We still don't have male birth control — but no, it's not because men are wimps

Article here. Excerpt:

'There’s a new study making the rounds about a seemingly effective male birth control. The hormonal injection, designed to slow or block sperm production, had a 96 percent success rate at preventing pregnancy among couples who completed the study.

There was just one problem, according to some media reports: The new method won't be available anytime soon because the men in the study were wimps. They couldn’t handle side effects — moodiness, acne — that women on birth control deal with all the time, and so the study had to be terminated.

"Male birth control study nixed after men can't handle side effects women face daily," read the USA Today headline. Similar stories appeared at the Atlantic and Cosmopolitan.

These stories are wrong and misleading.

The study was halted, but it wasn't because the men who participated in it were wimpy. It was halted because one of the two independent committees that were monitoring the trial's safety data was concerned about the high number of adverse events the men reported. And, yes, the rate of side effects in this study was higher than what women typically experience using hormonal birth control.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

the reports I have been reading also have the usual speel about how the drug companies quit testing because they don't see any potential profit$. 'men won't use it', and no potential profit$ from a potential market of up to 1/2 the adult population desperate for an answer? global warming II. faux science and bogus reporting. wonder what group could possibly NOT want men controlling their own future? or control what is reported? hmmm?

if a mbc ever does come to fruition (doubtful), of course laws will have to be made to insure married men don't deprive their wives of their right to have children. permission slips? legal doc's (prenups?). legal ramifications are always needed to insure some 'special' groups get their way.

don't say this group's name 3 times while looking in a mirror. horrible things will happen. oops, too late.

imho, warm, loving robot women could be the best answer. oh so many problems solved.

Like0 Dislike0

I've read a couple of articles by women on this and they all say the same thing: birth control is a burden for women.

I can understand that. I mean it must be horrible for a woman to actually have to take the pill. It's covered by insurance and it gives the woman control over her reproductive choices, but it's so unfair that the woman actually has to take the responsibility for taking the pill. How unfair. A woman actually having to take some responsibility.

Women will complain if they catch their sleeve in a gold vice.

I mean, if women can't handle the pill, how can a woman handle running the country?

Like0 Dislike0

I recall a convo w/ my brother about 8 years ago. I said I predicted we'd have self-driving cars rolling off production lines and in legal use in at least some states by 2020. He laughed at this and said no, the technology was a lot farther away than that, even with computing power doubling every 7 years (the old rule of thumb, which is not so much a rule anymore; more like every 3 years now).

Well, no one is laughing now. We *will* have street-legal self-driving cars by 2020 on at least some roads. There are already experimental models driving around no. Cali. Soon they will be in production for sale to ordinary people. The price will be steep at first but will come down fast.

On to android women: THE thing that is driving android robotics development is sexual surrogacy, period. Anyone who says otherwise is deluding him-/herself. We already have robots that are designed to do what they do: operate on factory lines, etc. They are built after that intended use: robotic arms that look little like human arms, etc. They fit the need.

There really is no practical need to create a robot android that looks, walks, talks, and acts like a human in most respects save one: sex. To care for the elderly? Japan is doing that already. The robots don't look too much like humans and that is b/c they do not have to. But a satisfying surrogate lover? That requires not just functioning of the robotic sexual areas, but the entire experience of being with someone intimately.

If the experience is replicated just 90% of the way, that'll be good enough. An exact replacement for humans as sex partners is not necessary, just a very close one. It is not men born and raised today that humanists need worry about. We have sex with women and know what it is like to do so and no doubt much prefer it over having sex in the abstract, at this point, with an android. The things that make sex an intimately pleasing experience are there because it's a core human function between 2 humans. The communication, movements, our bodily "imperfections", all make it a REAL experience. But with a sexbot, those get removed, or if they exist, they are programmed in. No, to create an actual real human replacement sex surrogate, the human mind *and* body will need to effectively be duplicated. I can only see bio-engineering a la the new BSG with the Cylon "skin jobs" hitting that sweet spot. I don't think we'll see that real soon but inevitably that is where development will take us.

But I kind of digress. The point I am on about is that it is not men raised with human females as sex partners that humanists need worry about; it's boys raised with sexbots in the home or even available somewhere that they should worry about. What'll happen when the first generation of first world men is raised from boyhood around and with access to sexbots? Will they even bother trying to form an actual relationship, even a FWB relationship, with actual human females? Remains to be seen. I do know this: if as a teenager I had had access to a life-like sexbot, I'd've been on it night and day! The poor machine would not have had a chance to get itself lubed and oiled, I'd've been on it so much. I can only imagine that the same is likely to happen to the first generation of boys with access to a realistic sexbot. THEN we'll have problems, because contrary to what feminists would have you believe, MRAs are not out to replace women with sexbots. We are out to redress injustices and wrongs dealt to men as a class. While some feminists do want to see males replaced or reduced to slavery, MRAs have no such intention. What we want is a true, comprehensive kind of equality, not the cafeteria equality that feminists espouse.

But markets are the mothers of invention. These realistic sexbots are only time away and not by that long. I foresee perhaps by 2040/2050, we will have very realistic sexbots available, as AI and materials science will have developed to match the demand. By 2050 though I will likely punch out so won't be on the buyer's list. Besides, I am rather fond of flesh and blood women and see no reason to trade them in for even life-like androids. I like my lovers alive, thank you very much. :)

Like0 Dislike0