NationStates Jolt Archive

Inspired by a sidetrack in another thread, I pose the following question to the menfolk of NS:

If a male form of The Pill were available, or another form of male contraception that was as reliable and safe as female contraceptive measures currently are, would you take it? If not, why not?

As food for thought, here's a post of mine from the other thread...

*Copied from the "feminist cover up" thread*

There is currently a type of male birth control that has been tested on mammals (but not humans, that I know of), which consists of a single injection that can be calibrated to prevent a male from impregnating anybody for between 6 months and three years. It works by mucking with the pH of the urethra (the tube in the penis that semen and urine come out of), and upsetting the pH will neutralize any sperm that pass through it. There is also a method of male birth control that has been used for centuries in parts of Asia, in which the man immerses his testicles in very warm water for about 45 minutes each day for three weeks. The whole reason men have external testes is because sperm need to be kept at a lower temperature than our internal body temperature, so exposure to the warm water will kill the sperm. One could theoretically acheive this effect by simply soaking in a hottub regularly.

However, research into male birth control has been stalled for a very practical reason: it's simply not as profitable. If a couple can use hot tubbing for birth control, how can the pharmaceutical companies make money off of contraceptives? If a man can just get one shot once every three years, why should his wife/girlfriend waste money for birth control pills every month, especially since he would not experience the hormone-related side effects that her birth control might cause? Why should anybody spring for condoms, if birth control could be this simple? Since there isn't much potential for profit, nobody is funding this research, and some people even speculate that there is a concerted effort to block such research.

It's kind of interesting to speculate about a world in which men would be primarily responsible for birth control. Imagine if men could no longer blame a woman for missing a pill, or could no longer claim they were "tricked" into being the father of somebody's baby. Imagine if women weren't the ones expected to bear the weight of pregnancy-prevention, and if men lost their ability to whine that women get all the choices. (Which is funny, in and of itself...we "get" to face the choice between 9 months of pregnancy followed by agonizing labor, or getting an abortion.) I think the sexual politics of our society would change quite a bit.

YES PUT MEN BACK IN CONTROLL :sniper:

Hmm, I always thought men wore the condom during sex. And with this male birth control business, not trying to be too lewd here but would we still "shoot" when we came? Cause if not it feels alot better when you ejaculate than when you dont. Again, sorry if this is way to graphic for some of our readers out there.

Why not?

I think it would be better if there were a monthly male version than if it has to be for 6 months or several years - just in case a couple decides during that time that they want to start trying.

However, although I am not male, my boyfriend has made it very clear that, were there a male bcp on the market, he would be taking it. In truth, since it would not be 100% either, I'd probably stay on mine and he'd take his up until we're ready to have kids.

Hmm, I always thought men wore the condom during sex. And with this male birth control business, not trying to be too lewd here but would we still "shoot" when we came? Cause if not it feels alot better when you ejaculate than when you dont. Again, sorry if this is way to graphic for some of our readers out there.
As far as I understand it, yes -- it would just change the chemical balance inside the urethra to kill or make the sperm less potent.

Hmm, I always thought men wore the condom during sex. And with this male birth control business, not trying to be too lewd here but would we still "shoot" when we came? Cause if not it feels alot better when you ejaculate than when you dont. Again, sorry if this is way to graphic for some of our readers out there.
Well, the man puts on the condom, but both partners are making use of it (if you know what I mean). By male contraception, I was refering to measures, like the female Pill, that the male would take independently.

As for your technical question, it's a good one. As far as I know, there is no male contraceptive being studied that directly prevents a man from ejaculating. The two measures I described would simply make it so that no active sperm was in the semen; you would still ejaculate, but it would not be able to lead to pregnancy.

One of the reasons that hormone-based male contraception isn't as good an idea as female contraception is that the necessary hormone imbalance tends to muck with male physiology a lot more. In particular, sexual experience can become problematic if we muck with male hormones enough to inactivate sperm or sperm production...men sometimes have trouble achieving erections in the first place, and will sometimes also have trouble ejaculating as well. This is why research is turning to other possible options. Men might never have their own version of The Pill because hormone contraception might simply not be as good an option for men, but that doesn't mean a male contraceptive measure can't be developed. The two examples I gave are possible avenues for such contraception, though neither has been proven to work safely and effectively in human males (yet).

Hmm, I always thought men wore the condom during sex. And with this male birth control business, not trying to be too lewd here but would we still "shoot" when we came? Cause if not it feels alot better when you ejaculate than when you dont. Again, sorry if this is way to graphic for some of our readers out there.
errr.....correct me if I'm wrong, but the pill for females doesn't stop them from ovulating either

Well, the man puts on the condom, but both partners are making use of it (if you know what I mean). By male contraception, I was refering to measures, like the female Pill, that the male would take independently.

As for your technical question, it's a good one. As far as I know, there is no male contraceptive being studied that in any way prevents a man from ejaculating. The two measures I described would simply make it so that no active sperm was in the semen; you would still ejaculate, but it would not be able to lead to pregnancy.

