What i've i've read about the male pill suggests that it is actually made up of a couple of hormone injections, not one pill and surprise surprise, there are side effects. Apparently, they are even having trouble getting men to participate in the test studies. So as nice as it sounds to you ladies (and, frankly to some men, would that it were safe and effective, without major complications) to be able to pass off birth control to men, i wouldn't hold my breath.

And quite frankly, the male bc pill would only be as good as the memory or dedication of the male who takes it. If a mistake is made, it is still the woman who gets pregnant.

I would rather see a way of using bc after you have sex. Why be on hormones for the entire month if sex is a couple of times a week? Makes no sense. Long term medication is just not desirable for anything. It would be better to not interfere with hormones but just prevent a possibly fertilized egg from attaching after sex.

Maybe it really is something akin to emergency birth control?

Last spring I was rushed to the hospital with chest pain and was soon diagnosed with pulmonary embolus; or blood clots in the lungs. The life threatening condition was attributed to my being on birth control (I am a non-smoker). After a stint in the hospital I am now fully recovered with a new determination to pay more attention to what I put into my body. Birth control has certainly revolutionized the modern woman, however I'd urge those on birth control and those considering it to think about the possible effects of tinkering with the body's natural hormones.. I sure got a wake up call.

Unfortunately that's what works. There may be reason to hope that there will be interventions that are more specifically targeted to be discovered. On the other hand maybe the fundies are right, at least about heterosexual sex, i.e nobody other than prospective parents should have it. It wouldn't be the first time the right and the feminist left have had the potential, at least, for common ground.

The problem with the Pill is not that it has side effects; there are so many different Pills that if you shop around a lot you will probably find one with side effects you can tolerate. The problem is that doctors don't really seem to understand what the side effects are. It took me close to a year of wanting to kill myself before I figured out that it was Ortho-Cyclen doing it; no gynecologist had ever warned me that depression was a possible side effect of the Pill, and the psychiatrist asked me what other meds I was on but never mentioned that the Pill could be causing my problems. And I have a bachelor's degree in psychobiology with a specific strong interest in women's issues. If *I* didn't know, how many women don't know and are never going to find out?

There are probably a number of women who cannot tolerate the Pill at all, in any form, and it's fine for them to go with other forms of BC, and they should have as many options as possible (did sponges ever come back?) But I think if more women understood the range of possible side effects any given Pill might have, and that other Pills will have entirely different effects, they would be less likely to go, "I'm getting fat! Screw this, I'm making my guy wear condoms!" and swear off the Pill entirely because one Pill in particular had side effects they couldn't tolerate.

Calm, rational understanding is the key. Neither shrill anti-Pill hysteria nor the opposite extreme of mindless Pill cheerleading does women any good. And I've seen too many women (and too many gynecologists) do one or the other.

The illegitimacy rate will drop to ZERO if a contraceptive method men control that allows natural sex is ever developed.

...but I agree, it would be a fantastic boon to men if reliable male contraception that didn't change the way sex feels was available.

Unfortunately reliable *female* contraception that doesn't change the way sex feels is only available to some women, due to various reactions to the Pill including possible loss of libido. Contraception that men would be comfortable with is sadly a long way off, I fear.

It doesn't help that while it is a greater strain on a person's life to pay child support for 18 years than to have an abortion, the choice between having an abortion (which are getting harder and harder to get) or having an unwanted pregnancy is a visceral, immediate, real fear for women, whereas men don't seem to think about the child support issue before they have sex nearly as much as women think about the pregnancy issue. Men seem to be perpetually blindsided by unwanted fatherhood, moreso than women by unwanted motherhood. Something happening to your body in the next nine months is just a more profound fear than something happening to your wallet for 18 years, even though logically the second one could end up being worse.

I look forward to the day when all people, men and women, have total control over their own personal reproduction, and no baby is ever conceived unless both parents have chosen to do it or unless there has been an extremely rare failure of *two* separate means of contraception at the same time. What a wonderful world it would be if all pregnancies were wanted by both partners. Sadly, it's not going to happen any time soon, but we can dream.

Lets face it until men get pregnant there will be no birth control pill for men.

the responsibility can be extended.

and they just assume, I think, that no woman who doesn't REALLY WANT to be a parent would ever allow herself to become one if the had the means to prvent it. obviously this assumption is based on their own feelings and not on an objective analysis of reality. to most men the idea of making a conscious decision to allow themselves to become a parent (when they know they will really have to be one!) under anything less than almost ideal conditions is hard to understand,