Slashdot Mirror


Why We Can't Have the Male Pill (bloomberg.com)

Reader joshtops shares a report: For years, headlines have promised an imminent breakthrough in male contraception. Time and again, these efforts have fallen short. Last October, for instance, researchers reported that a hormone cocktail they'd been testing curbed sperm production and prevented pregnancies. But they'd had to halt the study early because men were reporting troubling side effects, including mood changes and depression. "The joke in the field is that the male contraceptive has been five years away for the last 40 years," says John Amory, a research physician at the University of Washington School of Medicine who has been working on the challenge for two decades. A new form of male birth control would be a public-health triumph and could snag a significant piece of the contraceptive market -- which is expected to surpass $33 billion by 2023, according to research firm Global Market Insights Inc -- or possibly expand it further. In a 2002 German survey of 9,000 men in nine countries, including Brazil, France, Germany, Mexico, and the U.S., more than 55 percent of the respondents said they'd be willing to use a new form of male birth control. A later study by Johns Hopkins University estimated that the demand could yield 44 million customers in those nine countries alone. And yet major pharmaceutical companies have mostly abandoned the chase.

347 comments

  1. Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Pill generally works for most women (and in some cases helps them stay 'regular'), a not-insubstantial number cannot go near the things without causing massive problems (irritability, fertility issues later down the road, etc). That said, it's fairly predictable, and you're not introducing anything more than just more hormones at the right times.

    It's tougher with men, since we don't have predictable cycles to monkey with (sperm production is more or less constant until the guy is well past old age), unlike eggs (which are already present at birth), sperm is made on-demand, and various hormonal interdependencies with brain chemistry is likely way more complex.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      We don't really need a pill that blocks sperm, we just need a pill that alters your DNA enough to make you fail a paternity test.

    2. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Birth control pills have also been linked to (i.e. correlated with but not the cause of) strokes and other serious health issues in women. The cultural shift that was enabled by the pill was not without consequences, most of which we don't really understand.

    3. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by teslabox · · Score: 1

      Female birth control pills actually use hormone analogues that aren't actually very good analogues. Prescription Endocrine Disruptor would be an appropriate description for this class of prescriptions, if the medical profession was interested in being honest with their patients.

      It's trivially-easy to render males temporarily infertile. My karate instructor told me how his wife wasn't getting knocked up when they'd decided to have a kid, decades ago, and how the doctor knew exactly what their problem was...

    4. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh I get it. It's funny because women are systemically oppressed. Haha!

    5. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you implying that your karate instructor got kicked in the balls a lot which caused temporary infertility? Seems suspect

    6. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by penandpaper · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Funny that, you don't have to be the biological father to pay child support. http://clementlaw.com/child-su...

      Even if the woman lies about birth control you are still liable. http://www.kidspot.com.au/birt...?

    7. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction:
      " unlike eggs (which are already present at birth)," is completely false. Eggs are produced by the process of oogenesis, the counterpart of spermatogenesis. Woman are not egg cartons.

      Female contraception has been an easier problem because it's a complex process (oogenesis, fertilization, implantation, fetus development) that's fraught with potential failures (the overall miscarriage rate is 30-50%).

      The male side, pretty much just spermatogenesis, is dead simple: recent stories indicate only 5% and 15% of produced sperm are defective.

      It's the difference between a long Rube Goldberg machine and a rock falling off a shelf.

    8. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      The reason that male contraceptives cause depression is easily understood - both sexes need a sufficient quantity of one or the other of the sex steroid hormones - either testosterone or estrogen. This is why drugs such as dutasteride (to treat prostate cancer by dropping endogenous testosterone) come with warnings because they can cause depression and suicidal ideation.

      One option is for the woman to sneak sufficient quantities of estrogen in the man's food (known as medical or chemical castration), same as happened with the fish that changed sex.

      Or they could just follow the plan to neuter Hitler with estrogen

      Agents planned to smuggle doses of estrogen into his food to make him less aggressive and more like his docile younger sister Paula, who worked as a secretary.

      Estrogen was chosen because it was tasteless and would have a slow and subtle effect, meaning it would pass Hitler's food testers unnoticed. The Allied plot to turn Herr Hitler into Her Hitler was just one of a number of wacky ideas cooked up to break the stalemate, according to a new book.

      He said: ‘Research had showed the importance of sex hormones – they were beginning to be used in sex therapy in London.

      The Allies hoped to smuggle oestrogen into Hitler’s food and change his sex so he would become more feminine and less aggressive.’

      Professor Ford, a fellow at Cardiff University and a pioneer of popular science, said the Government gave serious consideration to the plan, and that it was perfectly plausible. British spies were already in place and poised to carry out the plot.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    9. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He may have been implying steroids.

    10. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, our gynocentric society is really keeping all the womens down despite our entire civilization being built around "Women are Wonderful"...

      Get fucked.

    11. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      They have these little rubber thingies that you put on banannas to stop women from getting pregnant

      I got some bad news for you.

      btw, men do it too. Being an ass hole isn't limited to one gender.

    12. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, our gynocentric society is really keeping all the womens down despite our entire civilization being built around "Women are Wonderful"...

      Get fucked.

      Says no one who has ever been in a corporate board meeting and noticed the centers of power are all under MALE control!

    13. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      There's also the fact the consequences of pregnancy hit women more immediately and personally, so they're wiling to put up with more to get birth control.

    14. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says someone who has never been in a corporate board meeting.

    15. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like females already suffer wild mood swings due to their insane hormone secretions.
      So no one notices if a woman is slightly more batshit than usual.

    16. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if the woman lies about birth control you are still liable.

      Yeah - it's called being responsible. Why trust what someone else tells you?

      So if not being fooled is the fool's responsibility, why do we have laws against fraud?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    17. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Pill generally works for most women

      Ignoring the heart problems and such, of course. Now the real issue with the pills are their effects once they leave the human body and end up in the ecosystem. So the question becomes "Why can't people use condoms, or have sex in the non-reproductive way?"

    18. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Pascoea · · Score: 1, Informative

      Funny that, you don't have to be the biological father to pay child support.

      While I don't disagree it sucks for the dude involved, being forced to pay for a child that is not his, I want to point out a couple of things about this case: Based on the court doc, they were married in 96, under two years later the kid was born, they weren't divorced until 2001. That would lead me to believe that for 3 years he raised the child as his own. The 2001 divorce filings "incorporated a revised marital settlement agreement acknowledging Richard as the father of the couple’s minor child and requiring him to pay child support." It wasn't until 2003, while his ex was suing him for non-payment of child support, that he contested paternity and subsequently attempted to claim fraud against her.

      The judgement you referenced only stated that the statute of limitations for fraud had run out, and therefore he could not seek reparations. This other doc is an interesting read, paraphrasing a portion of it says: Because he signed the 2001 divorce decree acknowledging he was the father, he is the father for all intents and purposes of the law. Essentially legally adopting the child. If he would have presented the paternity tests at that time, or within a year, he would have gotten out of the support payments. Because he waited 2 years he's SoL.

      Again, shitty for the dude involved and it sucks that he's stuck paying a shit load of money for a kid that's not his, but the facts and the laws are what they are.

    19. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by penandpaper · · Score: 0

      "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — a fooled man can't get fooled again."

      Ah, one of the best presidential quotes.

    20. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by shaitand · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And ruin sex, which is then with a rubber sex toy rather than a person. Besides that isn't responsibility it is due diligence or self-defense.

      We have birth control, morning after pills, and abortion. The argument that we can't require women to take the absolutely minimal risk associated with the morning after pill or an abortion or even carry to term if the father doesn't consent to an abortion is a weak one when we require individuals to risk death just to determine if their blood alcohol level is too high. The current system of treating a pregnant woman as the patient rather than the fetus which is 50% part of the fathers body is unjustifiable. Keeping paternity testing as taboo rather than standard and automatic procedure during pregnancy to establish fatherhood as soon as possible is unjustifiable now that it can be done early and as simply as establishing gender with a 99.9% reliable bloodtest from the mother.

      Even if you aren't willing to require minimal and reasonable levels of accommodation from women to provide something approaching equitable rights for expecting fathers, given that pro-creation is the least common motive for intercourse the father should at least have the right to waive parental responsibility while an abortion is still possible and later if the mother was negligent and didn't inform him during that time. In the case of rape the attacker should lose all related rights obviously, a man who rapes a woman has no rights to a resulting fetus and the same if a woman rapes a man and gets pregnant, she loses her rights and must go along with whatever decisions.

      Saying it is a woman's body it impacts and so it is all her decision ignores that the fetus is NOT part of her body any more than a piece of stolen jewelry she swallows. It ignores that carrying and birthing or the risks of outpatient abortion are the least of the risks, suffering, and responsibility that comes with a child. Are we really going to say it is okay for a woman to use her innate physical womb to take total control of lifelong decisions that impact another person at least as much as themselves? How can we reconcile that with the way we treat men who are even slightly assertive because women might fear the physical advantages they theoretically could take advantage of?

      Women make up about 60% of the population in the United States. They hold so much power in our society they were able to push through a constitution amendment (prohibition) that men opposed even when they didn't have suffrage. They make up 60% of the potential voters and have an even disproportionately greater representation at the polls. Politically we pretend women are disadvantaged because they have the political and social power to push that standard when in reality they hold almost all of the actual power and our policies and laws are all designed to give them all the advantages while guaranteeing no advantage can ever be given to males.

    21. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — a fooled man can't get fooled again."

      Ah, one of the best presidential quotes.

      Not quite:

      "fool me once, shame on... shame on you. Fool me .... you can't get fooled again" is the correct quote.

    22. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What exactly do you think a "baby" is? It certainly is NOT 50% of the fathers body....

      The father isn't the sperm donor, the father is the mother's significant other, whoever that may be. If the most significant other of that woman is a guy from a bar, he is the father. If she slept with the guy from the bar while married to you, tough shit that's your baby now, you're the father. Society decided this already.

      Fetus is part of her body. If she dies it dies, just like every other organ. Don't like the fact that a fetus is more of a parasitic organ than a human? Tough shit, take it up with god.

    23. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      I think the take away is ANAL. The sex act not the acronym.

    24. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      given that pro-creation is the least common motive for intercourse the father should at least have the right to waive parental responsibility while an abortion is still possible and later if the mother was negligent and didn't inform him during that time

      That would be shorter than the current period.

    25. Re: Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's sad that a good number of /.ers are married and yet carry such outdated and crazy viewpoints of women.

    26. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod +1 pls.

    27. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Ignoring your poor understanding of the biology of human reproduction, your argument for so-called "male abortion" where the father refuses to accept responsibility for the child before it is born is flawed.

      Your comment about condoms gives your mindset away. You want the pleasurable experience of unprotected sex, without any of the responsibility. Of course you can't really avoid all the risks with unprotected sex, even if she doesn't get pregnant you can still get STDs, but basically you are arguing that you don't want to use contraception because it reduces your physical pleasure and so wish to have an exemption from the potential consequences.

      Rather than demanding that women be expected to undergo medical procedures on your behalf, why not get one yourself and have a vasectomy? They are reversible or you could freeze some sperm if you want kids later. You could also use the rhythm method, assuming you aren't going to insist on having sex with random people you barely know... But then again, if you think sex is "ruined" by slightly reduced feeling, it seems like forming relationships or enjoying all the other parts of sex aside from penetration is not high on your priority list.

      By the way, women make up 51.5% of the US population, not 60% (source: last US census). between the ages of 15 and 65 it's dead even. And as for voting, back when these rules were introduced in the US, the 1950s through to the 1980s, men voted in greater numbers than women.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    28. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a great reason to avoid getting married.

      As if the 50% chance of losing huge money in a divorce wasn't already reason enough.

    29. Re: Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, is your argument then that fetuses are actually parasites, and you want more of them to go with your kind? But no girl parasites. They get too much stuff, so every boy parasite should make sure they remember their place, amirite?

      Posts like yours make me wonder if it isn't fair to accept that there are lizard people amongst us, considering that the lizard brain seems to be at work consistently when us men encounter contraception, pregnancy, birth/abortion and amagawd babies.

    30. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CNHwhHWPoQ

    31. Re: Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they're trying to pretend they're in their early twenties again and using bro talk to cover their bald spot and spare tires. It's cheaper than buying a muscle car. Same effect.

    32. Re: Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF. It's not crazy and outdated. This is real life and it's not a stereotype. Mine even admits it. There is a direct correlation between how she behaves and menstruation.

