Women, imagine that you are about to engage in intercourse with a man and right before said act is about to begin you open your mouth to discuss protection but instead the two of you simultaneously utter the sentence "don't worry, I'm on the pill."
Hmmmmmm.
When considering the possibility of a male birth control coming to fruition, one must also consider the likelihood that males would actually take it. Forget the physical ramifications, it is a given that any drug decreasing sexual libido or physically altering the male sexual organs would never make it to the market. Can men really deal with the psychological ramification of halting their "biological destiny?"
While many different forms of contraceptives could be available for male use, the fact remains that women are the ones who literally bear the repercussions from unprotected sex. It's also very probable that in the majority of situations women wouldn't be absolved from the responsibility or the desire of taking contraceptives. In "America and the Pill" by Elaine Tyler May, it is stated that both men and women brought up the issue of trust when faced with the idea of men having contraception as a option.
On page 114, a 45 year old married father of three says this: "It is time for men to have some control. I think it would empower men and deter some women out there from their nefarious plans. Some women are out there to use men to get pregnant. This could deter women out there from doing this. An athlete or a singer is someone who could be a target and they could put a stop to that"
On the same page, a 28 year old women says "I have heard women say that they'd be against a male pill because they wouldn't trust men to take it. That's just silly. The point of a male pill isn't that it allows you to stop taking it. It's just that you have twice the protection. Also, I think that it will force men to be more responsible towards children they did father. No longer would the 'she tricked me' option be on the table."
The same argument but with very different connotations. It's interesting that some men and women view pregnancy as a trick to be played on one another but hardly reassuring that the two sexes are so suspicious of each others reproductive agenda.
For now we can ask the question, would it be more egalitarian for men to have the option of medically controlling their reproductive options? Of course. However, the science behind a male contraceptive may be getting closer and closer but the fact remains that unless an option was available that in no way effected the sexual function, ability, performance or appearance of the male reproductive organ, there isn't a man alive out there that would take it.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
Male Birth Control Part I.
Every so often you hear about how a supposed "male birth control method" is mere moments away from perfection (really?)
The idea of a male contraceptive is not a recent one. In "America and The Pill" by Elaine Tyler May, there is an entire chapter entitled "A Pill for Men?"
Research began in the 1950's out of the goal to treat infertility (as it did for female contraceptives). Several studies were conducted on small groups of prison inmates and mental patients. Unethical to say the least, these test groups differed only slightly and showed some success with reducing and even eliminating sperm count. Unfortunately, the side effects ranged from the small scale decreased libido to the more serious effect of shrunken testicles. Furthermore, the test subjects were not engaging in sexual acts with women and could not replicate how a compound might work in a heterosexual relationship.
Throughout the 1970's, China conducted similar experiments on drugs that could be used to halt sperm production. Worldwide, but especially in China and India, concern was growing about population control and the idea of a contraceptive for men was appealing for numerous reasons. In fact, due to the one-child law, contraceptives were already mandatory in China.
A decade or two after Scientists declared male contraceptive just around the corner, women in America cried foul when the medical community lacked to produce any tangible methods that shared the responsibilities of contraceptives with there male counterparts. After all, if science could finally introduce a way to control the reproductive activities in women, why could they not accomplish the same for men?
What the issue comes down to now as much as it did then is that women can get pregnant and men cannot. Men have nothing, or at least significantly less at stake than women when it comes down to birth control. When the possibility of reduced libido came up as a potential side effect in female contraceptives, it was considered unimportant. In the case of male birth control, preoccupation with sexual side effects is widespread.
In general, the questions and concerns of male contraceptives regarding their safety, effectiveness, and reversibility have led to a widespread lack of interest among men for their use. Some men have suggested that they would be interested in using a male contraceptive as long as it wasn't chemical and didn't effect their hormones. Psychologically speaking, men often equate the ability to impregnate females with the ego relating to masculinity.
So, why else hasn't this male birth control come to fruition?
To be continued...
The idea of a male contraceptive is not a recent one. In "America and The Pill" by Elaine Tyler May, there is an entire chapter entitled "A Pill for Men?"
Research began in the 1950's out of the goal to treat infertility (as it did for female contraceptives). Several studies were conducted on small groups of prison inmates and mental patients. Unethical to say the least, these test groups differed only slightly and showed some success with reducing and even eliminating sperm count. Unfortunately, the side effects ranged from the small scale decreased libido to the more serious effect of shrunken testicles. Furthermore, the test subjects were not engaging in sexual acts with women and could not replicate how a compound might work in a heterosexual relationship.
Throughout the 1970's, China conducted similar experiments on drugs that could be used to halt sperm production. Worldwide, but especially in China and India, concern was growing about population control and the idea of a contraceptive for men was appealing for numerous reasons. In fact, due to the one-child law, contraceptives were already mandatory in China.
A decade or two after Scientists declared male contraceptive just around the corner, women in America cried foul when the medical community lacked to produce any tangible methods that shared the responsibilities of contraceptives with there male counterparts. After all, if science could finally introduce a way to control the reproductive activities in women, why could they not accomplish the same for men?
What the issue comes down to now as much as it did then is that women can get pregnant and men cannot. Men have nothing, or at least significantly less at stake than women when it comes down to birth control. When the possibility of reduced libido came up as a potential side effect in female contraceptives, it was considered unimportant. In the case of male birth control, preoccupation with sexual side effects is widespread.
