I had trouble till (hormonal) IUD, would never discount the side effects of most birth control available to women - copper IUD nearly killed me with hemorrhage, and pills raised my blood pressure, anything that went inside me (diaphragm, etc) either gave me yeast infection or bladder infection, so many of the methods seem designed to punish women for wanting sex without pregnancy.
But I’d think guys would love condoms because it’s the only reversible birth control they can control themselves.
Condoms can reduce sensitivity, but I don’t understand the hate. Is sex for some people some kind of race to see who can cum first? Try taking your time and enjoy it.
If you can’t cum with a condom on, maybe the problem isn’t the condom? Get your blood pressure checked. One of the first things I noticed when I started having issue with high blood pressure, was that the extra BP created a bit of extra “hardness”, but also reduced my sensitivity.
But I’d think guys would love condoms because it’s the only reversible birth control they can control themselves.
Yeah, what’s with that? Why are there dozens of different birth control options for women, and men have exactly condoms, permanent sterilization and nothing else?
You’d think there would be some kind of decent male birth control by now. It’s been 65 years since the first hormonal birth control for women was released. It’s been more than enough time to get something decent done for men too.
Why are there dozens of different birth control options for women, and men have exactly condoms, permanent sterilization and nothing else?
Because only the female body has a built-in ‘fertility off’ mode (pregnancy) that pharmacopoeia can manipulate. The most effective contraceptive methods we have all depend on tricking the female body into thinking it’s pregnant when it isn’t. The reason women have so many options is simply because there are a lot of different ways to accomplish that ‘trickery’, pharmaceutically. Women also only have one real barrier method, the diaphragm. It’s even shittier than condoms, re efficacy.
Those are just the biological facts of the matter. It’s not some sinister scheme to pass the buck from men to women. The above is exacerbated by the simple fact that it’s about stopping one egg a month versus stopping millions of constantly-created sperm.
Edit: This is what Wikipedia has to say on that topic:
Despite this, pharmaceutical companies are reluctant to lose market share of a thriving global market for female contraceptives and condoms which bring billions of dollars of revenue each year. Initially, RISUG attracted some interest from pharmaceutical companies. However, considering that RISUG is an inexpensive, one-time procedure, manufacturers retracted.
It’s one of those things that’s beneficial but not profitable (like the postal service), and therefore a ‘service’ that the government should be providing with tax revenue, imo.
so many of the methods seem designed to punish women for wanting sex without pregnancy.
Yes, that’s right, the people inventing these contraceptives were all huddled in a room twirling their misogyny mustaches, discussing “okay, we’re going to make this thing that prevents pregnancy, but we have to MAKE SURE it has unpleasant side effects, these women must be punished!”
Please.
But I’d think guys would love condoms because it’s the only reversible birth control they can control themselves.
Guys do like that, but not as much as they dislike the fact that it makes sex a lot less pleasurable, which is the primary reason they want to have sex in the first place. That’s why a lot of guys, like me, would rather just not have sex with a woman, if the only ‘safe’ (re both STIs and pregnancy) way to have sex with her, is with a condom on.
I had trouble till (hormonal) IUD, would never discount the side effects of most birth control available to women - copper IUD nearly killed me with hemorrhage, and pills raised my blood pressure, anything that went inside me (diaphragm, etc) either gave me yeast infection or bladder infection, so many of the methods seem designed to punish women for wanting sex without pregnancy.
But I’d think guys would love condoms because it’s the only reversible birth control they can control themselves.
Condoms can reduce sensitivity, but I don’t understand the hate. Is sex for some people some kind of race to see who can cum first? Try taking your time and enjoy it.
If you can’t cum with a condom on, maybe the problem isn’t the condom? Get your blood pressure checked. One of the first things I noticed when I started having issue with high blood pressure, was that the extra BP created a bit of extra “hardness”, but also reduced my sensitivity.
Yeah, what’s with that? Why are there dozens of different birth control options for women, and men have exactly condoms, permanent sterilization and nothing else?
You’d think there would be some kind of decent male birth control by now. It’s been 65 years since the first hormonal birth control for women was released. It’s been more than enough time to get something decent done for men too.
Because only the female body has a built-in ‘fertility off’ mode (pregnancy) that pharmacopoeia can manipulate. The most effective contraceptive methods we have all depend on tricking the female body into thinking it’s pregnant when it isn’t. The reason women have so many options is simply because there are a lot of different ways to accomplish that ‘trickery’, pharmaceutically. Women also only have one real barrier method, the diaphragm. It’s even shittier than condoms, re efficacy.
Those are just the biological facts of the matter. It’s not some sinister scheme to pass the buck from men to women. The above is exacerbated by the simple fact that it’s about stopping one egg a month versus stopping millions of constantly-created sperm.
There’s been various methods for blocking sperm from travelling down the vas deferens that managed to get through studies and then just got dropped.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vas-occlusive_contraception
Edit: This is what Wikipedia has to say on that topic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_inhibition_of_sperm_under_guidance
That kind of procedure would wipe out most of the contraceptive industry. And of course that can’t be allowed.
It’s one of those things that’s beneficial but not profitable (like the postal service), and therefore a ‘service’ that the government should be providing with tax revenue, imo.
deleted by creator
Yes, that’s right, the people inventing these contraceptives were all huddled in a room twirling their misogyny mustaches, discussing “okay, we’re going to make this thing that prevents pregnancy, but we have to MAKE SURE it has unpleasant side effects, these women must be punished!”
Please.
Guys do like that, but not as much as they dislike the fact that it makes sex a lot less pleasurable, which is the primary reason they want to have sex in the first place. That’s why a lot of guys, like me, would rather just not have sex with a woman, if the only ‘safe’ (re both STIs and pregnancy) way to have sex with her, is with a condom on.