      If you know some women (or are one) who don't have these severe mood swings that exactly correlate with the bleeding, that's great! Congratulations! But if you pretend that it's not a thing, then I can't help but think that you're being a dishonest piece of shit.

      This is serious, too. Without getting too much into it, it's like a good/evil switch gets thrown. I am half a century old and have been with her a decade and these few days of every month are one of the biggest, most serious and most threatening challenges of my entire life, and that's not an exaggeration. You do not know fear or pain if you haven't been on the other end of this shit. (God damn I can't wait for menopause. It stops after menopause, right?)

    33. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 1

      It's no more complex for men than it is for women. Depo Provera works just the same way that depot testosterone. One big difference is testosterone is more fragile than estrogen, such that daily pills are not feasible. Drug companies spent 20 years and a fortune finding a way to make an oral, safe, effective form of testosterone. But we do not have the technology.

      The problem is the hormones men would take have that unfortunate side effect of making you jacked and alpha. We can't have an army of pacified, effete faggots slaving away in servitude if male birth control was widely available.

      I mean, seriously. Look around you. Most men don't even look like men anymore. They are entirely lacking any musculature, and they are either disgustingly obese or stick creatures.

    34. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 2

      It is amusing how cuckholds like yourself think. You always have to begin your conflict with another man by proving just how much smarter you are. What the fuck does biology have to do with his argument? It's amazing you wrote multiple paragraphs about condoms, which are only tangentially relevant.

      There is no legitimate reason for women to have total control over a man's life because of sex. None.

    35. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If she dies" continues long after birth. Dependency doesn't make an organ, and it doesn't help your "IT'S MUH BODY".

      Looking forward to more headlines about millennials killing marriage, ever more men telling you to where to put your "tough shit your baby now" relationship.

    36. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It is the woman's body, which is why it's her decision. Whether the developing proto-child is her body or not, it has to ride around in her body, and it's therefore her decision. There is plenty of medical legal precedent.

      It seems reasonable to me that the man should bear reduced (or even zero, depending on the case) personal financial burden if he can somehow prove that he was lied to about birth control status for the purpose of conception. But that's about as far as that reasonably goes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    37. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, looked up some numbers.

      If DNA testing has gotten to 99.99% : http://www.babymed.com/prenatal-paternity-test-during-pregnancy-and-testing-for-dna

      And there are 4 million births in the US each year : https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/infantcare/conditioninfo/Pages/born.aspx

      That's 400 arguments (and quite possibly breaking that many marriages) started from the limits of scientific testing.

      If there's a reason to suspect an issue, testing is a powerful tool. Like anything else medical, testing just because you read that the test exists is a terrible idea, because it's more likely that you're going to get all sorts of false positives and negatives and fuck up your life when everything was fine.

    38. Re: Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have. She went from stable to having uncontrollable swings with the pill, and yes, there were moments where it was threatening.

      So I wouldn't go around calling her already messed up and using that as an argument such as "lulz wymmyn r alreddy messed up soz doesn mattur if they takes pills".

      It doesn't look good on anyone. Please to be remembering every person is different.

    39. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Not quite - unlike sperm which are continually produced, the individual oocytes that will become eggs are all present at a very young age, though they only grow and mature into fertilizable eggs at the beginning of the menstrual cycle in which they'll be released.

      That's the reason there are different radiation considerations for men and women astronauts who plan to have children. Men's gametes are constantly being produced, and thus far more vulnerable to radiation induced mutation during replication, but will all be replaced by fresh healthy sperm within a month or so after returning to Earth. Women's gametes on the other hand have already long since done all their replication and can thus withstand far greater radiation exposure without mutation - but once mutation does occur the damage is permanent.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    40. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      No way dude. You want 100% guaranteed birth control, you create an inhaler that can simulate orgasm. One snort and you are orgasming long and hard, no muss, no fuss, the end of STDs and rape. Of course getting people to stop using it might be a bit trickier ;D.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    41. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think it's bad in the US, don't bother living in Australia; politicians will do almost anything for the female vote.

    42. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      if you think sex is "ruined" by slightly reduced feeling, it seems like forming relationships or enjoying all the other parts of sex aside from penetration is not high on your priority list.

      I agree with the thrust of your comment, but this is sex-shaming nonsense. All of those other experiences are enjoyable with or without sex. The sex itself, however, is drastically diminished by the use of prophylactics, and for both parties — though far more for the male. Further, there is nothing inherently wrong about sex for the sake of enjoying sex, and suggesting otherwise is ridiculous puritanical horse shit.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    43. Re: Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Family law basically works like marrage: it's always the man's fault and responsibilities.

    44. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I agree with you, condoms so significantly reduce feeling and there is nothing wrong with enjoying that feeling for what it is...

      But all that I posted was said in the context of what the GP posted. If you want to enjoy sex but also don't want pregnancy or STDs then you can either use a condom or find some other method to avoid those things, such as finding someone you trust to do it with or doing stuff other than just penetration to heighten the enjoyment.

      What you can't do is what this person wants, which is to have responsibility free sex and walk away from any offspring that might be produced because you think abortions are no big deal or that fertility is the sole responsibility of the woman. If they really cared about the foetus they would not want one parent to be able to abandon it before it was even born.

      This idea is from the red pill camp, who basically want to go back to the 1950s.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    45. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      "Fetus is part of her body. If she dies it dies, just like every other organ. "

      Her body isn't defined as what dies if she dies, it is defined by DNA. You can apply a reductio ad absurdum and talk about cancer, damaged cellular DNA, organ transplants, etc if you like but having different models for macro physics and micro physics that don't mesh hinders the relevance of such an argument.

      "The father isn't the sperm donor, the father is the mother's significant other, whoever that may be. If the most significant other of that woman is a guy from a bar, he is the father. If she slept with the guy from the bar while married to you, tough shit that's your baby now, you're the father. Society decided this already."

      Ahh the tyranny of the majority. But pointing out the current legal policy contradicts the proposal is not a valid logical rebuttal of an argument that proposes changing the current legal policy.

    46. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by shaitand · · Score: 2

      "It is the woman's body, which is why it's her decision. "

      It IS my body, which iS why it's my decision whether I risk it by allowing them to take my blood to determine if I'm intoxicated... Oh wait, no, no I actually it has been determined that my right to the sanctity of my body is outweighed by the rights of others. The fundamental rights of 40% of our population with regard to the single most important thing in any parents life is a pretty damn huge thing to weigh against the risks of carrying a baby or having an abortion. Those risks were not always so low and there are still high risk situations and I would never suggest a doctor should not be able to object if one is a factor but by and large pregnancy and abortion are routine and safe medical practices.

      All that leaves is that she doesn't want the hassle or the responsibilities which are consequences of her actions just as much as the father. Women are no more entitled to a get out of jail free card than the father.

      "There is plenty of medical legal precedent."

      Which would only be relevant if we were discussing what the law is rather than it being broken and needing changed. Laws can and do change and precedents go out the window.

      "It seems reasonable to me that the man should bear reduced (or even zero, depending on the case) personal financial burden if he can somehow prove that he was lied to about birth control status for the purpose of conception. But that's about as far as that reasonably goes."

      Once upon a time "I'm pregnant" was final and responsibility for a baby was an automatic consequence both parties shared responsibility for and this would have made sense at that time. Today there are morning after pills, abortion, and adoption. Setting aside the implementation details and ramifications. If we support the ethical right of a woman to prevent a pregnancy she doesn't want for any reason at the very least we should support that father ethically would have the same right. Even if we don't support the rights of fathers to veto a pregnancy physically because of the mother's right to her body, there is no justification for not recognizing the fathers right to legally abort if she refuses to consent to the procedure.

    47. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry but 400 mishaps hardly justifies 3,999,600 potentially false cases of paternity. You wouldn't suggest we don't screen for breast cancer because of that error rate, why would you support the horrific consequences of a false pregnancy under that tiny failure rate? We have very very few medical tests/procedures with reliability as high as 99.99%...

    48. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind we are society with an overpopulation problem, not an under population problem. We have no reason to encourage pregnancies to go to term at this point.

      Methods of birth control are only tangentially related to my argument. Currently a woman is allowed to abort any responsibility she has for the outcome of a sex act but men are denied the same right. If we set aside how the choice is implemented for a moment, we have to recognize a woman has no more or less ethical right to avoid a responsibility than the a man.

      Picking back up implementation it requires taking a medication, undergoing a routine outpatient procedure, or signing away one's legal rights to another party. For a woman all three carries some risk, although in a typical case minimal, health risk. For a man there simply is no justification for denying the right to sign away his legal rights to the woman. This paves the way for her to do any of the above, including keep her rights, without infringing on the mans, legally speaking.

      Some of us would feel an obligation to a child no matter what the law said. Actually preventing a child from being born would require infringing minimally on the mothers rights by requiring her to accept the minimal near term health risks (with a doctor having an opportunity to object in high risk cases of course) of those risks being outweighed by the significant and reasonably certain lifelong consequences to fathers.

      I personally support both but I can't see how anyone can logically not support fathers having a right to "put the child up for adoption" legally speaking by passing rights to the father.

    49. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by PlaynBass · · Score: 1

      NEWSFLASH!

      Bananas do not, and never have caused pregnancy!

      --
      PlaynBass
    50. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Care to show me the Fortune 1000 corp with a majority female board?
      Thought not.

    51. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      So if not being fooled is the fool's responsibility, why do we have laws against fraud?

      Do I detect Trump's slogan for his third presidential campaign?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    52. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Wow, that was so funny I forgot to laugh.

    53. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really don't trust women, do you?

    54. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by SandWyrm · · Score: 1

      It seems reasonable to me that the man should bear reduced (or even zero, depending on the case) personal financial burden if he can somehow prove that he was lied to about birth control status for the purpose of conception. But that's about as far as that reasonably goes.

      If HE can prove? How about we shift the burden of proof to the person making the accusation of (insert irresponsible conduct)? HE should be presumed innocent until proven guilty with evidence.

      That is, after all, supposed to be the entire basis of our justice system.

    55. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      It isn't a matter of trust. A woman can be wrong or simply unsure. There is even an intense biological drive clouding their judgement that could lead to making wrong decisions in this department. It's anecdotal but I based on conversations I've had with women but I don't think they view this as being as serious and terrible as it is. Instead of viewing it as akin to a lifetime of repeated rape they adopt a "what he doesn't know won't hurt him and he gets the joy of a child" kind of attitude. This kind of mentality may come from a sort of common hormonally driven maternal instinct like that behind the "boys will be boys" attitude that was adopted by men with regard to date rape because even men who never did such a thing can sympathize with losing intense testosterone driven impulse.

      The issue isn't really trust, the consequences of an error with regard to paternity are far too high to leave something like that to chance when a simple blood screen can settle the issue as early as six weeks in. They already perform this procedure to screen for genetic defects and gender, optionally for low risk pregnancies and as standard practice for at risk pregnancies with women in the 30's and later. This is simple due diligence. Both for the father's sake and for the sake of a child. Anything else risks not having a true medical history for the child, not knowing their true father, and having someone they thought of as a father leaving their world when they find out at some later date.

    56. Re:Hormones are nasty things to screw with... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Underage rape victims are forced to pay child support too

      https://www.usatoday.com/story...

  2. Fundamental problems, both physical and monetarily by IMathGood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Women have a natural state where they no longer ovulate (pregnant or breast feeding) and female birth control works by tricking their bodies into going into that natural state. The big problem with male birth control is that there is no natural state where men don't produce viable sperm. All hormonal based male birth controls force the male body into some sort of unnatural state, which always leads to unacceptable side effects. Now physical barrier based male birth control might work better but its not as profitable because those methods are typically long lasting and more permanent, so the drug companies don't get a regular kickback as you don't have to buy pills every month.

  3. Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    A pill doesn't solve all the problems with sex, just birth control.
    A condom isn't perfect, but it's a heck of a lot better than a non-existant pill with the added benefit of preventing STDs.

    I'm disappointed that the male contraceptive that basically glued the vas deferens closed but could be dissolved by another solvent hasn't taken off: https://wired.com/2011/04/ff_vasectomy/

    1. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by thewolfkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A pill doesn't solve all the problems with sex, just birth control. A condom isn't perfect, but it's a heck of a lot better than a non-existant pill with the added benefit of preventing STDs.

      I'm disappointed that the male contraceptive that basically glued the vas deferens closed but could be dissolved by another solvent hasn't taken off: https://wired.com/2011/04/ff_v...