In general, the questions and concerns of male contraceptives regarding their safety, effectiveness, and reversibility have led to a widespread lack of interest among men for their use. Some men have suggested that they would be interested in using a male contraceptive as long as it wasn't chemical and didn't effect their hormones. Psychologically speaking, men often equate the ability to impregnate females with the ego relating to masculinity.
So, why else hasn't this male birth control come to fruition?
To be continued...
Friday, July 22, 2011
"blog" and "her" part I.
Are blogs for and by Women bad for Women?
Here is what has been in my head floating around of late.
If you are a women and you want to write about cupcakes on your blog where would you sign up and start going all cupcake crazy? Wordpress? Google? Blog her? Do you aim to reach the largest audience by going with the biggest, easiest and most user friendly site or do you put yourself with other foodies who want to live and breathe cupcakes? Should you be investigating how many men have ever sought out a blog written about cupcakes? What about a forum specifically for Moms, Moms like cupcakes and I'm sure some of them are looking for recipe blogs.
At this point I should probably inform my readers that there are so many existing blogs about cupcakes out there that if you were actually planning on blogging about cupcakes you may want to reconsider and go in another direction. Overall, my point is that choosing your blogging associations have a lot to do with what you want to get out of it.
In my brief research about women blogging for women, the general consensus of what I've found is clearly not supportive of women only blogging communities. In fact, most of the pro-women blogosphere comments are really anti-anti women blog sentiments. One women will sound off about how uncool and irrelevant women geared blogs are and some women will agree wholeheartedly, others will jump on the author and those who support her as women hating women. Confused? It's okay, the main division here seems to be about why women would write about anything of value specifically as a women.
I think it's pretty obvious when a site is trying to sell you on some product or advertisement by focusing on a specific demographic. Mom blogs are a different issue for me so I will go there another day. However, women who express Feminist views by any definition, seem to be a downer to some other women. Some criticism asks if the goal of Feminism is equality, why do Feminists segregate themselves from "mainstream male/co-ed" blogging sites by creating separate ones? Is that what the goal is? Preaching to the choir? Women and Feminists are not one in the same and not all blogs are created equal. How far can the argument go?
Until we revisit this topic, I leave you with a recent piece from the blog by Susannah Breslin. The article and the comments following are definitely worth a read through.
Here is what has been in my head floating around of late.
If you are a women and you want to write about cupcakes on your blog where would you sign up and start going all cupcake crazy? Wordpress? Google? Blog her? Do you aim to reach the largest audience by going with the biggest, easiest and most user friendly site or do you put yourself with other foodies who want to live and breathe cupcakes? Should you be investigating how many men have ever sought out a blog written about cupcakes? What about a forum specifically for Moms, Moms like cupcakes and I'm sure some of them are looking for recipe blogs.
At this point I should probably inform my readers that there are so many existing blogs about cupcakes out there that if you were actually planning on blogging about cupcakes you may want to reconsider and go in another direction. Overall, my point is that choosing your blogging associations have a lot to do with what you want to get out of it.
In my brief research about women blogging for women, the general consensus of what I've found is clearly not supportive of women only blogging communities. In fact, most of the pro-women blogosphere comments are really anti-anti women blog sentiments. One women will sound off about how uncool and irrelevant women geared blogs are and some women will agree wholeheartedly, others will jump on the author and those who support her as women hating women. Confused? It's okay, the main division here seems to be about why women would write about anything of value specifically as a women.
I think it's pretty obvious when a site is trying to sell you on some product or advertisement by focusing on a specific demographic. Mom blogs are a different issue for me so I will go there another day. However, women who express Feminist views by any definition, seem to be a downer to some other women. Some criticism asks if the goal of Feminism is equality, why do Feminists segregate themselves from "mainstream male/co-ed" blogging sites by creating separate ones? Is that what the goal is? Preaching to the choir? Women and Feminists are not one in the same and not all blogs are created equal. How far can the argument go?
Until we revisit this topic, I leave you with a recent piece from the blog by Susannah Breslin. The article and the comments following are definitely worth a read through.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
No Cost Birth Control
This article explains how President Obama commissioned the non-partisan Institute of Medicine panel to recommend which preventative health services insurance plans should cover under the Affordable Care Act. One of the main recommendations by the panel was to provide no cost birth control through all insurance companies.
Also reported by the IOM is the option that health insurers pay for HPV testing, contraceptive and lactation counseling, HIV screening and breast-feeding equipment.
Of course the ones opposing no cost birth control are the ones who still believe that any type of contraception is going to induce an abortion.
It's hopeful news, especially considering the wave of anti-choice fervor in defunding Planned Parenthood. Keep an eye on this proposal ladies; depending on your insurance (or lack there of) you may end up saving anywhere from $15-$50 a month.
Also reported by the IOM is the option that health insurers pay for HPV testing, contraceptive and lactation counseling, HIV screening and breast-feeding equipment.
Of course the ones opposing no cost birth control are the ones who still believe that any type of contraception is going to induce an abortion.
It's hopeful news, especially considering the wave of anti-choice fervor in defunding Planned Parenthood. Keep an eye on this proposal ladies; depending on your insurance (or lack there of) you may end up saving anywhere from $15-$50 a month.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)