Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm crazier off the pill than on it. My friends who don't like being on the pill have Mirenas. One day we'll have reliable reversible male birth control. The end.
I worked with him for 3 months (as a 'guinea pig' [I was well-informed and I understood what I was doing.])
Please re-read my original post (carefully)
I suggest (and I am not a Doctor of medicine) that an individual who has lived for (say) 30 years and who has received no medications (not even an aspirin!) is likely to be better equipped than one who had been (perhaps) over-medicated.
I didn't say "If you are on the pill your kid will be born defective"- which is what you seem to have assumed.
Why don't you re-read the post and then research Prof Wynn's paperwork?
Don't come after me. I'm retired aircrew and a retired lawyer.
I will not drop a bomb on your head.
Sosume
When I click your link I just get an empty black page. Can anyone else open it?
I just read an amazing article written by a self-proclaimed "man loving feminist" about why she is anti- the pill. Her feminist values about why she is anti-pill really resonate with me. I'm actually about to email this to the friend of mine I mentioned earlier.
I just read an amazing article written by a self-proclaimed "man loving feminist" about why she is anti- the pill. Her feminist values about why she is anti-pill really resonate with me. I'm actually about to email this to the friend of mine I mentioned earlier.
Seriously? That is the LAMEST article ever. EVER. My brain hurts from reading it and yours should too. Let's look at her points:
1 ) Like I’ve discussed before, I thinkthe Pill takes away a woman’s reproductive freedom by making her dependent on (usually male) doctors.
Unless a Dr is grabbing women and forcing them to take the BCP's it's THE WOMAN who makes first contact and requests it. That isn't "taking away reproductive freedom" by any stretch of the imagination. And you can stop taking it whenever you want, you don't get "dependent" on it. And I haven't had a male Dr in 20 years. And if/when it becomes OTC no Dr is needed.
2) The Pill encourages the idea that a woman’s fertile body is dangerous and needs to be subdued.
No it doesn't. It encourages the idea that you can have sex and not get pregnant or not have to experience debating cramps and heavy bleeding that sidelines you from life.
3. The Pill saddles women with the full responsibility of birth control.
No again. It puts them in control. They don't have to use it, they can use anything they like or nothing at all. THEY CHOOSE IT so they aren't at someone else's mercy.
Seriously? That is the LAMEST article ever. EVER. My brain hurts from reading it and yours should too. Let's look at her points:
1 ) Like I’ve discussed before, I thinkthe Pill takes away a woman’s reproductive freedom by making her dependent on (usually male) doctors.
Unless a Dr is grabbing women and forcing them to take the BCP's it's THE WOMAN who makes first contact and requests it. That isn't "taking away reproductive freedom" by any stretch of the imagination. And you can stop taking it whenever you want, you don't get "dependent" on it. And I haven't had a male Dr in 20 years. And if/when it becomes OTC no Dr is needed.
2) The Pill encourages the idea that a woman’s fertile body is dangerous and needs to be subdued.
No it doesn't. It encourages the idea that you can have sex and not get pregnant or not have to experience debating cramps and heavy bleeding that sidelines you from life.
3. The Pill saddles women with the full responsibility of birth control.
No again. It puts them in control. They don't have to use it, they can use anything they like or nothing at all. THEY CHOOSE IT so they aren't at someone else's mercy.
These are the points that I agree with:
The medical community seems to assume that women are generally too stupid/ lazy/wimpy to keep track of their own cycles and control their own fertility, and that’s why they have to prescribe the Pill. Since women are too incompetent to take care of it themselves, they need experts to prescribe them easy-to-swallow drugs, so that they don’t have to think about their cycles at all.
With the Pill,the woman has to have her body unnaturally altered to prevent pregnancy while the man’s body can keep doing what it was built to do. As a consequence, she has to deal with the side effects of the Pill (like decreased libido and all kinds of health risks) while he gets off scott-free. His fertility is just fine the way it is.