      Birth control is not just for one night stands. Sometimes wedded couples decide they have enough kids at whatever number they have and would like birth control that doesn't make the wife throw up and allows them to have sex. A LOT of married men would gladly take birth control over expensive constant buying of condoms.

      --
      Just another second banana
    2. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by ranton · · Score: 4, Informative

      Birth control is not just for one night stands. Sometimes wedded couples decide they have enough kids at whatever number they have and would like birth control that doesn't make the wife throw up and allows them to have sex. A LOT of married men would gladly take birth control over expensive constant buying of condoms.

      And they all have that option already: a vasectomy.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    3. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      A LOT of married men would gladly take birth control over expensive constant buying of condoms.

      Married men have sex enough that the purchase of condoms is constant and expensive. Whahaha!!!

      Seriously, though. It takes a day at the doctor's office and a weekend of holding frozen peas in your crotch. I made the decision after two.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    4. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, it's a really easy procedure. I had it done at 35 after 12 years of marriage. Never had, nor wanted, any children and my wife and I got tired of the worry and precautions.

    5. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by William+Baric · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm guessing that for a man who is circumcised, and who already lost most of his sensitivity, a condom doesn't make much difference, but for me the condom cuts far too much sexual pleasure. I prefer masturbation (and obviously a blow job) to having sex with a condom.

      Of course, the best solution would be for society to realize that it's women who get pregnant, not men, and that it's obviously their body, their choice, and therefore their responsibility, but society doesn't like the idea that women should be responsible for their body. Society still considers that a man should be responsible for a woman's body. It's sad that in 2017 women are still considered as being unable to be responsible for anything, not even their own body.

    6. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A LOT of married men would gladly take birth control over expensive constant buying of condoms.

      Married men have sex enough that the purchase of condoms is constant and expensive. Whahaha!!!

      Seriously, though. It takes a day at the doctor's office and a weekend of holding frozen peas in your crotch. I made the decision after two.

      Oh good, as long as there's no anesthetic or surgery required.

    7. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by penandpaper · · Score: 2

      For me at least, the ability to change my mind is why I am partial to the idea of male BC. When I am a little older or at least certain on the permanency of no children then a vasectomy makes more sense.

    8. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      The scar is less than 1/8" long, the local takes .03 sec to work

    9. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Of course, the best solution would be for society to realize that it's women who get pregnant, not men, and that it's obviously their body, their choice, and therefore their responsibility, but society doesn't like the idea that women should be responsible for their body.

      I know you're just trolling... but for the record. Damn right, if you get someone pregnant you're 50% responsible and better be prepared to take ownership of that child.

      If a woman tricks you into getting her pregnant that would suck really bad. I'd much rather have control over my own destiny than leave it up to someone else.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    10. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by 914 · · Score: 2

      Vasagel ( https://www.parsemus.org/proje... [parsemus.org] ) is pretty far along, with human trials expected in 2018. It's shown good efficacy and reversibility in animal studies already.

      RISUG, which uses a different polymer, has been in human trials in India for more than a decade, with good results and no serious side effects. It's currently in Phase II trials there, which is the last step before being available by prescription.

      Most of the information on RISUG is either very superficial or very dense, but this archived page has good information with sources cited.
      http://web.archive.org/web/200... [archive.org]

      As has been stated elsewhere, the progress on these options is slow, largely because there's little money to be made in a one-time (or once a decade) shot, as opposed to a daily pill for life. Vasagel is funded entirely by donation.

      Neither of these gels provides any protection from STI, but they are currently the most promising non-permanent male birth control.

      As it stands right now, there are NO male-controlled birth control options besides condoms and vasectomy. Vasagel would allow men to take control of their fertility, notwithstanding impulsive moments when a condom may not be handy.

    11. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I'm disappointed that the male contraceptive that basically glued the vas deferens closed but could be dissolved by another solvent hasn't taken off

      Is that because you've never heard of retrograde ejaculation? Personally, I would be happy if that never happened to me again.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I found that getting a properly fitting condom made a huge difference. The "standard" ones are too small, too tight. I'm not bragging or anything, I think they just make them that way so that they work reliably for everyone.

      You can measure yourself and then order ones to that exact size from several places online now.

      Even with the right fit it's still not as nice as without, but it's much much better than the generic size ones for me, back when I used that method of contraception.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Condoms might be ok for you guys that had your penis butchered , sorry - circumcision as an unnecessary billed to your insurance medical procedure in the US when you were born. For the rest of us they are a terrible experience.

    14. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known tons of men who are hesitant about a vasectomy. I could not agree with you more. If you are on the fence about a vasectomy but you know for sure you don't want any or anymore kids. Just go have it done because once it's over, you'll thank yourself countless times.

    15. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its called an IUD, they're cheap, work well and saves taking a pill every day with less side effects than the pill.

      Getting the snip is probably under rated too, most men are probably done with having children much after 35. I'm 38 and I'm most certainly done with having kids, if not for wife getting IUD I was going to get the snip.

    16. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by rizole · · Score: 1

      Wait...What? Married couples have sex?

    17. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The scar is less than 1/8" long, the local takes .03 sec to work

      8" long... geez, that doesn't leave much room left down there! ;)

    18. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And they all have that option already: a vasectomy.

      Maybe, just maybe we want something temporary. Maybe we want sex to be more amazing than it already is, and maybe some aren't ready to have kids.

    19. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      And they all have that option already: a vasectomy.

      And what about those couples who don't want to have kids for a while but do eventually? Checkmate.

    20. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Isn't tat the one that's already seen 5-10 years of human trials in India to great effect?

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    21. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the swelling and pain lasts for 3 weeks.

    22. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they all have that option already: a vasectomy.

      If one has the cash reserves available to obtain one. A lot of insurance companies no longer cover vasectomies. Vasectomies are considered 'elective procedures'. They are right around $5,000 (also, conveniently, the typical insurance deductible). That is a pretty strong deterrent, especially if you've already started your family.

    23. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      And they all have that option already: a vasectomy.

      I got one, and I'm happy with it. However, there's a 2-5% chance of chronic pain after a vasectomy. It's not intense pain, but it is chronic.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    24. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by thewolfkin · · Score: 1

      Birth control is not just for one night stands. Sometimes wedded couples decide they have enough kids at whatever number they have and would like birth control that doesn't make the wife throw up and allows them to have sex. A LOT of married men would gladly take birth control over expensive constant buying of condoms.

      And they all have that option already: a vasectomy.

      I'm not against vasectomy. But it's basically a one way procedure (Yes i know there are methods of reversing it but you don't get a vasectomy if you plan to reverse it) A reversible birth control option for men would have a lot of prominence. For instance you could take a shot of vagesel when you enter college (or high school) and not have to worry about unplanned pregnancy until you're ready to settle down with a girl. A vasectomy wouldn't be ideal there. No more "I forgot the condom let's just try it carefully anyway" babies.

      --
      Just another second banana
    25. Re:Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOMS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a woman tricks you into getting her pregnant that would suck really bad. I'd much rather have control over my own destiny than leave it up to someone else.

      If this happens to you then you have absolutely no legal recourse. You will be paying that woman for the next 18+ years and she will face absolutely no repercussions for her actions at all. It doesn't matter if you have never met her and she stole used condoms from your trash can to get herself pregnant from, you are on the hook and she is not. If you are extremely lucky she might get prosecuted for breaking and entering, but unlikely, and even if she does, she will likely never spend a day in jail for it.

  4. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Izuzan · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well arent you fucked up. "I dont like these peoples political opinions and who they vote for. So lets prevent them from having kids".

    *snaps heels together* Seig Heil !!

  5. Let's do the math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would think it's far more prudent (and effective) to kill one egg than a gazillion sperm.

    1. Re:Let's do the math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This may be true, but you're a fool if you rely entirely on the woman to ensure that happens.

      Modern women know they have you by the balls once they've got a kid attributed to you. They can get that gravy train AND ensure they never have to deal with you outside of whatever restrictions they desire. The court systems don't give a shit about men, they don't care about men's rights, they don't care about men staying active their kids lives.

      The court systems blindly accept the Feminist lies and proceed from there. For a society rich in "Rape Culture" and "Misogyny" we sure do cater to the whims of the "fairer sex". Everyone knows women are better and more virtuous than men, that they deserve whatever their precious feminine hearts desire. The "patriarchal court system" bends over backwards to ensure the Feminist Female Superiority movement can do whatever it wants.

      Top it all off with Feminism is now a fully Marxist movement and seeks nothing less than the complete dismantling of Western Civilization to usher in the Socialist Utopia they know is just around the corner! Never mind that once the current Western social order is obliterated that all the wonderful protections women have gotten over the centuries will evaporate (let's not pretend the Socialist Revolution project is ever going to work, it will open whatever state is targeted to take over by tyrants who parrot the revolutionary line), that evil old Western Civilization and Capitalism have just ruined everything for too long! It's literally impossible that those could be the lynchpins of the success of Western Society, they are EEEEVVVVIIILLL!!!

      TL;DR; The conceit that Western Civilization does anything but dote relentlessly on the whims and desires of women is absurd. Feminists seek the destruction of Maleness and Western Civilization as we know it. Socialist Revolution will never work. Feminism is cancer, you can tell by the way they try to insinuate that "Everyone's a Feminist, they just don't admit it yet!"

    2. Re: Let's do the math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats... Not how birth control works.

    3. Re:Let's do the math by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      It's funny what some people think is a "gravy train".

      Oops, I meant some assholes, not people.

    4. Re:Let's do the math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feminism is cancer...

      I've had cancer, and let me tell you, Feminism is no cancer.

      However, your viewpoint seems to be quite hostile and bitter towards half the human population. This is called "misogyny" and you might be able to treat it with therapy. I recommend a good strong CHEMO-therapy. Then you'll understand what real cancer feels like.

  6. not all that different by ArylAkamov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds about the same as the female pill regarding mood swings and depression, or altered personality. Anyone who has been with someone before and after they started taking birth control will know what I'm talking about.

    1. Re:not all that different by thewolfkin · · Score: 0

      Sounds about the same as the female pill regarding mood swings and depression, or altered personality. Anyone who has been with someone before and after they started taking birth control will know what I'm talking about.

      Exactly a lot of the responses to the male pill seem to be from people who are unaware that women have side effects from their BC methods.

      --
      Just another second banana
    2. Re:not all that different by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      There are cases in women where starting birth control helped balance out their natural cycles.

      Men do not have such natural cycles, and thus, there would be no chance for positive benefit (outside the 'no babies' part).

      That said, back when my then-girlfriend-now-wife was uninsured, I wished I could have been the one to take the pill. Would have saved us a crapton of money when we needed it the most (early 20's, just starting out in adulthood).

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:not all that different by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      But the difference is that women BC tricks the body into being in a normal natural state while male BC is forcing the body through hormones into an unnatural state. This is evident by some women are prescribed by their doctor to be on birth control to help regulate their bodies hormone imbalance.

      It reminds me of Addyi (female Viagra) and Viagra. It's biologically easy to get it up via drugs because it's all muscle and blood flow such that Viagra was an accidental side effect to originally help hypertension. However, getting the females "in the mood" pill is a cocktail of hormones and other drugs that cause all kind of problems as we have seen with Addyi.

    4. Re:not all that different by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

      Sounds about the same as the female pill regarding mood swings and depression, or altered personality. Anyone who has been with someone before and after they started taking birth control will know what I'm talking about.

      My wife was on various hormone based birth control when I met her. She blamed it on all sorts of crap, this that and the other.

      She hasn't been on it for 4 or 5 years now. No change- she just finds other things to blame stuff on. I'm not saying some women don't get impacted by them; I'm just saying, some women blame problems on the pills that are really just their own personalities.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re:not all that different by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      I didnt mean to imply anything about woman blaming things on their birth control, far from it. Every time a girlfriend of mine has started taking it, I notice a difference in mood, attitude and personality. Not a huge difference usually, but it's there, even though they insisted they felt exactly the same.

    6. Re:not all that different by William+Baric · · Score: 1

      The side effects of the birth control for men were much more severe than the pill for women. Out of 320 participants, 20 had to be taken out of the study by the researchers because the side effects were too serious. One man killed himself, one suffered from clinical depression, one ended up with an intentional paracetamol overdose (he didn't die). There were also cases of tachycardia, palpitations, hypertension and erectile dysfunction.

      Overall, the majority of men participating in the study were satisfied despite the side effects. The study was terminated early because one safety committee considered the product was not safe.

    7. Re:not all that different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... why are you still with this woman ?

    8. Re:not all that different by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      Well, that's what I get for not RTFA. Thats fucked.