One of the reasons that hormone-based male contraception isn't as good an idea as female contraception is that hormone imbalance tends to muck with the male sexual experience a lot more...men sometimes have trouble achieving erections in the first place, and will sometimes also have trouble ejaculating as well. This is why research is turning to other possible options. Men might never have their own version of The Pill because hormone contraception might simply not be as good an option for men, but that doesn't mean a male contraceptive measure can't be developed. The two examples I gave are possible avenues for such contraception, though neither has been proven to work safely and effectively in human males (yet).

Hm, sounds fine then. I really dont see a reason why people WOULDNT want to do this. If it makes things easier on the woman then I guess thats all for the better, right?

So basically, we want to prevent male pregnency?
Is it -- in any way -- related to gay marriages?

Oh.

There's also research going on at my university that is trying to develop a drug that would target the flagella on sperm. Those are the little tails that sperm use to swim up and reach the egg, and if we could target the tails then the sperm would be unable to get to the egg in the first place. This could a great option, since it could (possibly) target only sperm that have already been manufactured...a man could resume normal sperm production within a couple of weeks if he simply stopped taking the medication. In theory, of course...they're working on rats right now, and I don't know when--if ever-- they might be ready for human trials.

There's also research going on at my university that is trying to develop a drug that would target the flagella on sperm.
You're making meiosis cry.

Abso-freaking-lutely. I'd pay through the nose.

If a male form of The Pill were available, or another form of male contraception that was as reliable and safe as female contraceptive measures currently are, would you take it? If not, why not?

Considering that female birth control has been shown to cause cancer, no.

Hm, sounds fine then. I really dont see a reason why people WOULDNT want to do this. If it makes things easier on the woman then I guess thats all for the better, right?
That's what I thought, but I broached the subject with a male friend recently and was very surprised by his negative reaction. He felt that his sperm were important, in a way that he couldn't fully articulate, and was strongly opposed to any measures that would damage his sperm.

He's a very progressive and intelligent fellow, so I was confused by his response. I thought maybe this was something I simply cannot understand because I am female (and thus have never had sperm), so I brought the question here to see what other guys have to say. Since this forum is annonymous, I figure guys can be a little more open and direct about how they feel...you don't have to feel like there's a big pack of chicks staring at you and just itching to call you sexist pigs and throw drinks in your face :).

Considering that female birth control has been shown to cause cancer, no.
Um, no, it hasn't. Women who take birth control are more likely to be diagnosed with a certain form of cancer, but research has not established that the birth control is what causes the cancer.

errr.....correct me if I'm wrong, but the pill for females doesn't stop them from ovulating either

That's exactly what most of them do.

If a male form of The Pill were available, or another form of male contraception that was as reliable and safe as female contraceptive measures currently are, would you take it?

Vasectomy is more reliable and safer than female contraceptive measures.

It is far more reliable than the Pill.

I love my vasectomy. It gives me great peace of mind.

Manly, yes - but my wife likes it, too.

He felt that his sperm were important, in a way that he couldn't fully articulate, and was strongly opposed to any measures that would damage his sperm. All together now: "Every sperm is sacred…" ;)

And no, my answer to the poll is "no way".

So basically, we want to prevent male pregnency?
Is it -- in any way -- related to gay marriages?

Oh.

Yeah. All those men getting pregnant is horrible. :rolleyes:

No, I wouldn't take it. Why? I dunno... I guess because I already have to take other kinds of medication for things like acid reflux disease, and I always worry about how differnet drugs will react with each other and what side effects will be created.

errr.....correct me if I'm wrong, but the pill for females doesn't stop them from ovulating either

Actually, that's pretty much exactly what it is supposed to do.

Considering that female birth control has been shown to cause cancer, no.

Incidence of one form of cancer has risen, yes. Incidence of other forms of cancer has decreased. No direct link to either has been proven although anecdotal evidence certainly exists.

Back to the original question: I imagine my husband would probably take this, but it would in no way stop me from taking the same precautions against pregnancy I already take. I don't want to get pregnant, I'm responsible to do evertything I can not to get pregnant. He doesn't want to make me pregnant, he's responsible to do everything he can to not make me pregnant. I think it just creates a lot of redundancy. Both partners are now on "birth control."

Note: No connotation is implied with redundancy. I don't think redundancy (in this situation) is in any way a bad thing.

That's exactly what most of them do.
I never paid attention during that part of biology :p

That's what I thought, but I broached the subject with a male friend recently and was very surprised by his negative reaction. He felt that his sperm were important, in a way that he couldn't fully articulate, and was strongly opposed to any measures that would damage his sperm.

He's a very progressive and intelligent fellow, so I was confused by his response. I thought maybe this was something I simply cannot understand because I am female (and thus have never had sperm), so I brought the question here to see what other guys have to say. Since this forum is annonymous, I figure guys can be a little more open and direct about how they feel...you don't have to feel like there's a big pack of chicks staring at you and just itching to call you sexist pigs and throw drinks in your face :).

