Would you take a male pill?

[Lord George]

It would only be useful in a long term relationship, I'll stick with good old fashioned condoms for now.

 

[bjj hero]

I love all the guys in here going 'No thanks, I don't want to mess with my hormones.' How many of you expect women to be on the pill? That's the exact same thing and it STINKS to have the status quo and go-to solution be a hormone-altering pill.

Just two cents from a female point of view.

As the jab is still in very early testing it could be that the side effects from the jab are slight. Some of the side effects from the pill can be serious.

At that point I will be getting jabbed for the sake of my partner.

I don't understand the view that "there is no point". If you are in a long term relationship and are ditching condoms then the more options the better. There is no more "I was trapped" into a baby. You have sole responsibility with the jab.

If you are single and whoring about then a safety net for the condom can't be a bad thing.

Take it from some one who was having casual sex (years ago now...) with a girl, the condom split and she wouldn't take the morning after pill as "it makes me feel sick" leaving it with "it will be alright". It was a long, long, two and a half weeks until her period arrived. Once I heard that good news I never spoke to her again. The girl was mental.

 

[axia777]

No. I like my hormones the way they are. I have known lots of women who were on the pill and most of them hated it. It did all kinds of crazy shit to their bodies.

I am just getting a vasectomy as I all ready have a kid. No more off spring for me. I will still use condoms because of STD's and shit, but I will never have to worry about one breaking.

 

[bigolbear]

simply put. no.

I dotn trust the medical profession enough to play with my hormones unless its necesary for my survival.

 

[vampirekid.13]

I can imagine a lot of drunken guys saying "Don't worry, I'm on the pill" at the end of the night, whether they are or not. This recent study suggests that women don't think men can be trusted with contraception [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/8221196.stm].

If a woman (or a man for that matter) thought that only using the pill was ok for random drunken sex then they can expect some fun STIs. Trusting strangers is daft

It sounds interesting, but it would need to get less stabby to be popular. Are guys really going to keep visiting doctors every two months even when they might not be having sex? Compared to a woman taking a pill once a day, bit of a difference

women have a 2 month option too, and a 5 yr option, and a few others too.

basically, if it was a pill i would, if its an injection i woudlnt.

 

[fudgebo]

whats wrong with each partner taking the pill? Doubly safe in my book

 

[Sparrow]

I'd love to know what the women say about this. As for me, I hate needles more than anything. guuhhh, needles.

Same.

Needles are so evil. They scare me with their pointyness.

 

[Mr_spamamam]

I'd take it. as for the trust issue, its no more trust than a bloke puts in a woman who says she is on the pill. For random sex however I prefer condoms, a male pill is nice, but ity wont stop herpes

 

[MoganFreeman]

Provided the side effects are minimal, abso-fucking-lutely would I take it.

And do you know what else? I would still continue to where a condom every time.

However, the crushing majority of the situations are all variations of "picked up random girl, we didn't feel like using a condom!"... Well, enjoy your AIDS, chlamydia, or whatever the fuck happened to be the "flavor of the week" then dumbass. Seriously, in these types of cases, it's a good thing. It's natural selection.

While I don't condone unprotected promiscuity, it's interesting that you should mention natural selection in your tirade against promiscuity, being as, strictly speaking, those folk you pigeonholed so vehemently are far more successful than you, evolutionarily speaking.

 

[Varchld]

I'd love to know what the women say about this. As for me, I hate needles more than anything. guuhhh, needles.

Same.

Needles are so evil. They scare me with their pointyness.

That's a great reason to accidently have a kid XD

 

[bjj hero]

I'd take it. as for the trust issue, its no more trust than a bloke puts in a woman who says she is on the pill. For random sex however I prefer condoms, a male pill is nice, but ity wont stop herpes

Condoms won't completely protect you from herpes either.

 

[Caliostro]

While I don't condone unprotected promiscuity, it's interesting that you should mention natural selection in your tirade against promiscuity, being as, strictly speaking, those folk you pigeonholed so vehemently are far more successful than you, evolutionarily speaking.

And that's why you should never make assumptions... Because you look stupid.

I'm not against "promiscuity" at all. I'm against stupidity. In this day and age, if you go around fucking everyone that moves and don't have the 2 functioning brain cells to consider using a condom with that person you met 20 minutes ago... You're just asking for it... You're in the same bin as people who play russian roulette.

And, strictly evolutionarily speaking, a kid that has a child at the age of 15 is also more successful than someone who hasn't. Fortunately I like to elude myself and pretend most of us are smarter than your average brain damaged monkey... Even if most really aren't...

PS: It's Morgan Freeman [http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000151/], with an "r".