    9. Re:not all that different by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's still within the range of reported side effects for the Pill (original version) in women--there's also been the occasional reports of psychosis and one report I've heard of some very unlucky woman got a string of drug charges until it was realized that it was the Pill that had fucked her up. (These are things that you should get told when being offered the Pill, but informed consent and birth control don't seem to quite go together.)

      This is why minipill--with it's different formula and overall lower dose of hormones--got developed, and is probably the version to prefer if you're biologically female. Less likely to do all of it, right up to and including potentially killing your libido.

    10. Re:not all that different by thewolfkin · · Score: 1

      There are cases in women where starting birth control helped balance out their natural cycles.

      Men do not have such natural cycles, and thus, there would be no chance for positive benefit (outside the 'no babies' part).

      That said, back when my then-girlfriend-now-wife was uninsured, I wished I could have been the one to take the pill. Would have saved us a crapton of money when we needed it the most (early 20's, just starting out in adulthood).

      The fact that some women have side effects and some women find the side effect useful doesn't negate my point. Heck in the study they were doing on the male pill some of the men were perfectly content no side effects and no issues.

      --
      Just another second banana
    11. Re:not all that different by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      The fact that some women have side effects and some women find the side effect useful doesn't negate my point. Heck in the study they were doing on the male pill some of the men were perfectly content no side effects and no issues.

      So then, the premise (upon which this entire discussion is based) that male birth control won't take off because [insert generalization about men] is patently false.

      Hence, I shall consider this topic Flamebait, and discuss it no further.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  7. Google "How Much Do Vasectomies Cost" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Vasectomies cost about $350 to $1000 — far less than surgery to sterilize a woman — and many insurance companies will cover the procedure."

    How much profit do they think they'll make off these pills?

    1. Re:Google "How Much Do Vasectomies Cost" by crow · · Score: 2

      Yes, but currently they're not 100% reversible. So they're not a good option for people who aren't done having kids.

    2. Re:Google "How Much Do Vasectomies Cost" by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      "Vasectomies cost about $350 to $1000 — far less than surgery to sterilize a woman — and many insurance companies will cover the procedure."

      How much profit do they think they'll make off these pills?

      Sounds like an excellent investment that can save you tens of thousands or more down the road.

      I know that if it ever looks like some gal is taking any sort of interest in me, and she can convince me that she is not simply desperate or damaged, and her reasons for pursuing me are logical enough, and I find her attractive, then I will tap into my savings to get the snip...just in case.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    3. Re: Google "How Much Do Vasectomies Cost" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well keep trying. I'm sure there's a perfect woman out there who wants to meet all your needs and none of hers.

  8. Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pill" by SensitiveMale · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Woman have a valid reason for BC. Men would lie because we're stupid.

  9. Big Pharma Wants Pills by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Big Pharmaceuticals want a pill because you have to buy them on a regular basis.

    The solution is a one time, reversible, injection called Vasagel.
    And if there is flaws in that, work off the basis of that idea and make it work.

    But I imagine the FDA will stonewall it for as long as the lobbyist pay them off.

  10. I've heard this before by roc97007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The joke in the field is that the male contraceptive has been five years away for the last 40 years"

    Did anyone else immediately think of nuclear fusion?

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:I've heard this before by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      Did anyone else immediately think of nuclear fusion?

      Yes. Because that is the exact comparison that researcher in the article was making:

      When I was in high school, I thought I was going to become a physicist and work on developing fusion,” Amory says. “Then I started working on this, and now I wonder what we’re going to have first: workable fusion or a male pill?”

    2. Re: I've heard this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Radiation can lead to male birth control, but it's not reversible and it can have nasty side effects.

    3. Re:I've heard this before by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And AI.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re:I've heard this before by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      "The joke in the field is that the male contraceptive has been five years away for the last 40 years"

      Did anyone else immediately think of nuclear fusion?

      Nuclear Fusion seems a bit heavy handed just to achieve a male contraceptive.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    5. Re:I've heard this before by crmarvin42 · · Score: 1

      I thought of cellulosic ethanol, although It's been 10 years away for the last 25 years.

      People often forget that corn based fuel ethanol was only supposed to be a bridge to cellulosic, but that was passed during the Bush administration, and yet here we are...

      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
    6. Re:I've heard this before by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      At least with AI the initial goals were hit and our definition changed to some degree. "AI will play chess and win!"... "Ok, it can play chess really really well but that's only because it can see every move and choose the best one not because it is intelligent.".

    7. Re:I've heard this before by yuriklastalov · · Score: 1

      Get the AI to design the pill AND fusion and we'll be golden. It's Just That Easy (TM)

    8. Re:I've heard this before by aicrules · · Score: 1

      The answer is our work with nuclear fusion will go horribly awry and sterilize all men. Hooray!

    9. Re:I've heard this before by sootman · · Score: 1

      I think I first heard that joke about AI, maybe 15-20 years ago, and it was an old joke then.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    10. Re:I've heard this before by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      At least with AI the initial goals were hit and our definition changed to some degree. "AI will play chess and win!"... "Ok, it can play chess really really well but that's only because it can see every move and choose the best one not because it is intelligent.".

      Exactly. One could argue that seeing every possible move and choosing the best one isn't really AI. That's just tic-tac-to with more decision branches and faster processors.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    11. Re:I've heard this before by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      The answer is our work with nuclear fusion will go horribly awry and sterilize all men. Hooray!

      I think I read that novel. Didn't it have a talking dog?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    12. Re:I've heard this before by ShamblerBishop · · Score: 1

      Ya that's just what I thought - off to stick my balls in a fusor!

    13. Re:I've heard this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did anyone else immediately think of nuclear fusion?

      I didn't, because that's not what this topic is about, and enough threads are getting derailed into unrelated junk as it is.

      Others did, though.

      Hence why this thread derailed into unrelated junk, where nothing of value was produced, as usual.

      But hey, we both got to make useless posts, so there's that.

  11. Female biology has an off switch, males do not. by juancn · · Score: 2
    Contraceptive pills for women piggyback on the existing infertile period: pregnancy and lactation.

    If you already have a basic mechanism to stop fertility in place, it's a lot easier to trigger it on command. Specially when it is designed for external control. It is the fetus that signals the mother's body to switch to pregnancy mode. This makes it a lot easier to find and trigger the chemical pathways that will do the trick.

    Males, on the other hand, do not have such mechanism, which makes this much harder to achieve without serious side-effects,

    1. Re:Female biology has an off switch, males do not. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Contraceptive pills for women piggyback on the existing infertile period: pregnancy and lactation.

      Lactation? Women (and men!) can lactate independent of pregnancy.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Female biology has an off switch, males do not. by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I tested one that made me blow a dusty cloud out...
      harder to clean up...

    3. Re:Female biology has an off switch, males do not. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      What's your point? That is still perfectly inline with what the GP said.
      During pregnancy and during lactation (no mention of them being the same time) women don't menstruate. Google Lactational Amenorrhea Method of birth control.

      Also while men CAN lactate, they do not normally as part of their natural cycle and it has nothing to do with fertility, so that is irrelevant.

  12. The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Keep your pants zipped. I've done it for 47 years. Saves a lot of heartache from shotgun marriages, unwanted children and STDs.

    1. Re:The alternative... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

      Keep your pants zipped. I've done it for 47 years

      Not really a problem when you don't leave your mom's basement, eh?

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    2. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Sex is nasty and disgusting. Almost everybody gets an STD (seriously, look it up) and having to pay to support children keeps you from spending money on the things that are truly important.

    3. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Not really a problem when you don't leave your mom's basement, eh?

      I haven't lived with my parents in 25 years.

    4. Re:The alternative... by whoever57 · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you just don't get the opportunity ......

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    5. Re:The alternative... by Shotgun · · Score: 0

      It may be a lot easier to do that when you're not getting offered the chance of unzipping them.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    6. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fatty like you can't pretend that celibacy is a matter of self-control.

    7. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you just don't get the opportunity ......

      Plenty of opportunities... just never the right ones.

    8. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      A fatty like you can't pretend that celibacy is a matter of self-control.

      Right. Because fat people are incapable of self-control. If I can lose 13 pounds in 13 weeks from dieting and exercising, keeping my pants zipped shouldn't be that hard.

    9. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right. Because fat people are incapable of self-control.

      With the exception of rare cases where hormones are out of whack, yes, fat people are demonstrably incapable of self-control, at least insofar as it pertains to their ability to manage and limit what they stuff into their mouths.

      If I can lose 13 pounds in 13 weeks from dieting and exercising,

      Of course, you keep claiming that you've been exercising and eating the same way for YEARS now - why did the weight loss only kick in in the last 13 weeks, when your story about your current weight and your scale magically changed?

      If you were eating the same way and exercising the same way for years, but only started losing weight 13 weeks ago, you should see a doctor to get the tapeworm or cancer you're hosting checked out.

      keeping my pants zipped shouldn't be that hard.

      Yeah, it should be easy - you know, considering you have nobody actually asking you to take your pants off. Maybe your vast weight is your way of exercising sexual self-control. "I'll make myself so unappealing that literally nobody will want to have sex with me. I don't eat because I have no self control, I eat because I have consummate self-control over my dick, and I'm ensuring that nobody will ever want to touch it."

      Sometimes I think, "Creimer can't top himself, he's already so weird and dumb." And then I read posts like this one, and I say, "By jove, he's done it again!"

    10. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who brags about reducing their weight from 380 pounds to 367 pounds? Inevitably, fatties lose a little weight and then put it back on.

      Start talking yourself up once you get out of "obese" territory. If you're 5'10, you still have 157 pounds to go! But even so...if you really had willpower, you wouldn't have gotten to 100 pounds over morbidly obese in the first place.

    11. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Losing 13 pounds isn't impressive if you're more than 130 pounds over weight. That's not self control, its a rounding error. You flop sweat that much water when you try to talk to a woman.

    12. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plenty of opportunities... just never the right ones.

      What, you mean because Angelina Jolie hasn't parachuted into your ghetto screaming, "CREIMER, TAKE ME NOW, FUCK ME BABY, GIVE ME THAT HEAVY CREAM," you're passing on all the nasty sloots who're just dying for your dick?

      Please. The last time you had a woman interested in you, it was your grandmother or your maiden great aunt, who was trying to pinch your cheeks and feed you ribbon candy.

    13. Re:The alternative... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Yes, sleep in a separate bed away from the wife... She has cooties ya' know!

    14. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zippers stuck, eh? That's why I prefer velcro.

    15. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a pathetic loser is no substitute for reliable birth control.

      A drunk woman might fall on your penis one day, and then what will you do?

    16. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, you're so dumb! Can't you see that life revolves around meaningless one night stands and having as much sex as you can possibly accomplish? We've been liberated from the shackles of our prudish pasts! Now you're a bad person if you're not hooking up and fucking strangers on the regular. You're bad if you wouldn't fuck a tranny or think people who try to trick potential partners into thinking they're one thing while being another (Traps). In fact, you're probably just bad in general, especially if you're not a strident "empathic" lefty. You need to train up your Empathy levels to be able to make contradictory statements like "It's wrong to insult or otherwise mistreat minorities" and "Fucking redneck motherfuckers are ruining this country, they're stupid ignorant pieces of shit" with a straight (cis?) face. Obviously both statements are 100% empathic, you just need to fuck your brain up with Feminism (aka Marxism) to understand the 100% PURE EMPATHY of the second statement.

      In short, KYS you cis straight white devil, you're cancer!

    17. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      [...] why did the weight loss only kick in in the last 13 weeks, when your story about your current weight and your scale magically changed?

      I've been dropping weight for a while. When the gym scales (max weight 350 pounds) stopped "thunking" and two scales gave me different numbers, I got a digital scale with a 400-pound capacity. I was 370 pounds 13 weeks ago. This morning I weighed 357 pounds.

      Yeah, it should be easy - you know, considering you have nobody actually asking you to take your pants off.

      I dropped a girlfriend in college because she wanted to have sex with me but didn't want to marry me. That wasn't acceptable in church. My bicycle-riding weight at that time was 325 pounds.

    18. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just so you know, 'the chance' not a scarce resource. Chances aren't limited offers, one time only. Women aren't the prize, and after the 'pass the parcel' the one to unwrap the present is not the winner.

    19. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep your pants zipped. I've done it for 47 years. Saves a lot of heartache from shotgun marriages, unwanted children and STDs.

