While I think this is a great idea--more protection (or at least the option of it) is always better, and it would be wonderful if women didn't always have to take the full responsibility for the medical options of birth control--I think that a lot of men would be uncomfortable with the idea of having ineffective sperm (assuming that there were other reliable birth control methods available, which there usually are). Am I wrong there, guys?
This does seem like it would be great for families (like ketchupqueen's) where the woman cannot use the pill for health reasons. I'm just not sure how many men would use it outside of those situations.
Other thoughts on the matter?
Posts: 3801 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure if I would use it or not. Niki is on the patch herself, which is something like 99.999% effective, and all me going on the patch would do is add a couple of 9's to that number.
Maybe we could take turns?
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Redundancy in contraception is never a bad idea. Assuming the swim team would regain its, er, full potency when I went off the patch, I'd definitely do this.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it had a high enough success rate I would have used this. Teres had problems with the pill and developed medical complications with both pregnancies.
Instead I got a vasectomy a while back. Easier all around.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: think that a lot of men would be uncomfortable with the idea of having ineffective sperm (assuming that there were other reliable birth control methods available, which there usually are). Am I wrong there, guys?
No. No you are not wrong. I need my torpedos ready to deploy at a moments' notice.
Posts: 2532 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suppose that if I were a man interested in sowing my wild oats without having any of them actually sprout, I'd be interested in such a patch.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I woouldn't have a problem with taking a drug that rendered my sperm ineffective. I don't plan on having kids anyway, so I wouldn't even be terribly upset if its effects were permenant. I would be concerned about side effects of the drug, though, and wouldn't be an early adopter for that reason.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:The other side of the coin is having to trust the woman to be entirely responsible for birth control. A lot of men are not comfortable with that for various reasons (control, misogyny, paranoia, etc). For them, a patch makes a lot of sense.
Odd, I've met plenty of men who were just fine and dandy leaving the woman to be entirely responsible (financially and otherwise) for it, and based on at least one other post in this thread, I suspect I'm not the only one.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It wouldn't bother me to have ineffective sperm, as long as they became effective again within a short time after stopping.
Posts: 1960 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If anyone other than she gets ANYthing in my pants, MY wife might get really upset.
But by that point it'd be moot because if anyone else gets into my pants it's because they have pried my cold dead fingers off my firmly fastened belt buckle.
Posts: 2532 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are plenty of men like that out there, but it's a pretty stupid way to behave given the potential consequences.
Oh, I don't disagree with this in the slightest. Stupid, however, is sadly far more common than not stupid.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stop seeing him. Seriously. Anyone who wouldn't even consider using this, especially if you have known problems with the pill, I wouldn't want to talk to.
Or just don't have sex with him Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, don't worry. This really isn't going anywhere, and I'm probably moving out of this city in December, anyway.
I seriously don't understand why so many men seem to have issues with taking responsibility for birth control.
I know guys who think condoms are stupid, and that it's up to the girl to make sure she doesn't get pregnant. STDs aside, that's just absolutely moronic.
posted
When they finally develop a way for men to carry the baby during pregnancy, men will be controlling, misogynist, and paranoid if they don't want to.
I think this patch is just going to take the guys some time to get used to.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I seriously don't understand why so many men seem to have issues with taking responsibility for birth control.
Selfishness. Self-centeredness. A feeling of entitlement. Lack of responsibility. Pigheadedness.
None of which are useful traits in a boyfriend.
It should be noted that I have zero tolerance for the "but it'll make me less of a man" attitude this usually brings up, even when it isn't stated outright. If that really worries you I don't think you were much of a man to begin with...
[ October 14, 2005, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, Chris! It does all our hearts good to hear you say that. Well done!
(That is, essentially, what Ron said on the matter. I've had serious complications with hormone therapies, and we are on our way to vasectomyland as soon as we stop waffling about whether or not we want one more kid...)
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow! I bet KPC wouldn't be opposed to using this if it was effective and safe. I can't take hormonal BC, and we've had barrier and other methods fail twice now. Something safe and more effective that allows for more spontaneity would be welcome in our home!
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've had serious complications with hormone therapies, and we are on our way to vasectomyland as soon as we stop waffling about whether or not we want one more kid...
Teres developed gestational diabetes with both kids, and Tony pressing on her spine for 6 hours (lousy sense of direction) gave her permanent back problems. The pill gave her headaches and regular stomach cramps. Our options were a) stick with the pill anyway, b) go with condoms and foam and whatever else we can strap on, c) stop having sex, or d) get me snipped. Seemed a pretty obvious choice.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It never came up with my hubby, because my many problems always dictated me being on some sort of hormone therapy anyway, and my hysterectomy was a foregone conclusion from an early age, we always knew as soon as we were done having kids I'd need to have one.