Technically a true anonymous forum is something like 4chan (dont ask PLEASE dont ask) but thats besides the point. But my whole view with this is if you're in a relationship with someone you love but neither of you want to have children yet but the female isnt comfortable with birth control then there should be as many options open. But of course if the child is the product of a one night stand then the dude should have used a condom, and if the female decides to carry the child to birth then it is the males reponsibility to pay child support. (it is the law you know) And for me im kinda indifferent about my sperm, I mean if we really cared about it so much why would we waste it? i.e. masturbation, sorry if im getting to graphic here, but every guy does it and if he deny's it hes a damn liar. Ask your male friend this and see what his response is. ;)

I never paid attention during that part of biology :p

Wasnt that the fun part? ;)

Um, no, it hasn't. Women who take birth control are more likely to be diagnosed with a certain form of cancer, but research has not established that the birth control is what causes the cancer.
....what? People who take birth control are more likely to be diagnosed with a certain form of cancer but birth control hasn't been linked to be the cause. Wouldn't things like that be how they test what causes what?

Ihatevacations']....what? People who take birth control are more likely to be diagnosed with a certain form of cancer but birth control hasn't been linked to be the cause. Wouldn't things like that be how they test what causes what?

No. At the moment it is a correlation. Unless they find a pathway by which birth control actually causes the cancer, it is a risk factor - not a cause.

Interestingly, other risk factors seem to be more important in this case.

And, like she said, there is some evidence that it actually may help protect against other cancers.

I think the real problem would be that any male version of birth control would likely require yearly check-ups, just like the bcp does. Statistically, men are less likely to go for check-ups.

Vasectomy is more reliable and safer than female contraceptive measures.

It is far more reliable than the Pill.

I love my vasectomy. It gives me great peace of mind.

Manly, yes - but my wife likes it, too.

And before I remarried, when I was dating, I didn't tell women I had a vasectomy.

There was one woman who tried to say that she was pregnant and that it was mine. Nice try.

The peace of mind is incredible.

Birth control causes so many problems life's simpler without it. :)

*waits for the inevitable*

Ihatevacations']....what? People who take birth control are more likely to be diagnosed with a certain form of cancer but birth control hasn't been linked to be the cause. Wouldn't things like that be how they test what causes what?

There are thousands of factors which could be involved. They have yet to come to any conclusive evidence pointing to oral contraceptives.

One theory is that the declining birth rate is actually the problem. More modern women are choosing to remain childless than ever before. A link (still unproven) has been demonstrated that women who have not been pregnant are more likely to certain forms of cancer. Theories suggest that the hormones present during pregnancy in some way protect the body. Some doctors are suggesting that women take their hormonal contraceptives year-round without using the "sugar pills" which stimulate their periods. This (chemically) simulates a pregnancy. Doctors believe this will offer women the "protection" pregnancy has seemingly provided.

If these doctors are right, the birth control pill is not the issue. It's the fact that women are not having the same number of full-term pregnancies. If that is the case, chemically simulating pregnancy may ward off cancer, and villianizing oral contraceptives is ridiculous.

Medical research is working on the links; don't be so quick to draw conclusions. Concurrency doesn't establish cause; precedence doesn't establish cause; succession doesn't establish cause. They are all logical fallacies.

The peace of mind is incredible.

It does fail, you know. ;) Something like 1 in a Million. :eek:

Birth control causes so many problems life's simpler without it. :)

*waits for the inevitable*
If "the inevitable" refers to somebody going "huh?" then let me be the one to do it.

Huh?

I've used birth control for almost a decade, and I started taking it long before I was considering having sex. In addition to eliminating the concern of pregnancy--which is a farking huge potential problem, in my opinion--it also stabilizes my anemic condition, keeps my skin from doing that gross oily thing that lots of women get around their period, and serves as an encouragement for me to get regular pelvic exams (my doctor won't give me more than a year of refills unless I schedule a pelvic). I honestly can't think of a single problem it CREATES, except the relatively minor cost of the medication. I'm honestly curious about what you see as the problems created by BC.

One theory is that the declining birth rate is actually the problem. More modern women are choosing to remain childless than ever before. A link (still unproven) has been demonstrated that women who have not been pregnant are more likely to certain forms of cancer. Theories suggest that the hormones present during pregnancy in some way protect the body. Some doctors are suggesting that women take their hormonal contraceptives year-round without using the "sugar pills" which stimulate their periods. This (chemically) simulates a pregnancy. Doctors believe this will offer women the "protection" pregnancy has seemingly provided.

Of course, missed periods contribute to all sorts of problems, like osteoporosis.

Also, not having periods would build up a thicker and thicker endometrial lining, thus increasing chances of cancer, HPV, and other problems.

((Meanwhile, the sugar pills don't stimulate anything. You would have the same effect without taking them at all. They are just reminders so that you don't forget when you restart your pack. It is the loss of the high level of hormones that stimulates the period.)

