is a hammer, you'll approach every problem as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
Not a bad choice if you find yourself in the predicament the OP is in.