But I can't imagine him being reluctant to use something like this. I mean, especially if the wife has problems with hormone therapy, a husband who refused would be one self-centered jerk, IMO.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
At first glance it's hard to see why any women take the pill. It seems to have a huge number of potential side effects (including heart attack). I've also heard, although this may just be Bible-thumping propaganda, that when they were testing the pill (on poor Peurto Rican women, no less) a few of the subjects died and they just decreased a few of the ingredients without ever confirming that they had eliminated the death risk. And have you seen the ads for this new pill that makes you have only four periods a year? Is it me or is that company putting itself at a big risk for a lawsuit in 20 years? Then there's always the unexplained increase in breast cancer among younger and younger women---I know everyone says this is a right-wing canard, but it's something to think about...
Posts: 781 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always been taught/told/informed that it's the man's job to be in charge of contraceptives, well, non pharmecutical contraceptives (condoms). Other than birth control pills, it's all up to the man.
So far as a male patch thing, so long as it was assured that the troops would be ready to wake from their slumber, I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Guys, don't be a fool, wrap your tool.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: At first glance it's hard to see why any women take the pill.
I love being on the pill. It makes my period much, much lighter and shorter (an average of 4 days instead of 7). It makes my period predictable, always occuring on a Monday or Tuesday and ending around Friday. It's not going to come 5 days early and surprise, nor will it come 5 days late and cause me needless worry. It's allowing me to plan my wedding/honeymoon and know that as long as I keep taking the pills, I won't be interrupted by blood and cramps (er, at least not from feminine problems). And while I still get PMS, it's much, much less severe than it was before BC.
If I decided to never ever have sex again, I would still stay on the pill. If Ben were on a male contraceptive, I would stay on the pill. If my insurance stopped covering it, I would pay out of pocket and stay on the pill.
Basically, unless I develop health problems and my doctor refuses to prescribe my BC, I'm staying on it until any chance of me having a period is gone (either through menopause or a hysterectomy). Because it makes life so, so, so much more convenient.
Posts: 3801 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
1) If the patch proved to be as effective as the Pill, I would have no problem using it. Those men who fear it will make them less of a man are less of a man.
2) If I were a woman I would be very worried, and demand proof that any man I slept with that said they were using this, was actually using this. This discussion has come nowhere close to hitting how low men will be when sex is to be had. "Yeah honey, I'm on the patch. Ooops, I've got to leave town for a year or too. Good luck."
3) My wife is on the medication that can reduce her periods to up to 4 times a year. She has to get it in shot form so far. When she misses her shots he periods are incredibly unpredictable so it does her a world of good.
4) The reason the pill was so much of a success and a turning point in womens emmancipation is that it freed women from having to rely on men to use contraceptive. While men and women could enjoy sex, it was the woman who was often straddled with the result when the contraceptive the men aquired was imaginary. The pill allowed women to take control of their own reproductivity. I don't see many of them surrendering that control too quickly.
5) Abstinence is not the only 100% guaranteed way to stop pregnancy.
There is always homosexuality.
While its not a length I'd be willing to go, homosexuality is 100% safe when it comes to avoiding getting pregnant.
Though not when it comes to spreading disease.
But then, neither is this patch.
So yeah, wrap that rascal.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I certainly wouldn't mind wearing one and taking that burden off my wife. It would actually be a very nice method of birth control for us, as long as it was extremely reliable.
Is the patch something your doctor would have to prescribe? And could it be just your family doc, or would you have to go to some specialized doctor? Your wife's OB/GYN, perhaps?
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just wanted to brag about the fact my boyfriend was the first guy on the thread to offer to share the responsibility of birth control with me.
Posts: 2064 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My only concern is over how effective it would be compared to other forms of BC. It is pretty imperative that Cor not get pregnant, so whatever we do has to be close to fail-safe. (And yes, we use redundant forms of BC now.)
I don't know if I could feel safe not using a latex prophylactic, because the physics of how one of those works is something I can understand: Nothing gets through, nobody gets pregnant. Pills and patches and drugs and gels I feel a lot less secure in. But I could see myself using this and a latex prophylactic and not the other form of BC we currently use (I'm only going to share details about myself).
::wonders how long this thread will be considered Hatrack acceptable::
(My awkward wording, in case you're wondering, is due to a desire to keep my own post appropriate. I apologize if I fail in this.)
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel. As long as it is first proven to work really well, I will consider it a viable option. If my wife would rather that I be the primary provider of BC, I'm fine with that, as long as the results are the same. Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eddie, it seems as though it might not have *any* hormonal effect because it won't really be a hormone. While female chemical BC tends to revolve around fooling the body into thinking it's pregnant, this one appears to be about finding a substance that will only disable the sperms' ability to penetrate the egg.
They will still should be great swimmers in powerful numbers, which should be nice for the male ego. Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm all for male contraceptive drugs. I figure that multiple birth control methods is good, and if both partners are on the drugs and are known to be STD free, that means a barrier method may not be necessary.
I could see a woman wanting to do birth control for herself, since she's the one who probably has the most to lose if she gets preganant. It makes a lot of sense to me that both the man and the woman can do things to limit their own fertility. Still, if a woman doesn't trust a guy to do birth control properly, why is she sleeping with him?
Oh, and I'm with Ophelia. The Pill is awesome. I'm not even taking it for birth control reasons, so I can definitely see why a woman would want to use that form of birth control. So long as she doesn't have a bad reaction, of course.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