It does fail, you know. ;) Something like 1 in a Million. :eek:

I was tested several times over several months following the operation. Then again a year later, and one final time two years after.

Once you're past the two year mark, still showing zero - it's zero.

If it's going to grow back, and then fail, it's going to do it in the first year or so.

It also fails if you immediately go right after the operation and try it out. It takes a few weeks to have the count drop to zero.

keeps my skin from doing that gross oily thing that lots of women get around their period :eek: Please, please, don't elaborate!

Doesn't BC also mess up hormone imbalances and stuff? Sorry if that's wrong, it's just that I've never bothered to ever find out about contraceptives.

Of course, missed periods contribute to all sorts of problems, like osteoporosis.

Also, not having periods would build up a thicker and thicker endometrial lining, thus increasing chances of cancer, HPV, and other problems.


Both risks yet unproven from what I remember. It has been a while since I've been in any kind of research -- and I haven't fully kept up on my reading, so I could be mistaken.


((Meanwhile, the sugar pills don't stimulate anything. You would have the same effect without taking them at all. They are just reminders so that you don't forget when you restart your pack. It is the loss of the high level of hormones that stimulates the period.)

Yep. Bad word choice. What I actually meant to describe was to go on to the next month's pills without any "off-week" of sugar pills or no pills at all.

:eek: Please, please, don't elaborate!

Doesn't BC also mess up hormone imbalances and stuff? Sorry if that's wrong, it's just that I've never bothered to ever find out about contraceptives.

BC actually corrects many hormone imbalances and other pathologies. For instance, women with endymetriosis will almost definitely have to have a hysterectomy long before menopause. However, if they are on the pill (at least until they want to have children), their periods (which are are absolutely freaking horrible) are lighter, their cramps (which are damn near unbearable for some women - a friend of mine had more vomitting in any given month than most people do in a bad case of a stomach virus) are lessened, and they can actually wait longer before having a hysterectomy - thus increasing the time they have to have children.

In truth, one of the main uses of BC is to correct hormone imbalances. It gets those who are very irregular onto a regular menstruation cycle.

I was tested several times over several months following the operation. Then again a year later, and one final time two years after.

Once you're past the two year mark, still showing zero - it's zero.

If it's going to grow back, and then fail, it's going to do it in the first year or so.

It also fails if you immediately go right after the operation and try it out. It takes a few weeks to have the count drop to zero.

I really was just kidding. Just being a smart-alek.

:eek: Please, please, don't elaborate!

Doesn't BC also mess up hormone imbalances and stuff? Sorry if that's wrong, it's just that I've never bothered to ever find out about contraceptives.

Vasectomies don't bother your hormones, or cause any long term problems at all.

Vasectomies don't bother your hormones, or cause any long term problems at all. Unless you decide to have kids later on…
… I'm not going to go into why I don't like birth control (for the purposes of birth control, that is. Have no problem with it used as correcting whatnot).

Okely-dokely peoples.

While this sure seems like a nifty-wifty idea, and gosh-gall-darnit I'm all for the menfolk standing up to do their part, I have another question:


If some guy took you home from the Library for some Bible Study, are you womenfolk going to believe him when there's no prophylactics about and says "Well,that's OK... I'm on the pill! .................... Really!!!"?




I mean, trust your neighbour like the Goodly Book suggests.... but is HE the one at risky-wisky when you're all super-duper excited after a looooong chaty-watty about the Immaculate Conception?


I think this is more of an option for established, lovey-dovey couples. Not so much for the single folks.

Both risks yet unproven from what I remember. It has been a while since I've been in any kind of research -- and I haven't fully kept up on my reading, so I could be mistaken.

Those risks have just as much backing as the link to cancer. Thus, there would be no valid reason for saying "Hey, we think this might get rid of your risk factor for this one disease, but there is evidence that it would give you a risk factor for several more."

If some guy took you home from the Library for some Bible Study, are you womenfolk going to believe him when there's no prophylactics about and says "Well,that's OK... I'm on the pill! .................... Really!!!"?

I mean, trust your neighbour like the Goodly Book suggests.... but is HE the one at risky-wisky when you're all super-duper excited after a looooong chaty-watty about the Immaculate Conception?

I think this is more of an option for established, lovey-dovey couples. Not so much for the single folks.

In truth, I would hope that most women would insist on a condom in that situation anyways - even if they did believe him. If you aren't in a long-term relationship, condoms should be an absolute must, as you don't know where that other person has been - so to speak. None of these forms of birth control would stop the spread of disease.

For instance, women with endymetriosis will almost definitely have to have a hysterectomy long before menopause. However, if they are on the pill (at least until they want to have children), their periods (which are are absolutely freaking horrible) are lighter, their cramps (which are damn near unbearable for some women - a friend of mine had more vomitting in any given month than most people do in a bad case of a stomach virus) are lessened, and they can actually wait longer before having a hysterectomy - thus increasing the time they have to have children.

