• Saff@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Hopefully it less hormonal side affects than the female pill. But yeah having an extra level of protection will be nice.

      • Norgur@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        “Extra Level”? It’s more about taking the burden off the women for me. Why do they, and only they, always have to mess up their bodies?

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              They’re 100% effective, the only reason there said to be 99% effective is to prevent lawsuits from people using then incorrectly.

              • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I’m a human, I can make mistakes in the heat of the moment. I’ve had friend couples I know get pregnant even though they’re “professional condom putters onners”.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  It’s not the condom’s fault if you make a mistake. Condom material doesn’t let sperm through, it’s that simple, it’s been used incorrectly if it did. Companies don’t want to lose time and money with lawsuits hence 99%.

                  Also, anecdotal evidence while you weren’t in bed with them isn’t much of a proof, it’s as valid as me telling you I’ve never got any girl pregnant even when we weren’t using any protection therefore pulling out is 100% effective.

        • Saff@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Obviously it depends on the relationship and how risk averse you both are. But yeah why not both? Seems like a pretty good way to be really sure!

        • AEsheron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          The hippocratic oath, in this case. Medicine is all about risk management, the worse the “disease,” the more tolerant we are of side effects for the cure. Pregnancy and birth are still pretty traumatic events that, while much safer than they used to be, are still dangerous. Female BC just has to be less risky than that. Male BC on the other hand, has to be as low the risk for a man impregnating a woman, which is to say, almost zero. Pretty much any negative side effect is worse than that, so it’s very difficult to pass. I would gladly take one with comparable side effects to female BC, but sometimes unflinching ethics are inconvenient. Better than the alternative, but still.

          • Norgur@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The Hippocratic oath is not a thing in most countries and not applicable anyway. If it was, kidney transplants would be done without a doctor present (in the US that is, don’t overestimate your little made up oath ritual internationally)

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          we can finally share the load and mess up everyone because of not affording babies!

  • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I find it strange that many people here are against this when the alternative is a surgical treatment that often can’t be easily reversed, and even when it is, often lowers the likelihood they will have a kid.

    Chemical solutions are way better in that regard because if they are done right they don’t damage any tissue and their affects are temporary.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I’m not against it but you’d have to be crazy to trust a guy who doesn’t want to use a condom because he swears he’s on the pill. It seems like it opens up a wild new avenue for sexual assault.

      The reality is that the consequences of sex are asymmetric. I suppose this is an interesting option for couples in a relationship though.

      • Brownian Motion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        asymmetric?

        Like you’ve ever trusted a woman that has said “It’s okay, I’m on the pill” first time you hit the sheets?

  • Spaceballstheusername@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’ve heard of a male birth control every couple years and still nothing on the market. Usually it’s because there are slight side effects and that’s considered to much of a risk meanwhile female birth control can cause blood clots and whatnot. I’m too jaded to believe this will ever come to fruition.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      How was the recovery process? I keep meaning to do it (we’re done having kids), but we keep having trips or whatever, so excuses pile up.

      How soon could I be back doing active things? I have young kids, so “active” to me means roughhousing with the kids and whatnot.

      • TheIllustrativeMan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        My recovery was honestly pretty bad. I was bed-ridden for about 2 weeks, then 8-ish months of aching pain all day every day. Not actually sure when it finally cleared up, I just realized I hadn’t felt the pain in a while. My first nut was about a month after the procedure, and that was also a very unpleasant experience.

        My case is abnormal, but even more rare is the guys that continue to be in pain for the rest of their lives. Didn’t find out about that until I started digging deeper because of my persistent pain.

        That said, I still 100% recommend getting it done.

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          but even more rare is the guys that continue to be in pain for the rest of their lives

          EVEN AFTER REVERSING THE PROCEDURE

          Look, it’s SUPER rare. We still drive cars even though, using my state of California as an example, eight of us die on the roads every day.

          But…

          I could never forgive myself if my groin hurt thirty years from now because of a singular & highly-optional decision I made today.

          Same with LASIK - some have dry eyes forever afterwards. Nooooooo

        • TK420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Mine was rough too, about 6 months before I was normal.

          Not a single fucking regret

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The Caveat is that it is permanent and irreversible for the average person with very few exceptions.

      EDIT: added “for the average person”

      • cro_magnon_gilf@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Another caveat is that it’s not allowed for men under 25 in my country (Sweden). “My body - my choice” only applies to one gender lol

        edit: Although, to be fair, sterilisation is also not allowed for women under 25. They do ofc have many more options though

  • PPQ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ha jokes on them, the plastic in my balls is permanently shutting of my sperm!

  • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    the first trials for this resulted in men becoming sterile and then killing themselves.

    And then a bunch of female comedians made fun of them for “being a little moody”

    • Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The point of the joke is not that they think men are being babies about it. It is that women’s birth control causes these same side effects, along with strokes, and a number of other serious, long term issues. However when women say they do not want to take birth control, and instead opt for doing things that require more responsibility of the man, they are often told similar things concerning the negative effects they get when using it, and they should just deal with it.

        • twig@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          That is actually not true. Not downplaying the significance of these effects, but…

          In the 60s and 70s a large number of planned parenthood clinics were in low-income and predominantly black neighbourhoods, aimed at reducing the number of black babies.