      -nods-

      post by: creimer ( 824291 )

      LOL

      Of course YOU would say that. I actually did laugh out loud. Even after watching your miserable posting history, I still was surprised (and then not surprised) to see you say this.

      Keep livin' in your world, creimer. You are a constant reminder of the hell life must have been in the early 1900's.

    20. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Yes, sleep in a separate bed away from the wife... She has cooties ya' know!

      That's what my parents did — after my mother slept with the barbers from around the corner.

    21. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Keep your pants zipped."

      That's what she said, huh? That's what they all said.

      " I've done it for 47 years."

      You haven't done anything for 47 years except take up precious space.

      "Saves a lot of heartache from shotgun marriages"

      Are you a pregnant bride? Again, your grasp of idiom is tenuous, askance.

      "unwanted children"

      Shirley and Dale can teach us about that.

      "STDs"

      Like creimorrhea? Creimydia?

    22. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the years where I wasn't prepared to accept the results, I abstained from sex. Nothing is 100% effective except keeping your pants zipped.

      Whenever I mention that here, I get modded down like I'm a bible thumping fundamentalist. It had nothing to do with that. It was the practicality of risk vs. reward. Not worth it.

      (Now I have three kids that I conceived intentionally.)

    23. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      A drunk woman might fall on your penis one day, and then what will you do?

      Duck and roll to safety.

    24. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STDs aren't always that bad. Having that burning sensation in wintertime can be quite a treat actually

    25. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put it in her mouth?

    26. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Now you're a bad person if you're not hooking up and fucking strangers on the regular.

      I come from a very bad family. I had an uncle who took a bucket of lard into the forest, larded up a knothole in a tree and did the deed. Unfortunately, the bees inside the knothole were too thrilled about being come on. My uncle took his wounded pecker home.

    27. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been dropping weight for a while.

      Yes, 13 weeks. You claim to have lost 1 pound per week in the last 13 weeks. You also claim to have been eating 1500 calories per day for years now, and you also claim to have been working out regularly for years now. If you didn't reduce calorie intake, and you didn't up your workout regimen, then you should have been losing weight for *years,* not *weeks.* Since that hasn't happened, there are only 4 possibilities:

      1) You were lying about your start weight, and were significantly higher than 370 to start, and have been losing 1 pound a week for years, but only now started measuring it.
      2) You were lying about your caloric intake and actually started eating only 1500 calories a day 13 weeks ago.
      3) You were lying about your activity level and actually started working out as much as you claim 13 weeks ago.
      4) You haven't, in reality, lost any weight whatsoever, and are just making MORE shit up because you're a pathological liar and a fraud.

      Which is it, Chris? No matter which way you slice it, you're a liar. I'm just curious which aspect you thought was important enough to lie about you.

      I dropped a girlfriend in college because she wanted to have sex with me but didn't want to marry me.

      Sure you did. You dropped her. She wasn't a big girl at all, and she didn't dump your ass when she realized even she could do better.

    28. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty obvious that most people aren't like you. So I'm not sure why you would offer this as a solution.

      Also, historically speaking, if most people were like you, I suspect that the first major catastrophic event would completely wipe out any given society. If you could just not reproduce, then surviving the long term famine becomes much less stressful. People wanting to have sex is what has kept humans alive through many difficult periods of history.

    29. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you watch the whole time? Or did your uncle tell you this story during pillow talk?

    30. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Because fat people are incapable of self-control. "

      Stop posting until Monday morning. Your vanity and narcissism compel you to post anyways, you seek attention. Negative, positive, makes no difference as long as we pay attention to you.

      You can't control that.

    31. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      No matter which way you slice it, you're a liar.

      The only part I "lied" about was not mentioning that the gym scales maxed out at 350 pounds. The gym scales thunked and told me I was 350 pounds. That was good enough for me. Weighing 370 pounds didn't surprise me. If I was 400 pounds, I would have severe back pains and I haven't had severe back pains in years. Of course, this is Slashdot and everyone went ape shit over that small detail.

      She wasn't a big girl at all [...]

      She was Indonesian and went back home after she graduated, where her family made arrangements for her get married to a nice local boy. Something she wanted to avoid by having pre-martial sex, getting pregnant and staying in the US. I want to say that was an unusual situation, but I've meant quite a few Indian women in recent years who want to get pregnant without marriage to avoid going back home.

    32. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you German?

    33. Re:The alternative... by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      lol, thanks for the giggle. I was not expecting that one.

    34. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      So I'm not sure why you would offer this as a solution.

      Zipping your pants is still a very effective way of staying out of trouble.

    35. Re:The alternative... by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1
      Why do you make up such ridiculous stupid stories? Even if the story was true, any reasonable person would have the decency to keep it a secret. Which leaves only two possibilities:

      (a) you're a pathological liar and every claim you make about yourself should be treated as attention whoring tall tales or

      (b) you are absolutely not a reasonable nor decent person; you're a P.O.S. who will use your family's shameful past in a misguided attempt to entertain strangers on the internet.

    36. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Stop posting until Monday morning.

      I was planning to take the weekend off.

      Your vanity and narcissism compel you to post anyways, you seek attention. Negative, positive, makes no difference as long as we pay attention to you.

      ROFL

      You can't control that.

      I've been posting two dozen or fewer comments and inserting at least one Amazon link per day for the last several weeks. I also took last weekend off from posting on Slashdot.

    37. Re: The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except..... you never had the chance to unzip them. Maybe once in your 47 years of living.

      So it's not you abstaining from sex, it's woman abstaining from you.

    38. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or your personality.

    39. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only part I "lied" about was not mentioning that the gym scales maxed out at 350 pounds. The gym scales thunked and told me I was 350 pounds. That was good enough for me. Weighing 370 pounds didn't surprise me. If I was 400 pounds, I would have severe back pains and I haven't had severe back pains in years. Of course, this is Slashdot and everyone went ape shit over that small detail.

      So if you were exercising and eating the same way for at least 2 years (I believe you've claimed 5 years of working out & eating this way), losing 1 pound a week, where did that extra 104 pounds go, if 2 years? Where did that extra 260 pounds go, if 5 years? After all, if you've changed nothing about your lifestyle, then suddenly starting to lose a pound a week is a sign of a significant health problem. So are you going on the record saying you maxed out at nearly 600 pounds? Or do you have cancer or a tapeworm?

      She was Indonesian and went back home after she graduated, where her family made arrangements for her get married to a nice local boy. Something she wanted to avoid by having pre-martial sex, getting pregnant and staying in the US. I want to say that was an unusual situation, but I've meant quite a few Indian women in recent years who want to get pregnant without marriage to avoid going back home.

      You realize that "Indonesian" and "Indian" are not the same, right? I mean, having dated an Indonesian girl, surely you're sensitive to the fact that Indonesia is a completely separate country!

      And:

      I've meant quite a few Indian women in recent years who want to get pregnant without marriage to avoid going back home.

      LOL Good joke, champ. You've met no such number of women, and they wouldn't confide that to you even if you had.

    40. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you familiar with the 1984 comedy film "All of Me" starring Lily Tomlin and Steve Martin, about a rich woman who tried to cheat death? Seems she died a virgin ...

      Edwina: "I'm quite proud of my virginity!"
      Roger: "Nobody ever wanted it!"

    41. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She was Indonesian and went back home after she graduated, where her family made arrangements for her get married to a nice local boy. Something she wanted to avoid by having pre-martial sex, getting pregnant and staying in the US. I want to say that was an unusual situation, but I've meant quite a few Indian women in recent years who want to get pregnant without marriage to avoid going back home.

      Even that story doesn't make any sense. Getting knock up is not enough to let someone on a student visa stay in the US, she'd need a sham marriage with you, too. Which is exactly what you claim she was trying to avoid. And even if that were her plan, surely she would have moved on and found some other dupe after you did her the favor of rejecting her advances.

    42. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      [...] you're a P.O.S. who will use your family's shameful past in a misguided attempt to entertain strangers on the internet.

      Memiors is a popular literary category, especially if it involves fucked up families. My favorite memoir — and the template for my own stories — is "Fiction Ruined My Family" by Jeanne Darst. Her family moved to New York City for her father to write the Great American novel, where her former high society mother became an alcoholic and her father became obsessed with an abortion in the 1930's for a novel that he talked about writing for 30 years. Her worse nightmare came true when she acknowledged that she was an alcoholic like her mother and a writer like her father. So also had a bag of poop that she had to throw away while walking down the sidewalk and kept running into people she knew.

    43. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Memiors [sic] is a popular literary category,"

      Only if you're someone people care about.

      De-creimified link

      " Her worse [sic] nightmare came true"

      Just couldn't resist posting, you living Snuffleupagus?

    44. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man you are missing my favorite part of life.

      35 years into terrible decisions and one night stands, all clear so far. Will it blow up in my face at some point? Probably. But man, it's been worth it. No idea why you would cut yourself out of one of the best parts of life.

    45. Re:The alternative... by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      Memoirs are when you write about events that happened to you and how those events affected you. So like the AC asked, did you actually watch your uncle fuck a tree and get stung in the dick by bees? Because, if not, we're back to theory B, that you're just a P.O.S. This is confirmed by your gratuitous affiliate link.

    46. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The kid would be a US citizen. It used to be an easy US residency card for the mom (sometimes it still happens from what I understand).

      Getting knocked up by some random is something 3rd world nation women use to do, and yeah is about the only "a woman wanted sex with Creimer" story I would possibly believe.

      It's kind of a technicality, not the "I developed a close physical relationship with a person I lust after and/or love" that really makes sex worthwhile. Talking about how much it sucks to pay for kids when you have paid for a large Japanimation collection is fucking nuts.

    47. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you plans for the weekend? Wanking yourself into a coma?

    48. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No idea why you would cut yourself out of one of the best parts of life.

      Because he looks like this?

    49. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      after my mother slept with the barbers

      plural?

    50. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So also had a bag of poop that she had to throw away while walking down the sidewalk and kept running into people she knew.

      Neighbors tend to chat while walking dogs, neighbors tend to know each other, dogs tend to poop on the sidewalk. What's so significant about a bag of poop?

    51. Re:The alternative... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      What's so significant about a bag of poop?

      It was her poop. Housemate was hogging the bathroom, she had to go like the night before and took a dump into a plastic bag inside her wastebasket. Off she went to find a garbage can outside. New Yorkers are really touchy about other people dumping poop into their garbage cans and dumpsters.

    52. Re: The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a totally different kind of crazy than creimer... get the fuck off Slashdot.

    53. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blame the dog. Anyway women have very neat poops, type 1 on the Bristol poop scale. I researched it because I'm on medication that gives me constipation. I poop little golf balls every two days, and the golf poops are so clean I don't even need to wipe anymore. It's great.

    54. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he walked right into that one.

    55. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What in incoherent rambling mess. Shirley and Dale must have done quite a number on you...

    56. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it was your poop, we'd need a two-handle garbage barrel.

    57. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why do you make up such ridiculous stupid stories?"

      If you're game, try reading some excerpts from his ebooks. Absolute garbage.

    58. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he could reach it, I doubt it would get erect. Middle age, obesity, mental illness....

    59. Re:The alternative... by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      Here's a protip: The correct thing to do is "not commit rape." Which is what you'd be doing if you don't push a drunk woman who's fallen onto your penis off. That you seem to think that fucking her anyway is OK makes me think you're the pathetic loser--somebody who can refuse offers is much, much less of a pathetic loser somebody who feels compelled to take any opportunity, no matter how immoral and possibly illegal they might be...

    60. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep your pants zipped. I've done it for 47 years

      All the women in California sigh in relief!

    61. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    62. Re:The alternative... by antdude · · Score: 1

      Are you a 47 years old virgin? :P

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    63. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good old Shirley, huh?

    64. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You probably have Generalized Anxiety Disorder on top of your Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Might explain why you can't get near a woman without invoking ten thousand catastrophic scenarios.

      Man, Shirley and Dale did you no favors, huh.

    65. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He certainly is, and he boasts about it endlessly.

    66. Re:The alternative... by ls671 · · Score: 1

      My god, censor this dude. Think of the children!

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    67. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      creimer is the house moron. If he's not doing it, there might be an even bigger moron to come along. He's like intestinal flora; stinky, slimy, unpleasant, but necessary.

    68. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So this is "the everyday reality that he finds weird, twisted and absurd "?? Where is that an everyday reality, creimer? The 51-50 insane asylum where you belong?

      "which most people accept as being perfectly normal."

      Really? creimer, you think most people would find that perfectly normal?

      This is your by-line, big boy.