 

[A Pious Cultist]

It really only makes sense in a commited relationship as a temporal replacement for a vasectomy. IMO at least.

You're right. Plus I can see alot of guys going with this since there is a certain stigma about being infertile, even if you arn't planning on having children.

 

[Mr_spamamam]

I'd take it. as for the trust issue, its no more trust than a bloke puts in a woman who says she is on the pill. For random sex however I prefer condoms, a male pill is nice, but ity wont stop herpes

Condoms won't completely protect you from herpes either.

You have a better chance of not contracting it than if you didnt wear a rubber at all

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Perhaps if the doctor issued a certificate saying you were 'done' for 2 months each time, and that might put paid to men lying about it, although it's depressing to think men would lie about such a thing, instead of getting a two monthly injecting or just slapping on the raincoat. It is sad but unsurprising that some men would risk disease and an unwanted pregnancy because they're too selfish to roll on a rubber.

Then again, I've never been a fan of pointless sex, I've had 'casual' sex I guess, but never with someone I didn't feel close to, and yes, I'm male. I don't demand deep meaningful love from every partner, but I can't do the whole one night stand thing.

I guess I see my own hand as a less risky partner is all, than some drunk or drugged up woman I just met in a nightclub.

Not trying to instil my own morality, just my opinion. I think in long term relationships however, giving the man a chance to take on the responsibility of contraception is a good thing, provided tests prove it safe and not messing with your body.

 

[Epitome]

Oh right, more needles that's exactly what we need now!. I can see how people will abuse that concept on a drunken night but more importantly how will the pill prevent the "acquisition" of STDs.

The male pill seems a bit blunt if you ask me. It's only supposed to work as a contraceptive device, however that's hardly a groundbreaking solution given there is something that can already do this plus a bit more..called a condom. See that's a contraceptive device that also solves the risk of spreading STDs.

It does not solve the risk, condoms are the least certain method of contraception after the rythem method lol

Where in the world did you pick that up from?. Sure, nothing is 100% with contraception but short of a vasectomy or female sterilisation the condom comes pretty close with it's effectiveness (about 90 to 98 per cent).

Also it is or was the most common contraceptive method used so I'm sure that most of the populace knew how to use it properly. Let's be honest, it's not very complicated: it's a roll of polyurethane mixed with lubricant and it comes with a how-to booklet as added instructions.

Besides, are you suggesting that people drunk, at 3am, with the lights off are more than likely to jab themselves in the arse with a needle as a contraceptive method?.

That effectiveness of 90%+ is under laboratory conditions though, its effectivenss falls with practcal usage, and i dont like something to controls birth to have an effectiveness of 90%, the pill etc are 99%+ so long as you take em on time, which just becomes routine after a while. The shot in the ass isnt everytime you have sex is it its once every two months. I think that its a good middle ground form the painful and harder to reverve vastecomy and the sometimes fails, uncomfortable condom.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

All I got from this is that needles are involved somehow with reproductive organs. That does not sound like anything I want to be a part of.

And I would DEFINITELY not EVER want to be in the testing group. Just imagine all that can go wrong at that early stage. *shudders*

 

[A random person]

In addition to issues of it working, not horribly screwing up your body/making your permanently sterile, and forgetfulness, condoms would be much better at stopping STD's. Because of that, I will prefer them.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Perhaps if the doctor issued a certificate saying you were 'done' for 2 months each time, and that might put paid to men lying about it, although it's depressing to think men would lie about such a thing, instead of getting a two monthly injecting or just slapping on the raincoat. It is sad but unsurprising that some men would risk disease and an unwanted pregnancy because they're too selfish to roll on a rubber.

Then again, I've never been a fan of pointless sex, I've had 'casual' sex I guess, but never with someone I didn't feel close to, and yes, I'm male. I don't demand deep meaningful love from every partner, but I can't do the whole one night stand thing.

I guess I see my own hand as a less risky partner is all, than some drunk or drugged up woman I just met in a nightclub.

Not trying to instil my own morality, just my opinion. I think in long term relationships however, giving the man a chance to take on the responsibility of contraception is a good thing, provided tests prove it safe and not messing with your body.

I think the doctor should have to sign a form stating that he/she will adopt your child in the event the birth control he/she gives you is ineffective. That might encourage more men to partake of this service.

 

[Woem]

All I got from this is that needles are involved somehow with reproductive organs. That does not sound like anything I want to be a part of.

And I would DEFINITELY not EVER want to be in the testing group. Just imagine all that can go wrong at that early stage. *shudders*

In early stages the testing would probably be done in seeing if the subject doesn't turn green or if he stopped growing beard or something along those lines.

And, again: double dutch.