How does this unscientific instagram vomit has 500 votes on lemmy? Are we turning into reddit?
That’s why I got the chop. Firing blanks for the last year.
I think if I busted a nut 9 times a day, I would just simply just vanish.
Nah, this isn’t a great point at all… even at face value really.
Put slightly differently, if we’re assuming people sleep around as much as the text implies, if we focus on birth control solely for men, then one ‘failure’/non-controlled man would result in a ton of pregnancies. If the onus is on women, then one ‘failure’/non-controlled woman would result in one pregnancy.
Not really…
On the biological level it is trying to stop millions of sperm-cells to sneak in or prevent one egg-cell from being available. In the numbers game it is less risky and more reliable to make the one cell unavailable then to try to prevent the millions from being viable. Even if you shut 99.99% of them down, you still have more risk than having 99.99% chance of preventing the one cell being available.
I’m afraid that however we want the world to be equal for man and women, the biology itself is unfair and needs a lot more time and research if you want to equalize that.
Or use the tie-off snipsnip solution. It is a bit more permanent, but is pretty reliable in preventing.
I’m actually waiting for male birth control pills so bad
They would give men more agency on reproduction, aside from vasectomy, which is permanent, and condoms, which can rip or be intentionally poked.
Also, they can be used in couples where a woman is hesitant to take pills herself, either out of reproductive concerns (fear that pills would make them permanently sterile), or the overall influence of hormones on the body and the menstrual cycle.
I’m not sure who’s she targeting because I know a lot of guys who would love to have birth control pills.
Counterpoint: a woman taking birthcontrol is empowered because she is taking charge of her own reproduction. She doesn’t have to rely on or trust the man to take his pill. After all, she would be the one bearing most of the burden in case of an unwanted pregnancy.
Additionally, purely biologically it is much easier to reliably stop conception on the female side than on the male side. A woman only produces one egg cell per month, whereas a man produces millions of sperm cells per day.
Lol this is so dumb
It’s easier to prevent ovulation of one egg than stop a billion sperm cells from reaching their destination. Stop politicising biology.
The one who gets pregnant should probably take the birth control, as pregnancy would be more bothersome for them than for the other person.
Condoms?
Not everything is a conspiracy against women
I do think that birth control pills having 1 week of sugar pills to force periods rather than 1 week of optional pills to allow skipping periods is pretty fucked up though. The term conspiracy is pretty intense though. But it’s super fucked.
Was curious about the placebos and came across this if you are interested.
https://srh.bmj.com/content/familyplanning/44/3/214.full.pdf
A paper that suggests there is no medical evidence why there should be a break in hormonal pills and that you can simply just start a new pack of pills and continue going on with your life
Yes and your prescription then runs out early, leaving you without birth control for multiple weeks
Sounds like a logistical problem, not a medical problem.
I used the word should.
As in the system right now is flawed and could be better.
What point are you trying to make because I’m not picking up on what you are putting down
It’s less of a conspiracy and more that it didn’t even occur to society until pretty recently (in historical terms) that reproduction isn’t solely a woman’s responsibility
Well yes. But it also occured to society that stopping 1 egg per month is easier than millions of sperm every day.
This sounds like it would make sense on the surface, but is just not true. You can look up pretty easily that there wasn’t really any research on the viability of male hormonal birth control until half a century after female hormonal birth control became a thing, so it’s not like they made a rational decision based on scientific findings. When they found out how to do it for men, it was roughly comparably complicated, with similar side effects. This too is easy to look up.
It makes sense that the side effects were too much to legalize hormonal male birth control because today’s standards are much higher. Which is a good thing ofc- im glad they don’t allow new medication as easily as they did in the past. Female birth control wouldn’t be legalized if it was invented today, and neither would, for example, aspirin. They get to stay around because they don’t take that stuff back out usually, even if it wouldn’t pass modern standards. That’s a bit of a tangent though.
Many men would LOVE a reliable, non-condom, male-controlled birth control method
Currently for men there are two options — condoms, which are problematic and difficult in several ways, or vasectomy, which is essentially permanent or at least difficult and uncertain to be reversed.
The third method is to take WAY too many TOO HOT baths, but that also has uncertainty and is a real hassle.
As it stands, really for men they either need to use a condom, or trust that your female partner is reliable.
100% agree. The fact that they’re only researching it now has been hurting everyone involved.