      "He lives and works in Silicon Valley,"

      "He"?? Talking about yourself in the third person, eh?

    69. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    70. Re:The alternative... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Keep your pants zipped. I've done it for 47 years.

      That is starting to explain a lot about your angry rants on Slashdot. I'd be angry too without sex for 47 days. ...

      Wait. You said years. WTF man! Live a little. If you're worried about a parasite developing then spend the $100 down at the local brothel.

    71. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to my personal Hell. One day I decided to start following creimer and now I can't stop. He is mentally ill for sure, but what's wrong with him, I can't even begin to guess.

      But it sure is fun to guess, and reading the back and forth between him and God knows how many AC detractors is fascinating. I may be reading some posts wrong, but he even has a (very) small retinue of supporters!

      How many of these are just creimer posting as AC is also something fun to try to guess.

      Just simply amazing.

    72. Re:The alternative... by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Come on! This is easy psychology: creimer himself was the tree or else how could he know about it?

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    73. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A football player?

    74. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The potential is there. But the only thing he has in common with a football player is CTE.

    75. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good old Uncle Chuck "Treefucker" Reimer, huh? Charles was a weird dude.

    76. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And ever since then, he's been fascinated by bees.

      https://youtu.be/352TmSim9Xs

      Because they bit his uncle's cock...

    77. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *THAT*'s the _real_ reason they called him Lard Butt at Google!

    78. Re:The alternative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're pro-rape?

    79. Re:The alternative... by ls671 · · Score: 1

      I know it is you creimer, posting as AC again and self-promoting yourself in your own way.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  13. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Woman have a valid reason for BC. Men would lie because we're stupid.

    Oh, lookie.

    Another "Women are all victims" sitzpinkler wuss.

    Won't work. Hot women still go for real men, not metrosexual pussies.

  14. Don't make me no wussy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    men were reporting troubling side effects, including mood changes and depression.

    Yeah, I tried it. I just wasn't getting angry as often as before. The lack of adreneline surges was depressing.

  15. Vasalgel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Im still waiting on the FDA to approve Vasalgel, its worked for decades in India, is reversable, no side effects, but also no money because its a cheap one time injection.

    1. Re:Vasalgel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It hasn't worked for decades in India. It is not used by the public at large anywhere in the world. It is still in the early stages of trial in both India and the US.

    2. Re:Vasalgel by 914 · · Score: 1

      Vasagel ( https://www.parsemus.org/proje... ) is pretty far along, with human trials expected in 2018. It's shown good efficacy and reversibility in animal studies already.

      RISUG, which uses a different polymer, has been in human trials in India for more than a decade, with good results and no serious side effects. It's currently in Phase II trials there, which is the last step before being available by prescription.

      Most of the information on RISUG is either very superficial or very dense, but this archived page has good information with sources cited.
      http://web.archive.org/web/200...

      As has been stated elsewhere, the progress on these options is slow, largely because there's little money to be made in a one-time (or once a decade) shot, as opposed to a daily pill for life. Vasagel is funded entirely by donation.

      Neither of these gels provides any protection from STI, but they are currently the most promising non-permanent male birth control.

      As it stands right now, there are NO male-controlled birth control options besides condoms and vasectomy. Vasagel would allow men to take control of their fertility, notwithstanding impulsive moments when a condom may not be handy.

  16. Hate Facts. by x0ra · · Score: 3, Funny


    This article is pure hate fact. We all know the only reason there is no "male" birth control pill is because of the cis-gendered alt-right white nazi patriarchy. Men and women are the same and any differences only exist because of social constructs.
    </mode>

    :-)

    1. Re:Hate Facts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Golf clap*

      Well done, sir.

    2. Re:Hate Facts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a male vagina and a female spleen. My right kidney is a demi-girl. It is a social revolution, we are taking over all the constructs! My house is a gazelle.

    3. Re:Hate Facts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up Drinkypoo

    4. Re:Hate Facts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      those same sjws are going on a crusde against 'sexbots' and 'vr sex'.

      they think eventually if the bar gets low enough. we'd fuck a sjw.

    5. Re:Hate Facts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ackshually

      you will find sjws are against these kind of things
      https://www.theguardian.com/co...

  17. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by tysonedwards · · Score: 1

    We've already got a way to prevent unwanted pregnancies... It's called eSports.

    --
    Thirty four characters live here.
  18. Will most likely cause a massive social turbulence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because it will be much harder (if not impossible) for the women to conceal a 'successful' adultery.

  19. The least of our concerns. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    Perhaps male contraception was a viable issue to address during the boomer generation.

    Today, the divorce rate has never been higher. Infidelity(AshleyMadison/IllicitEncounters) and casual sex(Tinder/Grindr) have been turned from sins into products for the hook-up generation. All of this activity going on in the most dangerous STD landscape that has ever existed.

    Pill contraception is a one-trick pony, and unwanted pregnancy is the least of our fucking concerns now.

    1. Re:The least of our concerns. by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Perhaps male contraception was a viable issue to address during the boomer generation.

      Today, the divorce rate has never been higher.

      Divorce rates peaked in the 80's and have been steadily falling for decades now.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:The least of our concerns. by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1
      The divorce rate is actually at a 40-year low.

      http://www.bgsu.edu/ncfmr/reso...

    3. Re:The least of our concerns. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      All of this activity going on in the most dangerous STD landscape that has ever existed.

      Baby boomers had more sexual partners on average, but please don't let facts bother you.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:The least of our concerns. by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I would still believe it - female birth control pills weren't widely available to unmarried women until the 70's (at least according to history sources, I wasn't around), making a condom more important as a contraceptive prior to then.

  20. Really ?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I REALLY the first poster to find this giggleworthy : "Male contraception has fallen short" ?!

    I preferred the old, silly Slashdot, before we let girls in and everyone pretended to be mature.

  21. This! by alongley · · Score: 2

    Once you father a child the state OAG has you by the balls, and even if you sign a legally binding contract for child support at x dollars per month, they can come after you every three years for more for no more reason than time has passed. No requirement on the mother to prove she's capable or actually spending the money on the children neither. Staying married is only an option for some. It's cynical as heck but protection, you know, protects. You.

    --
    How do I edit my sig.
    1. Re: This! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I paid $400 every 2 weeks. I was making 40k a year. I got a small increase for cost of living 42k a year. Child support went up to $500 every 2 weeks. You can't win.

      They can readjust it every 3 years or ANY time you get a raise the mother can request it to be readjusted. It sucks. But a lot of dead beat dads have put us in this situation.

    2. Re: This! by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Ask for a pay cut in 3 years.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    3. Re: This! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or work under the table ;)

    4. Re: This! by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      More often than not, you have to keep the standard of living the mother and the child are accustomed. It doesn't matter if you can still afford it or not.

    5. Re: This! by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      Or you could try for custody.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    6. Re: This! by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      So if my wife leaves me because I spend all our money on gambling that we can barely get buy, we can use that as the baseline even though I made a lot of money when we were married?

      PS - I know there is no real way to get around this. I'm just posing ideas for amusement purposes only.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    7. Re: This! by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      Child custody cases are very expensive and the courts are biased toward maternal custody. My attorney indicated it could be as much as $45,000 or more. All of that time, the poor child has to live with the mother and sometimes get badgered while the case happens.

      Unless mom is a criminal, there is little chance the judge will award custody to the father.

      If in doubt, google the statistics. Maternal custody is typically in the high 80% range.

    8. Re: This! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am male. Have custody. Lost the first battle, she was just a shitty parent. Then she married a sex offender and lied about it. Now I have custody. Total bill for both trials: ~35,000.

    9. Re: This! by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      Most courts now days are very open to shared custody. Unless the mother is total crap, it's hard to get Full custody but 50-50 custody significantly drops the amount of money you have to pay and could even go the other direction if your ex-wife makes more than you.

    10. Re: This! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Unless mom is a criminal, there is little chance the judge will award custody to the father.

      Well, if you're stupid enough to have a child, then you're probably too stupid to get the wife ensnared in some jail-worthy criminality before she divorces you.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    11. Re: This! by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      All it takes is for mom to move out of the area and there is no possibility of shared custody.

    12. Re: This! by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      All it takes is for mom to move out of the area and there is no possibility of shared custody.

      It doesn't work that way. I know multiple women with practically full custody that are unable to move. Generally the person moving is the one who loses custody regardless of gender. Depending on the state, there is usually a certain mile radius where you are allowed to move but basically both parties require permission to move outside that area unless they want to risk losing custody.

  22. Ejaculation Control is Possible by sarku · · Score: 1

    It' s been practiced for thousands of years. I do it. Just press at the base of the perineum just before ejaculation and voila. Orgasm with no ejaculation.

    1. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      It' s been practiced for thousands of years. I do it. Just press at the base of the perineum just before ejaculation and voila. Orgasm with no ejaculation.

      Yeah... and you know that is far from fool proof... right? There can even be sperm in your pre-ejaculate. You can get someone pregnant without even having an orgasm.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by sarku · · Score: 0

      The pill isn't foolproof either, neither are condoms. Basically, don't have sex with the wrong person at the wrong time in the wrong place unless you're ready to raise a child. Pretty simple.

    3. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No ejaculation or you are holding it back momentarily hopefully at a 100% success rate and as soon as you let go then splat?

    4. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      The pill isn't foolproof either

      99.998%

      neither are condoms

      98% when used properly, 90% in "real-world" use.

      don't have sex with the wrong person at the wrong time in the wrong place

      80% effective if you do it perfectly, and few abstain for enough days per month to do it perfectly.

      Also, your method is only slightly more effective than nothing. No birth control is about 30% effective at birth control.

    5. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by sarku · · Score: 0

      Meh, it's worked for me for over 8 years, and I have kids.

    6. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by sarku · · Score: 0

      Hold it long enough and there's no ejaculate. There's plenty of info out there about how to do it properly.

    7. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      The pill isn't foolproof either, neither are condoms. Basically, don't have sex with the wrong person at the wrong time in the wrong place unless you're ready to raise a child. Pretty simple.

      Got it in one. Personally, I feel it's a good way to also ensure that you don't have morning-after regrets--I mean, sex toys are easily gotten, so why not demand that any sexual partner offer me more? The only person who's going to be a pathetic loser is the one who can't manage to beat an inanimate object at all...

    8. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by Immerman · · Score: 1

      How about having sex with the right person, at the right time, and the right place, but not wanting to have (any more) kids? Plenty of married couples want to have sex without having another child every couple of years.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    9. Re:Ejaculation Control is Possible by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Sorry, lost track of exactly which comment I was replying to. To finish the thought, there's basically three tiers of non-permanent birth control: Nothing/timing/etc (~40-80% chance of pregnancy per year), Condoms (~14%), the pill (~1-2%), and IUD/hormonal implants(~0.1%).

      Have regular sex with your spouse for a decade or two and the difference in number of children you can reasonably expect to have will vary wildly depending on your chosen method of birth control.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  23. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by penandpaper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because women don't lie about being on the pill? I got some bad news for you.

  24. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pharmaceutical companies don't develop procedures like that. A research institution would have to be involved, either a university or a hospital.

  25. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

    Woman have a valid reason for BC.

    So do men. No-one wants to be lumbered with 18+ years of child support from a one night stand.

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  26. It would end the species. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only way for a male pill to not end the species would be by slashing women's rights to absolve males of practically all responsibilities.

    1. Re:It would end the species. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Eliminating women's rights already exists in much of the muslim world...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  27. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or maybe many men reveal themselves to be victimizers - physical fondlers, emotional abusers, and general victimizers, especially when they have power over others and think they either won't get caught or can get away with it.

  28. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by alvinrod · · Score: 1

    Birth control outside of a condom is for people in a dedicated relationship and if you're lying about birth control in that situation your relationship is more fucked up than I care to imagine. I wouldn't want to have unprotected sex with someone I've just recently met. Pregnancy isn't the biggest concern compared to getting some STDs. If someone gets pregnant you can always get an abortion, but there's no easy fix for HIV, hepatitis, or herpes.

  29. Will nobody think of the teetotalers? by queazocotal · · Score: 1

    "He confessed his transgression to the researchers, and follow-up studies confirmed his account: WIN 18,446 didn’t mix well with booze. Men who combined the two reported heart palpitations, sweating, nausea, and vomiting. The research was quietly abandoned.".

    As someone who doesn't drink at all, I would quite like this to be researched more. There are a non-trivial number (some millions in the USA alone) of people who don't drink, for one reason or another, and might be interested in a contraceptive.