All women and most definitely are gross exaggerations. Many women live (un)comfortably with endometriosis -- and hysterectomy is indicated only for a very small portion of them.

BCP is one of the first treatments, followed by courses of other hormones, though. Endometriosis is not an infertility sentence despite what one sometimes hears; many women with endometriosis find that they have little or no difficulty getting pregnant. Most sufferers find that after having a child (whether getting pregnant was difficult or not) that their symptoms are much reduced; some report feeling "normal" for the first time in their lives...

Not to get off topic, but there's no reason to overstate and cause panic. ;)

All women and most definitely are gross exaggerations. Many women live (un)comfortably with endometriosis -- and hysterectomy is indicated only for a very small portion of them.

I didn't say all women. And I am well aware that women live with endometriosis. However, the longer they live with it, the more likely it becomes that hysterectomy will be indicated.

BCP is one of the first treatments, followed by courses of other hormones, though. Endometriosis is not an infertility sentence despite what one sometimes hears; many women with endometriosis find that they have little or no difficulty getting pregnant. Most sufferers find that after having a child (whether getting pregnant was difficult or not) that their symptoms are much reduced; some report feeling "normal" for the first time in their lives...

I never said it was an infertility sentence. However, women with it who are on the pill until they wish to have children have a better chance of being able to get pregnant later (if necessary). And yes, it does seem that the best treatment for endometriosis is a pregnancy. LOL.

Not to get off topic, but there's no reason to overstate and cause panic. ;)

I wasn't causing panic, and any overstatement was unintentional. I was simply pointing out a use for bcp that has nothing to do with birth control.

condom is better for men. leave wusses to pills. i mean, most people want to shout it to the rooftops that their not a virgin so its not a bad thing when a condom splits. i mean lets face it, people always say that they'll only get layed when they have a proper relationship but end up having an urge when they're 16. so, basically no, condoms feel and work better

Unless you decide to have kids later on…
… I'm not going to go into why I don't like birth control (for the purposes of birth control, that is. Have no problem with it used as correcting whatnot).

It can be reversed as well. The reversal rate is not 100 percent, but it's pretty good.

You can also have semen frozen before the operation.

Okely-dokely peoples.

While this sure seems like a nifty-wifty idea, and gosh-gall-darnit I'm all for the menfolk standing up to do their part, I have another question:


If some guy took you home from the Library for some Bible Study, are you womenfolk going to believe him when there's no prophylactics about and says "Well,that's OK... I'm on the pill! .................... Really!!!"?




I mean, trust your neighbour like the Goodly Book suggests.... but is HE the one at risky-wisky when you're all super-duper excited after a looooong chaty-watty about the Immaculate Conception?


I think this is more of an option for established, lovey-dovey couples. Not so much for the single folks.

shut up you prat. :mad:

P.S that is a very good ned flanders impression. :D

condom is better for men. leave wusses to pills.

Not all men like wearing condoms. I don't.


i mean, most people want to shout it to the rooftops that their not a virgin so its not a bad thing when a condom splits.

I don't know what point you were trying to make, but saying a broken condom is a good thing negates the purpose of the condom altogether.

i mean lets face it, people always say that they'll only get layed when they have a proper relationship but end up having an urge when they're 16. so, basically no, condoms feel and work better

It boils down to personal preference. When my ex and I were having sex, I never wore a condom. I also have very good self control, and I never once 'did my thing' inside her. She wasn't a big fan of condoms either, to her it felt better without it.

For instance, women with endymetriosis will almost definitely have to have a hysterectomy long before menopause.

I read this (and likely many people read this) as having endometriosis means you will have to have a hysterectomy. I apologize for misunderstanding you, but this is why I responded.

I read this (and likely many people read this) as having endometriosis means you will have to have a hysterectomy. I apologize for misunderstanding you, but this is why I responded.

No, it was definitely unclear - and I'm glad you corrected it. Gave me a chance to clarify =)

P.S that is a very good ned flanders impression. :D



What "impression"?


Gosh darn it! It's me!

:eek: Please, please, don't elaborate!

Am I the only one who's noticed this? Some girls/women get oily looking skin around "that time," though most of them learn to deal with it using skin care or make up or something...I don't really know, to be honest, but women always seem to find ways to look slammin'.


Doesn't BC also mess up hormone imbalances and stuff? Sorry if that's wrong, it's just that I've never bothered to ever find out about contraceptives.
The Pill does alter hormone levels, but it's a matter of perspective if it's "messing them up." Some women feel like they are better off when on birth control, but some feel less comfortable. This is probably because not all women experience the same hormone flux. For myself, I've been on birth control pretty much since puberty kicked off, so I don't really know how it feels to not be on birth control...maybe somebody else has a bit more personal perspective on that.

It can be reversed as well. The reversal rate is not 100 percent, but it's pretty good.

You can also have semen frozen before the operation.
I've got a guy friend who had a vasectomy at age 25, after putting several sperm samples on ice for the future. He does want to be a father some day, but he said he doesn't ever want to worry about becoming a daddy by accident...he wants any child of his to be 100% intentional :).

