[DISCUSSION] Would you feel comfortable using a male contraceptive medication?

As comfortable as I'd be with a woman taking contraceptives. None are completely safe and there haven't been nearly enough studies on their effects (particularly the mental health implications).

Just because there hasn't been enough study on men's birth control, doesn't mean we put the burden of contraceptives on women alone.

I just want to add to the conversation that part of the reason why male contraceptives haven't been approved yet isn't all because men are shying away from the burden of side effects from contraceptives. It's because of how risk evaluations for medications in development work. The risk of pregnancy is severe pain, permanent scarring, death, and a myriad of post partum conditions that can become chronic. When women take contraceptives, they are averting themselves of this risk. When men take contraceptives, they are generally not averting themselves of any direct health risks (not including the consequences of fatherhood). It's also easier to prevent the release of one egg with certainty than stopping millions of sperm.

This is not to say that it's a good reason to let women suffer from side effects alone and deny men the option to take on the burden. This is just one of many systemic barriers in modern medicine that have been detrimental to women.
- I appreciate the discussion and absolutely agree with your points.

I use to inhale tobacco and ingest alcohol and eat at McDonalds. How much worse can those chemicals be.

Vasalgel sure looks like the ideal contraceptive - no side effects, long lasting, cheap, the surgery is as easy as taking a blood sample, and better that the hormonal pill in every way.

It's only problem is that it's still in the trials for 13 years and counting.

Dudes who refuse the idea of male contraceptive because it will harm their idea of masculinity are those you don't want to have children with anyway.

Can we distinguish men who don't consent to using contraception with men who basically worship tate and chauvinism?

I don't use them because I don't want them, and I don't owe anybody an explanation.

I think there's alot of men like me that don't wanna be lumped up with Andrew Tate.

They can steal part of my dick when I'm a baby but we still don't have ball valves? Just give me ball valves.

This is the based mindset. The double standard is real.
- Yes men all feel mocked when women are flashing their Fallopian tube valves.

A male contraceptive medication would have to work through a fundamentally different mechanism than female birth control, requiring changes to sperm or sperm production. I myself would be extremely skeptical until it had been on the market for a long period of time. This is less a skepticism of science and more of a skepticism of the pharmaceutical industry (particularly in the states).

Edit: After looking into the mechanisms of the up and coming methods (primarily hormonal) that have been in the news I think my conclusion was a little hasty. I think long term risks are likely very low or at least comparable to women's birth control.

In an imaginary and magical world where I actually get to have sex? Sure.

As a concept I would welcome a safe affordable male contraceptive and would use it if appropriate.

I would say that I would definitely evaluate the option very carefully. Especially in a committed relationship. Sometimes female birth control can bring benefits beyond just birth control, along with its drawbacks. My partner suffered from severe period cramps at a point in her life, where the birth control she used suppressed that. That said, it would actually be positive to have the option of a male contraceptive in a relationship. We share the pleasure and the responsibility. In the end, the safest option with the least side effects will probably win out. If that is a male contraceptive, so be it.

Outside of a committed relationship, condoms just makes more sense. I cannot imagine taking the risks associated with sex and not taking any precautions for it. Then again, my early 20s was spent in a country and area with a high prevalence of HIV, so not taking chances is ingrained due to that. It would also depend on just active a sex life we are dealing with.

People who want to take hormones typically used for contraception for their other effects still can do so. I know people who don't have sex at all or not with anyone who produces semen, who use contraceptives this way.

Absolutely. I’d much rather take this medication than use a conform. Assuming of course neither my sexual partner nor I had carried an STI.

most definitely.

but then again, I've had a vasectomy, so that already sort of indicates how far I'd go to avoid procreating.

yes, though pretty soon i'll be gettin the snips regardless

Short answer but absolutely, I'd jump at the chance.

Personally no

I like the trustworthyness of a condom

When it has an issue of effectiveness you usually can tell pretty quick

Whereas medication (at least in my experience) can suddenly stop being as effective due to your body building a tolerance, something you ate, an allergy forming that wasn't there before, etc.

Absolutely. It goes without saying that women's bc pills come with a myriad of side effects. They often have to try different options to find what works for them. I'd personally enter the market as soon as its available, but I'd prefer for several options to be approved so we can pivot if one particular pill doesn't agree with you. Until then, a good old fashioned condom is my best friend.

Probably not, I'd likely stick with condoms. Any male contraceptive medication would be too new to have any clear idea of whether it was safe. Even for women's contraceptives that have been around for decades, there are a ton of potential side effects and risks.

As one user already said, Vasalgel looked really promising. Waited for years for it. In the end, I got a vasectomy.

It was the only way I could control the means of my reproduction. Anxiety and stress during sex, and absolute panic during condom fail is not fun. If I could have taken a pill, I would have absolutely done that.

I think calling it male contraception would make it weird for me because i am not male/a man. Still, I would have definitely used in the past, but know i dont need it any more.

Why is that? As someone not a female/a woman, I never found "female contraception" to be a weird term. It always seemed like a useful term to bring attention to the fact that it is not applicable to my circumstances.

As the word male most commonly refers to those who produce motile gametes, which is what such a product seeks to impede in some way, semantically it is quite aptly named.

I take that, given that you mention it would have been useful in the past, that your gamete production facilities have been damaged in some way and you are still coming to terms with that?

Depends on the mechanism, but if it's anything like available female contraception than no.

There are other means besides hormonal ones. One of the methods currently being tested uses some kind of gel to block the vas deferens, the ducts that transport sperm away from the testicles. It's reversible too. And then there are temperature based methods. I'll add, to answer another poster, that condoms are really not a great method of contraception, because it relies so much on good practices on the user part every time you have sex. Were I a woman, I wouldn't trust a condom and use a another form of contraception anyway, though obviously it has other benefits, notably protecting from STIs. Personnally, I will certainly use male contraceptives once they become available. There's no reason this burden should rest on women's shoulders alone. Altough again, were I a woman, I'd need to really trust the man i'm having sex with before relying solely on his contraception to do the job, considering that i'd be the pregnant one if things go wrong.

In my opinion only condoms are necesarry, plus they never affect your health and prevent STDs. Even if I were a women, i wouldn't want to use contraceptive pills.