    1. Re:Will nobody think of the teetotalers? by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      I've never been much of a drinker, and I would absolutely give up the few social drinks I have every year in return for otherwise safe male contraception. Hormone-based birth control gets riskier for women as they get older, and around 35 doctors start advising you might want to try something else. As a middle-aged man I'd be fine taking a pill so women don't have to.

      And though I could live without it, there's also the possibility (I'm ignorant of the chemistry involved, so until someone who knows advises otherwise, to ME it's a possibility) of a secondary pill to aid in the metabolizing of alcohol that you could take on occasion.

      After all, the effect on sperm wouldn't be instantly reversed, but if you could get flushed with the required ingredients to assist in breaking down alcohol safely, that could work while you were drinking. In effect, temporarily neutralize the pill for a short enough period that it doesn't significantly degrade the contraceptive function.

      Like you, I'm a bit surprised that they ignored the non-drinker (or willing to be a non-drinker) market. Must be the evil beer lobby pulling strings!

    2. Re:Will nobody think of the teetotalers? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      It's a free country, why don't you take on the investment yourself. But I heard that teetotalers are some 2% of the population, so you might find it difficult to profit on such a small market.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    3. Re:Will nobody think of the teetotalers? by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      If it isn't a direct interaction, it means that the slight work the liver had to do on the booze left it unable to deal with the drug. This isn't good... a bigger study would probably then find that taking an advil would result in similar.

    4. Re:Will nobody think of the teetotalers? by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      Way, way higher than 2%.

      http://www.add-resources.org/half-the-worlds-adults-do-not-drink-alcohol-what-should-the-policy-implications-be.5325474-315773.html
      Past year abstainers (lifetime isn't so relevant as you can come off the drug in a day or two).

      Doing more digging comes up with the figure of 28% of of-age males had been alcohol abstinent in the previous year in the united states. That's a damn large market.

    5. Re:Will nobody think of the teetotalers? by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      My limited understanding is it attacked specific enzymatic pathways - not a general 'liver weakening' effect.

  30. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 0
    No.
    it's really

    "I don't like those people's ignorance resulting in the orange-haired liar, so let's prevent them from breeding down to the root of THEIR species, pigs."

    If you're going to present straw men, do it right.

  31. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it needs to be done because red states are welfare queens.

  32. RISUG by wishiwascool · · Score: 1

    Google it, there is a solution that works and is reversible.
    Why don't we have it? Because the entire contraception industry would collapse and I'm sure there is even a decent dose of fear about birth rates plummeting. Major commercial and religious entities at play in making sure you continue to make babies...

    1. Re:RISUG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the entire contraception industry is cooperating to block a massive business opportunity. Uh huh.

  33. Contraception+Viagra combination pill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it was a combo pill that cut out the spermies and pumped up the Johnson, now that'd sell like hotcakes, sir.

  34. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    Because women don't lie about being on the pill? I got some bad news for you.

    A responsible adult (man or woman) should be able to take control of their own birth control. They should never have to rely on the other party doing their part- or be in a position where the other party could be misleading them.

    Doesn't matter if you're man or woman, it's much better to have your destiny in your own hands.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  35. Perhaps fighting evolution is not trivially easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the male can't impregnate, they are removed from the gene pool. This is how selection works. No offspring means a change in allele frequencies. This is also the razors edge in human evolution. Male fertility has a better "fail fast" because of short biological turnaround than female fertility. Anything that has a short-term reduction in male reproductive ability without some equivalent leap in "fitness" is removed from the gene pool.

  36. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Dorianny · · Score: 0

    Female hormonal birth control can cause serious and even deadly side effects, however they are acceptable in women because Pregnancy carries far higher health risks for women, especially older ones. For males such side effects are very problematic because men don't face any additional health dangers if they do not use contraceptives

  37. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by Beerdood · · Score: 1

    Hardly a "massive" social turbulence. The number of births where the expected father isn't the real father is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2% (Find your own sources). This wouldn't even be a blip on the radar.

    --
    Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
  38. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bullshit! Women often become very fertile within a month or two after giving birth. Ever wonder why tots in a family can be three to six months a part? Yeah, that's why!

  39. The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Women don't like the idea of their monopoly on long-acting and dosed contraceptives being disrupted.

  40. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2

    Yeah it's also cost/benefit.

    If you get pregnant you're in a risky medical condition. The pill might put you at risk, but you're avoiding a different risk. For the male pill you're taking someone who is in a perfectly safe medical condition and putting them in a risky medical condition with no direct benefit to the individual.

    It's a stickier ethics question than the slam dunk case for female contraceptive pills.

  41. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Pascoea · · Score: 1

    Solve the liberal problem by preventing weak men from reproducing!

    They should put it in the water in all the low education red states....

    Well arent you fucked up. "I dont like these peoples political opinions and who they vote for. So lets prevent them from having kids".

    Wait, which one is messed up? The one that matches your world view, or the one that is opposite of yours?

  42. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

    ...because men don't face any additional health dangers if they do not use contraceptives

    Err....paternity suits, and having to be associated with this one woman and kid for 18 years can be a huge, long term, chronic health threat (mental, physical and financial).

    Health risk by law...

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  43. Proven solution by PPH · · Score: 1

    Sperm #1: "I'm getting tired swimming. How far is the uterus?"

    Sperm #2: "I don't know, We only just passed the tonsils."

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  44. Re:Sweep that under the rug!! by butchersong · · Score: 1

    They already do. Everywhere. The amount of testosterone and sperm motility is half for males that lived in your grandfather's time in the US.

  45. Re:Sweep that under the rug!! by butchersong · · Score: 1

    Man I screwed that sentence up. Ours is half that of our grandfathers time. If only we had a 30 second grace period edit option... anyway there are a ton of articles available. Here is one: http://www.trtguide.com/low-te...

  46. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by penandpaper · · Score: 2

    Absolutely agree and that is one reason I hope for a day with male BC so that I don't have to make a permanent decision like a vasectomy to take control of my own birth control.

    or be in a position where the other party could be misleading them.

    This is more difficult because it amounts to; "Trust no one". Being in a relationship, a healthy one at least, is built on some level of trust.

  47. Fucking Wah by Rastl · · Score: 1

    Men reported side effects that are minor versions of what women get with birth control pills and it's enough to stop the study. Fucking wah.

    If they're serious about male birth control pills they would conclude the study as planned.

    Of course no intelligent woman is going to trust a random guy who says he's on "The Pillz(tm)" because quite frankly no intelligent man should trust a random woman who says she's on the pill. These would be for stable, trusting relationships and peace of mind for the guys. None of which is bad.

  48. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    Nice dehumanization you did there. Remember, it's not murder if their not human. You would fit right in with ze Nazi's.

  49. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    Both.

  50. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by goose-incarnated · · Score: 2

    Hardly a "massive" social turbulence. The number of births where the expected father isn't the real father is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2% (Find your own sources). This wouldn't even be a blip on the radar.

    No. It's been measured from 20% to 35%. There are multiple sources for this, I suggest you start with the CDC.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  51. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Izuzan · · Score: 1

    My comment still stands true.
    How about the people that voted for hillary. Im sure by your comment you fit in that croud.

    That leaves the 60% that didnt vote to make the states a better place.

  52. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So we could have had yellow haired Trump he will do a bunch of stupid reversible shit or we can have the criminal Clinton and no I'm not talking about emails.

    Trump was elected as a public reaction to social justice and all the idiotic things they try to cram down everyone's throat. If you dont think like them they will do anything they can to get at you including getting you fired from your job. They are also anti free speech and all for burning books so when I sat there finally in line to vote I thought would i rather see this country be fucked for a couple years or turn into a facist state. I voted trump. So take antifi who are actually facists and to the fuck away.

  53. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice advertorial you fuck

  54. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Women still ovulate when they are breast feeding. Just ask any mother who had their children within a year of each other.

  55. We're talking about men right? by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

    ...and just how many women would trust a guy saying... "yeah.. I'm totally on the pill"

    1. Re:We're talking about men right? by Pfhorrest · · Score: 2

      It's not about asking women to trust men, it's about not asking men to trust women.

      If each party can see to it on their own that they're not going to make a baby, then nobody has to take anybody's word that they're handling it on their end, and if they're both taking separate precautions the pregnancy prevention is even more effective anyway.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
  56. No, I didn't. And I like the way you roll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And have you thought of a running a porn site? Because that's one of the few porn fantasies I haven't seen yet: fucking and nuclear fusion. And think about it: MILF Nuclear Fusion, Teen Nuclear fusion, Blowjob Nuclear Fusion....

    I'd think the XHamster guys would pay a nice sum to buy you out too!

  57. Re: Fundamental problems, both physical and moneta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget the family law system, which is designed to put men into indentured servitude for the state and take responsibility for a woman's decision. With no oversight to ensure the child ever gets taken care of. Family law actually profits from breaking up families.

  58. mood changes and depression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm surprised no one is commenting on the fact that for a male pill, "troubling side effects, including mood changes and depression" are a showstopper, but for the female pill, they're just par for the course.

  59. Consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why can't women just swallow their man's children?

  60. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 2

    Female hormonal birth control can cause serious and even deadly side effects, however they are acceptable in women because Pregnancy carries far higher health risks for women, especially older ones. For males such side effects are very problematic because men don't face any additional health dangers if they do not use contraceptives

    That's not how it works are all. In fact, it's somewhat worse: When the Pill got through testing, all of the side effects were considered perfectly acceptable in general. Not in a 'because pregnancy is more risky' sense, but in a flat-out 'because we do not actually give two fucks' sense...which should be a hint as to why the rules got tightened, too. (Nearly all the rounds of the FDA's rules getting tightened can be traced back to it being realized that they're fucking people over; the one exception is when it was everybody else being lax getting us a nice global panic while a paper-pusher at the FDA went "Nope!" and refused to allow Thalidomide to get approved in the US...well, for the uses wanted for it at the time. It's actually a very good cancer drug & approved for that particular use.)

    We've since tightened up the rules, but since the Pill got approved before then it stays on the market even though you'd never get it through now.

  61. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Bullshit! Women often become very fertile within a month or two after giving birth. Ever wonder why tots in a family can be three to six months a part? Yeah, that's why!

    Hmmm... Three to six months apart? I thought gestation was longer than that... I guess birth control pills can speed up everything!

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  62. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you should upgrade your cartoon world view to reality some day

    LOL EPIC NAZI REFERENCE BRO LOL

    "I dont like these peoples political opinions and who they vote for. So lets prevent them from having kids"

    is about one step away from god's point of view

    "These people's perception and way of life is inferior to others, so I will prevent them from having kids by natural selection"

    Like, what part of the entire natural history we know of, of human history, makes you think that some people don't deserve to die for the way they live their lives? What thoughts go through your head when you hear of extinct animals, people, and countries? You're so delusional it's horrifying. You are one of the people who doesn't deserve to reproduce. Brainless slave.

  63. Only rapists dare having sex now anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't want to end up in court/jail/Ecuadoran embassy. I am keeping my dick to myself, thank you very much!

  64. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Trump was elected as a public reaction to social justice and all the idiotic ..."

    Nice to hear from another person with a theory who also slurps up the non-events media amplifies into pseudo controversies. Their profits thank you too.

  65. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like Baltimore Maryland? Yeah red states...

  66. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 2

    Hardly a "massive" social turbulence. The number of births where the expected father isn't the real father is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2% (Find your own sources). This wouldn't even be a blip on the radar.

    No. It's been measured from 20% to 35%. There are multiple sources for this, I suggest you start with the CDC.

    If memory serves, the higher numbers are specifically for those children for whom paternity testing is done--the 2% number is what I've seen given as predicted for what might be expected with a truly random sample, and usually gets brought up to remind people that the 20%-35% number is better understood as the percentage of men who are actually right in suspecting that the child isn't theirs.

  67. So the men turned into women? by mveloso · · Score: 1

    "side effects, including mood changes and depression."

    Sounds like they were having their period.

  68. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Says a man who has never been on the pill. It can kill your sex drive and quite literally make you crazy. The long term birth control shots fuck with your bone marrow and cause osteoporosis. Hormone pills can also cause breast cancer and ovarian cysts.The IUDs can cause permanent infertility and result in hospitalization.

    BTW - a lot of the mood changes women complain about associated with the pill, are also associated with the hormone changes from being pregnant and menopause. Bottom line is that even though it may be triggering a "natural" state, that state sucks and only a man who has never done it would wish it on another human being..

    It's like the vagisil cream that is supposed to relieve the burning of a yeast infection that burns like a mother fucker when applied.