          In the same era birth control (more appropriately termed eugenics) programs forcibly sterilized black and indigenous women. Where it was presented as an option, the consequence for not following through on these doctor’s “recommendations,” were threats to withhold healthcare or public assistance. The statistics through the 60s and 70s were that roughly 1 in 4 indigenous women were non-consenually sterilized.

          But also, yeah, the results of this trial are fucked and people are right to be skeptical of this drug.

  • humdrumgentleman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Friendly reminder of the core problem: medical treatments are all balanced against the risk of what it counteracts.

    Undergoing physical and chemical changes to grow another creature inside you and have it damage everything on the way out is pretty risky. Female birth control only has to be less risky than that.

    A male has zero physiological risk from impregnating someone. Therefore, anything except a miracle drug with high efficacy and almost zero side effects is going to stall at the trial stage.

    On another note, that speaks to how safe and effective vasectomies are.

        • rudyharrelson@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Not that guy, but I have one kid who I love to bits. Got a vasectomy when he was 2 years old cause we would explode if we had a second kid, lol. One is enough for us. We’ve been incredibly fortunate so we decided we didn’t need any more surprises.

          The doc who did mine was a military vet who went into urology after serving. I remember reading the pamphlet on the operation and it said the vasectomy only took 15 minutes. I asked him, “It only takes 15 minutes??” and he responded, “Eight.”

          I like a good speedrun as much as the next guy, but I told him to take his sweet time lol. Ain’t in no rush, doc.

          Recovery was super chill. Couldn’t roughhouse with my son for a week or two, and that’s about it. I’ve got some fun titanium clamps chilling in my junk now, so that’s fun. I’m basically Wolverine.

      • HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Yeah zero psychological risk is a bit of an overstatement. Zero physical maybe, but there’s definitely psychological risks, and I’m not even thinking about child support

        Edit: I can’t read, it says physiological and I’m just deficient in the reading

      • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        No one likes a raunchy coochie/schlong

        Untrue. There are some people that specifically seek that, along with the STDs called “bug chasers.” Since I’ve been cursed with this knowledge, so must you all be.

      • cro_magnon_gilf@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Honestly, I think condoms are unrealistic. Fucking with a condom is so totally useless that you almost feel a bit resentful of the woman after. Like she has bad minge or something. The first time I had sex I was a good boy and used a condom and I just quit after a while, and sat down and wondered what the fuck was wrong. She thought I’d finished.

        Saying “wear a rubber” is stupid. For a lot of people, sex with a condom is completely useless. I’ll wear one the first time with a woman as I ofc want to get imtimate, but the sex itself will be useless.

        • frankspurplewings@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          If you aren’t creative enough to get off, then sex with you is probably useless too. 🤷🏼‍♀️

          But lame ass roasting aside, being responsible during sex is important. Being able to communicate your wants and needs is absolutely necessary. I’ll tell you that I also hated condoms during sex, but it took being with my partner about six months before I felt comfortable enough to bring up a discussion about having sex without condoms. We then talked about the risks of accidental pregnancy, STDs, and my hormones and birth control. In the long term, the time period we used condoms was worth it because we learned each other’s bodies, as well as each other’s personalities. Once we did move to sex without condoms, it was sooooo much better, but we also were better communicators and the sex was wayyy more fun.

          You have to be willing to put in the time and effort and trust that leads to a real connection first.

          • cro_magnon_gilf@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            If you aren’t creative enough to get off, then sex with you is probably useless too. 🤷🏼‍♀️

            But lame ass roasting aside

            Not gonna pretend that I don’t deserve it, or that I’m very polite either, but beginning every response with an insult is not some clever ‘roasting’.

            I don’t agree with you that it should take half a year of learning your partner for sex to be good. If you’re attentive and interested in getting your partner off, then you can do that the first time, or certainly atleast in a shorter time than that. But it’s going to differ between different people ofc.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Safe, cheap, permanent but trivially reversible male birth control was invented in 1979 and has yet to be approved for US sale.

      • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Probably talking about RISUG, although the US equivalent is Vasagel.

        Basically Vasagel plugs up the Vas Deferens so sperm can’t get out, and RISUG rips sperm to shreds as they come out. It lasts for 10 years, and is reversible with a shot of baking soda.

        RISUG is approved in India (where it was developed), and Vasagel is being developed by a foundation instead of a pharmaceutical company, so progress has been slow.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It does not plug up the vas deferens. One of the (many) advantages RISUG has over vasectomy is that it doesn’t block material from flowing through the vas deferens, and hence avoids the complications from that aspect of vasectomy.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        RISUG is a technique by which a polymer with specific electrical properties is injected into the vas deferens. This polymer messes up the flagella on sperm that pass nearby. Since “nearby” is a distance larger than the radius of the vas deferens, this means all sperm passing through get their flagellum screwed up, can no longer swim, and is therefore immotile.

        It makes the man essentially sterile, until he wants to reverse the effect at which point a second injection simply washes the original polymer layer off the inner lining.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Oh, I’m way ahead of them there, with 44 years of shitty diet and lifestyle choices.

  • 3volver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Male self control breakthrough keeps their dick in their pants and don’t have sex for a while. Try it some time, it’s fantastic.

  • DaddysLittleSlut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Hahahaaa I’m just waiting for Plan A honestly. It’s a 10 year injection that is 100% effective. With blocking sperm but allowing everything else.