My question is, why doesn’t the man have to take a drug to make him temporarily impotent until he’s ready to be a father? Why aren’t doctors working hard to develop a drug like that? After all, as Toni Weschler points out in Taking Charge of Your Fertility,** a woman is only fertile a couple days every month, and she only has a few hundred eggs in her body from the start, which eventually run out. Men, on the other hand, have millions of sperm in their bodies at any given moment, which are continuously being replaced, and men can continue to father children until death. Plus, men already tend to have a higher sex drive than most women, and could probably stand to have some decrease in libido. Shouldn’t men be held responsible for reining in their quadrillions of aggressive sperm, instead of women having to protect their few precious eggs from unwanted fertilization?
When the Pill is used for birth control, the woman has to do everything: she pays for the drug and makes all the doctor’s appointments. She makes sure she fills her prescriptions on time. And then, if she gets pregnant, she gets the blame – it’s her fault for not taking the Pill correctly.
The medical community seems to assume that women are generally too stupid/ lazy/wimpy to keep track of their own cycles and control their own fertility, and that’s why they have to prescribe the Pill. Since women are too incompetent to take care of it themselves, they need experts to prescribe them easy-to-swallow drugs, so that they don’t have to think about their cycles at all.
No, the medical community does not think this. Women take the pill for all sorts of reasons and a big one is to CONTROL that cycle instead of having to "keep track of" which doesn't do a whole lot of good if cycles are even a bit irregular. Which they are for almost all women at some point.
Quote:
My question is, why doesn’t the man have to take a drug to make him temporarily impotent until he’s ready to be a father? Why aren’t doctors working hard to develop a drug like that?
There has been research into that, it's just easier on the other end. Condoms are a good start until such a thing is available however. And even when there is such a thing women would still want to take the control if possible since it is SHE who ends up pregnant in the end no matter who uses what.
Quote:
When the Pill is used for birth control, the woman has to do everything: she pays for the drug and makes all the doctor’s appointments. She makes sure she fills her prescriptions on time. And then, if she gets pregnant, she gets the blame – it’s her fault for not taking the Pill correctly.
No one seems to interpret things that way except you and the author of that silly article. The rest of us are grateful to have control of ourselves.
There is no "even steven" when it comes to being pregnant. It is always and only the woman, so it makes sense that the woman be the one calling the shots.
No, the medical community does not think this. Women take the pill for all sorts of reasons and a big one is to CONTROL that cycle instead of having to "keep track of" which doesn't do a whole lot of good if cycles are even a bit irregular. Which they are for almost all women at some point.
There has been research into that, it's just easier on the other end. Condoms are a good start until such a thing is available however. And even when there is such a thing women would still want to take the control if possible since it is SHE who ends up pregnant in the end no matter who uses what.
No one seems to interpret things that way except you and the author of that silly article. The rest of us are grateful to have control of ourselves.
There is no "even steven" when it comes to being pregnant. It is always and only the woman, so it makes sense that the woman be the one calling the shots.
The "rhythm method" has a very high rate of failure, due to irregular cycles and the fact that a woman can pregnant for days before and after ovulation, there is also the cruel fact for those trying not to pregnant that women's libido increases during ovulation and men find the woman more attractive, so you have to fight through abstaining where your body most wants sex. It is generally only a good idea for married couples who are able to handle an unplanned pregnancy. The pill gives women much more control, there is no real substitute at this time, the idea that men force it on women is just silly.
I'm all for advances in male birth control, we need more options, and men having an option where they could have control over pregnancy is a great thing for those that would choose to use it. More options involving both genders is a great thing we should be pushing for. We certainly don't need to make men temporarily impotent though, then nobody is having sex. We need them to be temporarily infertile.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
,** a woman is only fertile a couple days every month, and she only has a few hundred eggs in her body from the start, which eventually run out. Men, on the other hand, have millions of sperm in their bodies at any given moment, which are continuously being replaced, and men can continue to father children until death. Plus, men already tend to have a higher sex drive than most women, and could probably stand to have some decrease in libido. Shouldn’t men be held responsible for reining in their quadrillions of aggressive sperm, instead of women having to protect their few precious eggs from unwanted fertilization?