  69. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Dorianny · · Score: 1

    The FDA can't revoke approval but it has slapped the ominous Black Box warning on most hormonal birth control pills. Older women that smoke are highly discouraged from taking them because of the significantly higher risk of cardiovascular side effects. Still most OBGYN would recommed those in the high risk category to continue taking hormonal birth control if their partners object to alternative birth control methods and they would try to carry a unwanted, high risk pregnancy to term because of their beliefs

  70. How i got cured from herpes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you want the cure for HERPES?
    What Is Herpes?
    Herpes, whether on the mouth or genitals, is caused by a family of over 70 related viruses. These viral infections cause small, fluid-filled blisters to develop on the skin and mucous membranes. There are actually eight different types of herpes simplex viruses that both children and adults can acquire, but two are by far the most common: HSV-1 and HSV-2.
    The most common reason that people develop cold sores on their mouths is due to becoming infected with HSV-1. (4) HSV-1 usually causes cold sore breakouts around the lips or mouth, or what some people describe as “fever blisters.” Someone can become infected with HSV-1 starting as a child, and then the virus can lay dormant in the body until the immune system is weakened, at which point symptoms can surface.
    HSV-2 is commonly referred to as genital herpes because it usually causes cold sores to erupt around the genitalia. In fact, genital herpes is the No. 1 cause of genital ulcers worldwide, according to the CDC, and affects up to one in three adults (although most who are infected don’t even know it). (5) Both types of herpes viruses are highly contagious, and both can cause cold sores in either area of the body (or sometimes both). i was so happy when i found out about Dr dahosa, who uses herbs for his cure. he cured me withen 14days. so frieds if you need help, kindly contact his mail hsvnaturalremedyclinic@gmail.com or whatsapp via +2347033330161 and call via +2349072235613

  71. Men have vasectomies by scourfish · · Score: 1

    They're relatively inexpensive, reversible, not a complex or invasive, and don't involve hormone changes. I'd rather do that than take a pill.

  72. Re: Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You most certainly are that guy.

    An option for married couples who don't want more kids, if you'll read the fucking thread.

  73. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or maybe many people reveal themselves to be victimizers - physical fondlers, emotional abusers, and general victimizers, especially when they have power over others and think they either won't get caught or can get away with it.

    FTFY

  74. Part of me wonder..... by hai_Priesty · · Score: 1

    If medical study and caution for side effects for women contraceptive was held to same stringent standard as this current male contraceptive is now, will the women pill be stuck as "five years away for the last 40 years" as well. Women Contraceptives are not exactly harmless for health.

  75. Vasalgel a more viable alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't try and stop sperm being produced, just block them on the way out

  76. ice hockey? by TimMD909 · · Score: 1

    If anyone's ever played ice hockey, or any other sport, you'd know it's easier to stop one puck than it is to block 500,000,000 at once. This is why we don't have a "male birth control pill".

  77. Un natural by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

    Alterations in estrogen levels during pregnany result in haulted ovulation during pregnancy. It is part of the normal biological process for ministration to suspend under some circumstances. The female pill creates one of those circumstances.
    There are no normal situations that suspend sperm production. It’s an abnormal situation.
    Just to point out the obvious, the article was written by a woman.

  78. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by aliquis · · Score: 1

    It's what natural selection and society already does.

    Atleast if let alone.

  79. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by aliquis · · Score: 1

    Also their opions (reds) are intrusive non-free one so of course one should be free to fight back against it.

    It's not like they are for liberty and of no danger.

  80. Re: Or, you know, the working alternative - CONDOM by thewolfkin · · Score: 1

    You most certainly are that guy.

    An option for married couples who don't want more kids, if you'll read the fucking thread.

    good grief that was one example. Do i have to cite every single reason for birth control in one post to make them valid?

    --
    Just another second banana
  81. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also man buns, dungeons and dragons..

  82. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by endercase · · Score: 1

    9.5/10

  83. Re: Because only womyn can get free stuffs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you saying that men should learn to be better victims and humble themselves before society for societal approval?

  84. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

    Actually, as you noted, it's only most hormonal birth control pills--but knowing the wide range of alternate birth control methods? The only reason I can come up with for a partner objecting to all of them is that he wants something he can easily sabotage with minimum chance of detection... (There's safer options that don't change anything for the male part of the experience and are harder for either side to sabotage.)

  85. Will never happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless the male is in a happy marriage where all parties agree to no more children, there is no incentive for the male to invest in birth control beyond a rubber. It's the female who faces the vast majority of risk, and therefore has the vast majority of incentive. No amount of PC is going to change that. If it does, that sentiment will go away in a couple of generations due to natural selection. ...Which, incidentally, is one reason Trump got elected.

  86. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by PlaynBass · · Score: 1

    You defenders of Trump are barely literate, but at least you have the comfortable delusion that your ignorance is what will make you free.

    There are none so stupid as those who chose not to learn from the mistakes of history.

    The truth can not be swept away or hidden, but ignoring it can cause plenty of damage.

    The forces supporting Trump's MAGAdupes are counting on that group's continued blind acceptance of their blatant lies and misdirected anger to stay in power and to continue in their unlawful power grabs.

    Collusion with the Russians is only the tip of the iceberg of corruption that is beginning to be revealed as their evil plans unfold.

    --
    PlaynBass
  87. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    Says the apparatchnik of the party of vote suppression.

  88. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

    Name the crimes and the proof
    Don't bother with Drudge, NewsMax or Faux, as these are all proven lies
    Trump LOST the election by 2.86 million votes because we, the people, are tired of brainless cowardly guntoting sheep running the nation into ever more war debt while people die of easily cured diseases.

  89. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by aliquis · · Score: 1

    You defenders of Trump are barely literate, but at least you have the comfortable delusion that your ignorance is what will make you free.

    Illusions won't make me free.
    The destruction of the threats against my freedom would.

    There are none so stupid as those who chose not to learn from the mistakes of history.

    Socialists never learn.

    continue in their unlawful power grabs.

    What's that really? Being able to empower yourself?
    Yeah. Sounds scary.

    Collusion with the Russians is only the tip of the iceberg of corruption that is beginning to be revealed as their evil plans unfold.

    Putin is our guy. He's for sovereignty. That's worth plenty.

    Also I'm Swede not American so my Trump support or not isn't very relevant over there.

  90. Re:Perhaps fighting evolution is not trivially eas by omnichad · · Score: 1

    Idiocracy explains it best. It's a negative selection bias against people who are proactive and think.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  91. Poor argument. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Men have been expected to make the money as their half of the family. They can't give birth, so sustenance is all they can bring to the table as a partner.

    Therefore the men are more motivated to succeed because women want successful men to bonk, not losers.

    So the reason why men have "all the power" when you look at jobs, it's because women have wanted men to do that and men have had to.

    1. Re:Poor argument. by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      So, as I said, there are NO Fortune 1000 corporations run by women, Thus the POWER in this culture is held by men.
      Game, set, match, loser

  92. Wear a condom. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Job done. Use your own if you're worried about having had them doctored. But if you're that worried, don't have sex at all.

  93. Re: Sweep that under the rug!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, Trump lost the popular vote because the states with the biggest chunks of population vote democrat and can't see the policies that have been enacted over the last few decades are killing the interior states. Or rather, they look down on the people in the interior because they're the 'wrong colour' to be poor and disadvantaged. Trump won the electoral college, the last place these states really have a voice in.

  94. Cottonseed Oil by kwijibo · · Score: 1

    It can be ingested regularly, and in about a year, total male sterility.

    Its the same spermicidal lubricant used on condoms.

  95. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by djinn6 · · Score: 1

    How do you predict something for which you have no data whatsoever? If most children haven't received paternity testing, how do you know how many of them have the expected father? It could be none of them, or it could be all of them, or anything in between.

    Besides, if men's suspicions are so off base, they could be equally bad at not suspecting a cheating partner.

  96. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

    How do you predict something for which you have no data whatsoever? If most children haven't received paternity testing, how do you know how many of them have the expected father? It could be none of them, or it could be all of them, or anything in between.

    It's measured at 2% for those who found out the real paternity due to a medical issue that cropped up. That 2% number comes from a perfect storm that requires all of the following:

    1) A cheating wife (a given in the context of wrong paternity), and

    2) The 50% dice roll that results in the other guys sperm managing fertilization in place of the husbands (also a given), and

    3) That the child is biologically incompatible with the husband, and

    4) An unexpected medical procedure that requires compatibility

    So, yeah, I guess a "real" rate of 30% could work out to 2% if measured using the above constraints only.

    If the other guy has compatible blood type with the husband, the true paternity will never be discovered. If the child never needs biological material from the husband, the true paternity will remain a secret.

    Of course, this means that the true rate of female infidelity is probably twice as high as the 20% - 35% number, because a women who is alternating between two men (husband and non-husband) will only get pregnant by the non-husband around half the time, meaning that only around half of women who cheat get pregnant by the non-husband.

    In other words, for each woman who is found to have perpetrated paternity fraud, there is one other woman who cheated but got pregnant by husband instead.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  97. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

    Hardly a "massive" social turbulence. The number of births where the expected father isn't the real father is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2% (Find your own sources). This wouldn't even be a blip on the radar.

    No. It's been measured from 20% to 35%. There are multiple sources for this, I suggest you start with the CDC.

    If memory serves, the higher numbers are specifically for those children for whom paternity testing is done--the 2% number is what I've seen given as predicted for what might be expected with a truly random sample, and usually gets brought up to remind people that the 20%-35% number is better understood as the percentage of men who are actually right in suspecting that the child isn't theirs.

    I've already answered this - see this link below. TLDR version is this: the 2% number is derived from the number of paternity fraud discovered when "daddy" tries to donate biological material to the child, and they realise that he is incompatible. The 2% number doesn't reflect wrong paternity, it reflects wrong paternity AND unusual medical procedures.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  98. Re:Because men would lie "Yeah baby, I'm on the pi by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

    And that is how I know you are stupid.

  99. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

    Hardly a "massive" social turbulence. The number of births where the expected father isn't the real father is somewhere in the neighborhood of 2% (Find your own sources). This wouldn't even be a blip on the radar.

    No. It's been measured from 20% to 35%. There are multiple sources for this, I suggest you start with the CDC.

    If memory serves, the higher numbers are specifically for those children for whom paternity testing is done--the 2% number is what I've seen given as predicted for what might be expected with a truly random sample, and usually gets brought up to remind people that the 20%-35% number is better understood as the percentage of men who are actually right in suspecting that the child isn't theirs.

    I've already answered this - see this link below. TLDR version is this: the 2% number is derived from the number of paternity fraud discovered when "daddy" tries to donate biological material to the child, and they realise that he is incompatible. The 2% number doesn't reflect wrong paternity, it reflects wrong paternity AND unusual medical procedures.

    Unusual medical procedures is a better means of approximating a random sample of the population than there being questions in the first place about the paternity.

    To get a truly accurate rate would require a proper random sample, and you're never getting that by itself through an ethics review board. You might manage to get approval of a study on rates within the population of something that would require you establish genetic parentage--but it'd need to be something where you can establish a reason why knowing inherited vs de novo mutation rates would be just as important as does vs doesn't have rates.

    Oh, and your modern paternity test is a genetic test. The blood test has issues, including the fact that chimerism is not unknown in humans--and one of the known flavors is basically accidental in utero transplant of maternal blood stem cells. (At that age, transplants are easy.)

  100. Re:Will most likely cause a massive social turbule by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

    And this is how I know you're not in any part of STEM where you're expected to know how to recognize what is and isn't a random sample...and how to approximate such because there are logistical issues in grabbing people at random from all over the planet as an experiment. And, well, I suppose it's also not terribly ethical...

    One of the really interesting things is that we do know that the chance is not 50%, even for simple fertilization. There's a lot of factors involved in just the odds of conception alone--enough that people are making careers out of studying this--but those odds can be altered by such things as genetic compatibility, point in her cycle, sex acts performed (aside from the obvious one), frequency with that specific partner, and of course male fertility. Most of this list also figures into the odds of the outcome being a 'live infant.' (And yes, you can find scientific papers on this entire list, but if you want me to do it for you I expect to be paid.) Most, if not all, of these factors have been shaped by evolution, in at least part because the reproductive investment for females is higher than it is for males, especially in mammals.

  101. Re:Fundamental problems, both physical and monetar by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

    Well, that and female birth control also lowers the risk of some cancers and has other benefits - typically related to menstruation - as well.

    --
    Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.