Letters to the Editor
-
Does it come in a TiVo version?
Those crazy Australian scientists are always tinkering down under.
-
Every Serious Relationship Man's Dream Come True.
Sounds awesome, I want one. It's probably just a matter of clearing the pipes with a little alone time in the restroom after intercourse.
I am definitely going to do some more study on this.
It sounds like women would really like this one to, but I wonder how one could be certain if the valve is closed or not, and could a man prove that to a woman? I would not want to be mistaken on that one.
I knew eventually BC would be a matter of turning a switch on or off.
-
This would be much cooler if it were voice activated
Then it would be more like a sperm-based super power. "Sperm on! Sperm away!" And there could be fun changes of mind, like "No, no sperm off! Abort mission! Repeat, abort mission!"
-
wowsy wow wow
you mean we might be allowed to have some REAL power without sacrificing our pleasure or autonomy?
where does the line start?
-
PetBoy
The off and on position might RFID passively report the position of the switch if a radio signal producing device calls on it. Don't know if this would work in relity, I know to olittle about the technology, but in theory it sounds like it might.
-
Nefarious
Some women are out there to use men to get pregnant. This could deter women from doing this. An athlete or a singer is someone who could be a target and they could put a stop to that.
Sure, 'cause men are too stupid to use condoms. Or at least that guy is.
-
Harumph. Gimme the old school.
I had a vasectomy last summer, and except for a few seconds of mild-moderate pain, it was no big deal. I don't see why any guy would want a gizmo implanted into his unmentionables.
Well...a friend of mine who was both philosophically opposed to both marriage and having children (and who, perhaps not coincidentally, could not get a date) got a vasectomy just in case, and then much to his surprise actually, 1) met a woman, 2) married said woman, and 3) was convinced by said woman to have a kid. So, he had the procedure undone. It's not that the reverse vasectomy was necessarily painful, but it cost a boatload of money more than the original procedure.
Punchline: they got divorced a few years later.
-
Not sure this can work as many seem to think
After a vasectomy there is still the potential to ejaculate active sperm for some time. It is recommended to wait months and have two consecutive zero sperm count tests before relying on a vasectomy as a birth control method.
So it wouldn't be I wanna go out tonight, I need to get the valve closed!
-
OUCH, DurianJoe
Your anecdote is actually a really good argument for the device over a vasectomy. And vasectomies aren't always the painless walk in the park they are touted as being. I know people who've had painful complications. The possibility of painful complications with this device may, of course, be comparable.
But golly! An electronic IUD for men? I hope it works without serious side effects. Men in committed relationships need more birth control choices. (Obviously, if you're not monogamously married or otherwise monogamously committed, a condom is still the best idea for both sexes, as they prevent more than pregancy.)
-
Heh heh, Melthough.
Sorry to burst your sac, but from the article, I think this new-fangled vasectomy will hurt as much (or as little) as the old school version. In both cases you'll have to shave your goods -- which isn't painful, but it gets itchy on the far side (but hey, it's a legitimate excuse to scratch). Then in both cases, the doctor will have to inject a little anesthetic into your skin (yes, that skin) so that the small incision he makes won't hurt. And then -- and this is where the wee bit o' pain comes in -- he'll have to mess around inside your boys' club while doing the procedure. The pain comes from the inevitable bumping around of Laurel & Hardy as the doctor does his thing. Still, unless you've got a doctor who gets hit with a sudden case of jazz hands, it's not all that bad.
-
Seems like a good idea to me
I'll be waiting on the results of the tests. I've considered vasectomies before, but shied away on the "well, maybe someday we'll change our minds about kids" line of thought. A simpler reversal, assuming the success rate is very high, might make the difference.
After a vasectomy there is still the potential to ejaculate active sperm for some time. It is recommended to wait months and have two consecutive zero sperm count tests before relying on a vasectomy as a birth control method.
So it wouldn't be I wanna go out tonight, I need to get the valve closed!
I don't think there's as much confusion as you think. My understanding is that it's basically the same as a vasectomy, except that it could be reversed at the push of a button instead of a major, expensive, and potentially unsuccessful surgery. I don't think there's anyone who would want to continually switch on and off (well, maybe those in extra-marital affairs)...either you want a pregnancy, or you don't.
-
@ durian joe
"a friend of mine who was both philosophically opposed to both marriage and having children (and who, perhaps not coincidentally, could not get a date)"....
Hey, was your friend nicknamed Brightstar by any chance?
Seriously though, this idea has been around for a long time, though the "remote control" bit is new to me. So long ago, that the first device was called a "phaser" in a bit of homage to Star Trek.
As long as I've been around, I've read stuff about "some terrific new invention by scientists that will make male birth control possible", and back then I was a teen and now I'm in my 50s, and the only birth control for men is still CONDOMS, which were around in my granddad's era. So.....don't be holding your breath waiting for remote control vasectomy to be available at the drugstore any time soon.
As long as men (like, um let's say, BRIGHTSTAR) can seriously talk about the awful sacrifice of pleasure they have to make if they wear a condom, and while Salon is hip-deep in whiny guys who complain about women "stealing their sperm in order to force them to become dads against their will and pay seven-figure child support payments", we really will not have intelligent discourse on birth control or achieve the dream that Senator Clinton has articulated, where abortion is "legal but very rare".
Because we still have deal with assholes who think that bareback sex is their RIGHT, and that it's only women who have to worry about birth control and pregnancy and who have to do all the work of preventing it. At the same time, the same assholes want to be able to knock up girlfriends (or one-night stands), and then if they can't compel the woman to an abortion, they DEMAND THE GOD-GIVEN RIGHT to walk away scott-free from any children they father!!! because as we all know, it is an outrage to be forced to support your own children, when the stupid taxpayers will do it for free.
Want birth control? want to be child-free? want to keep all your hard earned money for yourself and not pay a dime in child support? My friend, your answer is at the drugstore -- a giant size pack of Trojans (or similar high quality brand) and the economy size tube of spermicide, and you have yourself a 99.9999% guaranty of sexual and economic freedom. The odds don't get better than that anywhere on this planet.
But don't sulk in your parent's basement, waiting for "Australian reversible vasectomies" or for a new social order that will let you abandon your children. It ain't gonna happen, at least not while you are young enough to benefit from it.