YES PUT MEN BACK IN CONTROLL :sniper:


nice first post there.....lol

i'd be willing if my partner asked me to.

"That's why I'm a Protestant!... I can walk right up to a Chemist and stand tall and say "Give me a condom!".... (and this from Python's fav. poofter... ;) )

Tho it's sort of moot since I had a snip-job done 10 years ago... :rolleyes:

Tho it's sort of moot since I had a snip-job done 10 years ago... :rolleyes:


ow...im so sorry. done willingly? if so thats not so bad

ow...im so sorry. done willingly? if so thats not so bad
Yes. I have a few congenital issues I am lothe to pass on. If I (and my wife - similar issues but her surgery would cost more...) want a kid bad enough, we'll lease one from the government. If it works out, we might even buy... :D

There are plenty of messed up kids out there with no strong parentals who need help. Who am I to selfishly want "one of my own" when it it likely to be medically F'ed up and there are so many who need good homes? :headbang:

Foster Kids need homes too. :fluffle:

Yes. I have a few congenital issues I am lothe to pass on. If I (and my wife - similar issues but her surgery would cost more...) want a kid bad enough, we'll lease one from the government. If it works out, we might even buy... :D

There are plenty of messed up kids out there with no strong parentals who need help. Who am I to selfishly want "one of my own" when it it likely to be medically F'ed up and there are so many who need good homes? :headbang:

Foster Kids need homes too. :fluffle:
Wow, you (and your wife) rock. Hope you find a kid worth leasing :).

Wow, you (and your wife) rock. Hope you find a kid worth leasing :). :blush: Thank you. We're very practical people.

But we have to get my wife's BiPolar/Psychosis under control enough for her to handle psychologicaly messed up kids first. I'm not sure if it will happen, but it might. We've got plenty of time and the world won't run out of Foster Kids (sadly).

(since she's not watching...)

On the flip side, being clipped makes having "dangerous liaisons" much less dangerous... :p [JK]

:blush: Thank you. We're very practical people.

And, unfortunately, that is a rare and precious trait...


But we have to get my wife's BiPolar/Psychosis under control enough for her to handle psychologicaly messed up kids first. I'm not sure if it will happen, but it might. We've got plenty of time and the world won't run out of Foster Kids (sadly).

Yeah, I hear that. I've got some medical problems as well, and I figure that I need to sort out my own shizzle before I even remotely consider the notion of possibly helping in some way to be involved in the rearing of a human child.

I've no real interest in having kids, personally, but my partner is desperate to be a daddy...I figure that if he's willing to let me get a puppy, I'll let him bring home a kid. We can race to see who can house-break their pet first!

Okay, I was mostly kidding about that.


(since she's not watching...)

On the flip side, being clipped makes having "dangerous liaisons" much less dangerous... :p [JK]
Seriously, though, I would think there would be interest in male birth control for pretty much that reason...whether or not I approve, there are many fellows who would like to be able to fool around without worrying that one of their partners will come down with an acute case of baby-in-tummy.

If "the inevitable" refers to somebody going "huh?" then let me be the one to do it.

Huh?

I've used birth control for almost a decade, and I started taking it long before I was considering having sex. In addition to eliminating the concern of pregnancy--which is a farking huge potential problem, in my opinion--it also stabilizes my anemic condition, keeps my skin from doing that gross oily thing that lots of women get around their period, and serves as an encouragement for me to get regular pelvic exams (my doctor won't give me more than a year of refills unless I schedule a pelvic). I honestly can't think of a single problem it CREATES, except the relatively minor cost of the medication. I'm honestly curious about what you see as the problems created by BC.

*Actually amazed a forum about birthcontrol popped up just when she was getting scared of it* I'm getting female brithcontrol pills.....my mom insists...

Would you like to know the problems I am oh so terrified by?

1.) I happen to have extreme cases of emotional disorders in my family tree....birth control with either cure this problem of mine.....or itensify it to the point where i'd rather die then take more pills.

2.) Birth Control has been generally shown to decrease sexual drive, frustrating both partners.

I'm also concerned about taking female hormones...i'm tomboyish and the last thing i want to do is act more femanin...*sweatdrop* I know it's not likely...but i"ve heard cases of hormones being prescribed for girls not interested in girl things....

*Actually amazed a forum about birthcontrol popped up just when she was getting scared of it* I'm getting female brithcontrol pills.....my mom insists...

Would you like to know the problems I am oh so terrified by?

I might be able to address some of your concerns...


1.) I happen to have extreme cases of emotional disorders in my family tree....birth control with either cure this problem of mine.....or itensify it to the point where i'd rather die then take more pills.