Is that why men have been wrapping their dicks in all sorts of weird shit for thousands of years? Animal intestines and bladders to name but a few. Fuck your “in historical terms”, youre talking out of your arse, just like every other sexist who makes hating men part of their personality.
Why is everyone in this thread acting like men are always the ones providing and insisting on using barrier methods? Have yall talked to a woman who’s had casual sex before about what it’s like out there?
Yes, men AND women are both taking responsibility. Just because you can point to few cases of morons, doesnt make “women are sluts who use abortion as birth control” anymore true than the bullshit youre pedalling. But nice try, trying to get out of the “historical terms” bullshit, but shifting the focus to modern day… Doesnt at all make you look desperate to be right, regardless of facts…
Theres bad apples in every bunch. Only a bigot tries to frame that bad apple as the whole bunch.
Ok I’ll ignore the name calling one last time.
I’ll put it super simply, in the hope that you misunderstanding me wasn’t as intentional as it comes across
-
barrier methods have always been, and continue to be, a shared responsibility
-
all other non-permanent methods have been purely on women until very recently.
Ignore whatever the fuck you like. Youre bigoted cunt, and thats all there is to it. You dont like being called out? Have you tried, not being a perpetually online sexist piece of shit? Fuck you.
Can you please point out the thing I said that you consider sexist, and why? I’m striving not to be, and like to learn where I can.
-
You say that as if women haven’t been treated like property in nearly every society ever since we learned how to farm
This is one of the dumbest wagons to hitch that argument to in particular.
The most commonly produced, available, and used birth control method worldwide is the latex condom, used by everyone who has a penis. Try again.
Let’s say you save exactly one pill and it works on anyone. Also assume 100% pregnancy rate, so if you are paired with someone and neither have the pill, then it’s an automatic pregnancy. Our goal is to minimize number of pregnancies.
- “Max promiscuity”: Say we have a complete bipartite matching. if it’s given to a male, then no pregnancies have been prevented since every other male can impregnate every female. If it’s given to a female, then it reduces the number of pregnancies by 1 since none of the males can impregnate her.
- “Traditional”: Say we have a bijective matching (i.e. each male is paired with exactly one female, and vice versa). Then the pill can be given to anyone and it will always reduce the number of pregnancies by 1.
- “The Harem”: Say we have a matching where males have more than one pairing but females have at most one pairing each. In this case, giving the pill to the male with the largest number of pairings will reduce pregnancies by however many pairings they have.
- “Reverse Harem”: Same scenario as above but flip male and female. Giving the pill to any female will have the same effect of reducing pregnancies by 1. Giving it to a male will have no effect.
- “The Cliques”: The population is split into disjoint graphs, but each of these disjoint graphs are complete (bijective) bipartite graphs. In this case, if the pill is given to a male, then it will only have an effect if that male only has a single pairing, thereby reducing pregnancies by exactly 1. Otherwise, there will be no reduction in pregnancies. If given to a female, then it will always reduce pregnancies by exactly 1.
As far as I’m aware, the real world operates most like a mixture of “Traditional” and “Cliques”. At least, in places where birth control is an option. But in the real world, we have more than one pill.
If we have enough for either all males or all females, then the effect is the same regardless of who gets the pill. It will always lead to 100% pregnancy reduction.
Let’s say we have enough pills for all but one male, or all but one female.
- “Max promiscuity”: If the pill is given to the males, then we still have one male that can impregnate everyone, so there will be no reduction in pregnancies. If given to females, then you will end up with exactly one pregnancy.
- “Traditional”: As before, there’s no difference. Any decision will lead to reducing pregnancies to exactly 1.
- “The Harem”: giving to all the males except the one with the smallest number of pairings will reduce pregnancies to however many pairings that one male has (more than 1). If given to females, then it will reduce it to exactly 1.
- “Reverse Harem”: Giving it to the males will reduce pregnancies to exactly 1 since they’re only in 1 pairing. Giving it to females will also reduce it to exactly 1.
- “The Cliques”: if given to the males, then it will only make a difference if there exists a clique with exactly one male. It will reduce pregnancies by the largest number of females in a clique with a single male. If given to females, then it always reduces pregnancies to exactly 1.
So with the goal of minimizing pregnancies, it either makes no difference or is optimal to have the pill on women (unless you’re in a harem). This is highly reductive though. We have many other considerations when deciding who should get access to birth control.