I've got a major history of clinical depression in my family, and I've found that birth control has had no significant impact on my own depression. Indeed, when I was first diagnosed with depression my psychologist suggested that I try going off birth control during our initial assessment so that we could try some medications without worrying about drug interactions, and I felt that my depression got a little worse without the birth control. I felt like I experienced a larger range of mood swings, and that the birth control kind of helped even me out. That was just a brief personal experience, though, and I wouldn't presume to generalize those effects to other people.

Now, you may be different, so you should make sure you have a very good psychologist or psychiatrist who can help you monitor your medication and progress. If you really feel that the birth control pills are causing you problems, don't hesitate to speak up!


2.) Birth Control has been generally shown to decrease sexual drive, frustrating both partners.

Depends on the birth control. If sexual side effects are a concern for you, then speak to your doctor. There are several options available that have few if any sexual side effects...I'm using one such form right now, and if my sex drive is decreased then I haven't noticed ;).


I'm also concerned about taking female hormones...i'm tomboyish and the last thing i want to do is act more femanin...*sweatdrop* I know it's not likely...but i"ve heard cases of hormones being prescribed for girls not interested in girl things....
That one I can promise will not be an issue. Birth control pills will NOT make you "girly." I'm a tomboy too, always have been, and birth control has had no impact whatsoever on that. The hormone therapies sometimes used to make girls more girly (usually they are actually applied to intersexed individuals or persons undergoing sex change) are very very very different from birth control hormones. You will NOT become a girly girl just because you went on the Pill.

Wow, you (and your wife) rock. Hope you find a kid worth leasing :).

I completly and totally agree ^_^ I myself am adopted...

:blush: Thank you. We're very practical people.

But we have to get my wife's BiPolar/Psychosis under control enough for her to handle psychologicaly messed up kids first. I'm not sure if it will happen, but it might. We've got plenty of time and the world won't run out of Foster Kids (sadly).

(since she's not watching...)

On the flip side, being clipped makes having "dangerous liaisons" much less dangerous... :p [JK]


Your wife's BiPolar? *nods sadly* My birth mother was BiPolar and schizophrenic..., that's why she had to get rid of me...apparantly she was in and out of mental instituitions all her life...I'm not diagnosed with anything, but that's mainly because I avoid doctors because of a severe phobia of them.....

I might be able to address some of your concerns...


I've got a major history of clinical depression in my family, and I've found that birth control has had no significant impact on my own depression. Indeed, when I was first diagnosed with depression my psychologist suggested that I try going off birth control during our initial assessment so that we could try some medications without worrying about drug interactions, and I felt that my depression got a little worse without the birth control. I felt like I experienced a larger range of mood swings, and that the birth control kind of helped even me out. That was just a brief personal experience, though, and I wouldn't presume to generalize those effects to other people.

Now, you may be different, so you should make sure you have a very good psychologist or psychiatrist who can help you monitor your medication and progress. If you really feel that the birth control pills are causing you problems, don't hesitate to speak up!


Depends on the birth control. If sexual side effects are a concern for you, then speak to your doctor. There are several options available that have few if any sexual side effects...I'm using one such form right now, and if my sex drive is decreased then I haven't noticed ;).


That one I can promise will not be an issue. Birth control pills will NOT make you "girly." I'm a tomboy too, always have been, and birth control has had no impact whatsoever on that. The hormone therapies sometimes used to make girls more girly (usually they are actually applied to intersexed individuals or persons undergoing sex change) are very very very different from birth control hormones. You will NOT become a girly girl just because you went on the Pill.


*relieved* You don't know how much you helped me ^_^ I kept reading horror stories online...... You are my personal Bob now.... I had been close to tears with worry -.-

Yes. I have a few congenital issues I am lothe to pass on. If I (and my wife - similar issues but her surgery would cost more...) want a kid bad enough, we'll lease one from the government. If it works out, we might even buy... :D

There are plenty of messed up kids out there with no strong parentals who need help. Who am I to selfishly want "one of my own" when it it likely to be medically F'ed up and there are so many who need good homes? :headbang:

Foster Kids need homes too. :fluffle:

I agree with you completely. There are plenty of children who need homes. Why add to the population when you can adopt? Especially, in my case. I don't want to pass on migraines, fibromyalsia and other things that a biological child may end up with. I wouldn't take a chance of having a child who has to go through that.

I have no congenital issues that I know of (unless being British counts). I have one healthy and happy son, and I have had a vasectomy, so yes I would take the pill but I actually don't need to, so I won't. How should I vote?

I completly and totally agree ^_^ I myself am adopted...
Your wife's BiPolar? *nods sadly* My birth mother was BiPolar and schizophrenic..., that's why she had to get rid of me...apparantly she was in and out of mental instituitions all her life...I'm not diagnosed with anything, but that's mainly because I avoid doctors because of a severe phobia of them.....
Please, please, please do NOT be afraid of doctors. While there are a few Psychs who should be on Treatment themselves, NOT seeing one when you NEED one is unbelieveably painful for you and everyone else.

As the child of an Inpatient, you MUST MUST MUST be very aware of your moods/mood swings. DON'T be afraid to tell people who are around you who can watch out for you. Schitzoaffective disorders can pop up with a quickness and you won't even know you are in a Doom Spiral.

Oh, and BTW, your mother did NOT "get rid of you", she ensured you were here to post on NS... somthing she was likely not able to do in any other way. Laud her for her incredibly difficult decision.

Take your pills according to your Doctor. You'll be fine.

Hugs.

I have no congenital issues that I know of (unless being British counts). I have one healthy and happy son, and I have had a vasectomy, so yes I would take the pill but I actually don't need to, so I won't. How should I vote?
Vote YES because you DID...

Please, please, please do NOT be afraid of doctors. While there are a few Psychs who should be on Treatment themselves, NOT seeing one when you NEED one is unbelieveably painful for you and everyone else.

As the child of an Inpatient, you MUST MUST MUST be very aware of your moods/mood swings. DON'T be afraid to tell people who are around you who can watch out for you. Schitzoaffective disorders can pop up with a quickness and you won't even know you are in a Doom Spiral.

Oh, and BTW, your mother did NOT "get rid of you", she ensured you were here to post on NS... somthing she was likely not able to do in any other way. Laud her for her incredibly difficult decision.

Take your pills according to your Doctor. You'll be fine.

Hugs.

*considers* I suppose you might be right...recently i've gone to college for the first time....found out to my dismay that I react to the extreme stress of a very difficult school and a very difficult major by going catotonic schizophrenic for short periods of time...-.-;; Luckily I have someone I love very dearly by my side with similar problems who knows how to comfort me untill I recover....but....yeah.... Medicine scares me.... Yeah, I know she didn't get rid of me...it was a poor word choice...

Considering that female birth control has been shown to cause cancer, no.


My five cents:
Everything causes cancer. For all we know toilet seats are the problem.....

While I was reading I noticed an interesting topic shift...it went from our feelings on male birth control, to the side effects of female birth control. Nice. I think its a great idea..male birth control that is, I would definitely pay for it.

As to concerns about birth control decreasing a woman's sex drive, I would have to say that in my experience it does not. My ex was kind of a nymph when we got together, and I think she got worse after she was on the pill...but you don't hear me complaining ;)

I was bored...reading through the posts and had to add my two cents..

*considers* I suppose you might be right...recently i've gone to college for the first time....found out to my dismay that I react to the extreme stress of a very difficult school and a very difficult major by going catotonic schizophrenic for short periods of time...-.-;; Luckily I have someone I love very dearly by my side with similar problems who knows how to comfort me untill I recover....but....yeah.... Medicine scares me.... Yeah, I know she didn't get rid of me...it was a poor word choice...
(alarm bells...) My wife first "manifested" in college... though she had mood problems from high school. Please be very cautious - and speak with a Uni health representative.

A word of advice: Stress and hormones make Bipolar/Schitzoaffective worse. Take life easy. Don't go all Type AAA at school and try to get a double major or somthing. Take enough classes to stay full time and/or healthy and THAT'S ALL. Nothing F's up a college education like a month in a psych ward...

Medicine should not be scary. If you need it, you need it. THe daily meds that keep my wife stable would knock most people out for days. Her body needs it to be healthy. It's really no different than insulin.

If you are in a major metropolitan area in the US, look up NAMI (the national alliance for the mentally ill)and see if you can get into the "Family to Family" program. It is an evening educational group of family members of people diagnosed with mental illness. It is NOT "therapy". It is a class for people learning how to cope with the idea of a mentally ill family member. You qualify. Interestingly enough, most family members ALSO end up needing some sort of help, usually anti-depressant treatment, because of the stress. It's no big deal.

TG me or Bitchkitten if you have particular concerns. :)

@FlamingChickens

Take Syniks' advice please and go talk to a specialist. My wife manifested with a full blown depressive crisis (monopolar depression in her case) at 24 while in the fifth year of an architects degree. It nearly wrecked her life. If she had gone and spoken to professionals about how she was feeling earlier the crisis could have been avoided.

She is now a PhD, and co ordinator of a leading post graduate program here. But she has to take medicine every day. This has not caused her a problem it has solved her problem.

*relieved* You don't know how much you helped me ^_^ I kept reading horror stories online...... You are my personal Bob now.... I had been close to tears with worry -.-
:( Man, I'm sorry to hear this subject has been bothering you so much. If you (or anybody else) have more questions about birth control you can feel free to telegram me. I'm not a medical doctor or a nurse, but I've used birth control for many years and I have volunteered at free clinics like Planned Parenthood for quite some time. I'm always willing to help people become more informed about their options when it comes to family planning...in my ideal universe, every pregnancy would be planned and wanted!

I also am very informed on the subject of antidepressants and other psychoactive drugs, because I am currently working toward my PhD in neuroscience. Again, I don't pretend to have anything close to a medical doctor's qualifications, but I can usually fill in some of the blanks in what the average person understands about psychoactive medication. It's my field, so I love chatting about it, and will do my best to answer any and all questions :).