Remote Controlled Birth Control for Men

[lindajdunn]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1774

Quotes from the article:

Vasectomies could be a thing of the past thanks to a remotecontrolled implant that can stop the flow of sperm.

Men who change their minds about having children would then simply point the remote handset at their testicles and press a button to open up the valve.

So how many men and women are going to trust this? And how many of you see the potential humor here with fights over the remote control? Off/on/off/on/off/on...?

[JackOfHearts]

Meh, I dunno... Having a little on/off switch sounds like a convenient idea, but there are a number of things, human stupidity and absent-mindedness for example, that could render it null. I think that's going a bit far in any case...

[Fencergrl]

ROFLMAO.... A birth control method for men using a remote control. How perfect is that???

Not that I wouldn't trust him. I could see him using the 'mote to switch the darn thing and he ends up changing the channel on the TV.

[needle]

Taking it to absurd, the next "obvious" steps would be fidelity enforcement devices - remote-controlled erection enabler for men, and remote controlled embedded chastitiy belt for women.
Of course, both would have to be secured against hacking ... which means that the phrase "I've got a headache" can finally be replaced with "I forgot the password"

[parrythis]

I cannot view the article because my company's stupid firewall found an offensive (to it) phrase in it. So my $.02 are without benefit of reading the story.

This concept is not a new one. There have been devices that contain a valve that can be inserted into the man's Vas deferens. The idea is that the valve is normally turned off but when the decision has been made to have children, the valve is opened so the couple can procreate. If I recall correctly, they were never popular and there may have been an issue with the man's body deciding that if it couldn't get rid of the sperm, it would go ahead and destroy them all, thus rendering the man permanently sterile. I'm not sure if that's true or not.

I once had a college professor who suggested that human beings should be rendered sterile at birth with a reversible operation. Then, when the decision to procreate has been made, the operation would be reversed.

Interesting concept. The idea is that the decision to procreate is not one that should be made lightly, or, in this case, at the press of a button. I think I agree.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!


Organized feminists have been claiming, quite strongly, that power over female reproductive decisions should solely rest with women. Considering that, how can anyone who agrees with that position consider letting anyone else than the man in question having the remote - without being a total hypocrite?

That said, if it works one might consider a program where teenage guys are paid a pretty penny if they consent to having one of those operated in, and the sole remote in custody of the hospital until some set date a few years down the line.
Easy money for the teenage guy, both taxpayers and teenage gals have to worry about unwanted pregnancies much less.

How about scaling up the device a bit, and putting it into the cervix? Once the woman´s period is over, she pushes the "open" button on the remote, and bleeds out all in one go - no dragging it out for 5-7 days! I am not an ob/gyn by training, so there might be flaws to this idea that I am not aware of. YMMV.


Do continue eating your dinner.

Peter Gustafsson

[Zilverzmurfen]

This idea is just too silly for words. Have men eat birth control pills the way most women do.

You can argue both benefits and downsides of this solution. It has positive effects and it has begative effects. Perhaps for the next upcoming decades it's the men's turn to eat hormone pills..?

[MyrddinsPrecint]

How about scaling up the device a bit, and putting it into the cervix? Once the woman´s period is over, she pushes the "open" button on the remote, and bleeds out all in one go - no dragging it out for 5-7 days! I am not an ob/gyn by training, so there might be flaws to this idea that I am not aware of. YMMV.

There are devices that work sort of on that idea-- although it's more of an every day kind of thing (depending on flow)--

http://divacup.com/

[Go? Fencing?]

There are devices that work sort of on that idea-- although it's more of an every day kind of thing (depending on flow)--

http://divacup.com/

I have one; I much prefer it to anything else I've tried.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

I have one; I much prefer it to anything else I've tried.

I wholeheartedly agree.

[Warrior Princess]

Hi!
How about scaling up the device a bit, and putting it into the cervix? Once the woman´s period is over, she pushes the "open" button on the remote, and bleeds out all in one go - no dragging it out for 5-7 days! I am not an ob/gyn by training, so there might be flaws to this idea that I am not aware of. YMMV.


Do continue eating your dinner.

Peter Gustafsson

Ummm... Toxic Shock Syndrome.

[Warrior Princess]

I like the idea of men taking pills too. Its stressful (the Pill). The side affects can be bad if you get them, sometimes you can't get the prescription in time, sometimes (VERY INFREQUENTLY) you forget.

[Gav]

I like the idea of men taking pills too. Its stressful (the Pill). The side affects can be bad if you get them, sometimes you can't get the prescription in time, sometimes (VERY INFREQUENTLY) you forget.

Pills for men have been tried and discarded. They can have pretty bad side effects; they are also generally ineffective.

Just use a condom.

Anyway... would any female seriously trust a guy who said "it's ok I am on the pill"?

[Zilverzmurfen]

They can have pretty bad side effects; they are also generally ineffective.

Pills for women too can have pretty bad side effects. If the pills for men were 'generally ineffective' then perhaps they were not strong enough.

I'm ranting, of course. Seriously though, let's just face it -- experimenting with hormones isn't generally a good thing.

[Gav]

Pills for women too can have pretty bad side effects. If the pills for men were 'generally ineffective' then perhaps they were not strong enough.

ZZ - I never said there wasn't any problem with the female pill...

Generally speaking the biggest issue is one of effectiveness. Oh - and perhaps laziness.

I'm ranting, of course. Seriously though, let's just face it -- experimenting with hormones isn't generally a good thing.

Yes. I am not convinced that a heterosexual woman would really want a chemically castrated man in bed. YMMV.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Pills for women too can have pretty bad side effects. If the pills for men were 'generally ineffective' then perhaps they were not strong enough.

Well there is a difference. You produce one viable gamete each month, we produce 10´s of millions in a day (according to wikipedia, normal sp*rm should contain at least 40 million spermatozoa in each pop).

While researching this post, I came across the following gem:

Research has demonstrated that s*men may have anti-depressant properties. In studies, women who did not use condoms but instead absorbed s*men v*ginally (as was the norm among humans before the HIV scare) sustained a better mood. Research has not yet demonstrated whether this effect may also be obtained from drinking s*men following oral s*x, but researchers hypothesize similar benefits.

A new explanation of the word gay?


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[RkfdFencer]

Microsoft used to ask "Where do you want to go today?" Peter, that's not the place I wanted to go. But, since we are there, wouldn't it be the activity to acquire the specimen be the anti-depressant? As long as it's done correctly at least. :grin:

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

Microsoft used to ask "Where do you want to go today?" Peter, that's not the place I wanted to go. But, since we are there, wouldn't it be the activity to acquire the specimen be the anti-depressant? As long as it's done correctly at least. :grin:

Without breaking your neck, that is.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Fencergrl]

Yes. I am not convinced that a heterosexual woman would really want a chemically castrated man in bed. YMMV.

When I was dating... I preferred men with a vasectomy over men without. According to these men, I wasn't the only one with this preference. It's nice to not have to worry about birth control issues. The nice thing about a pill, is that it is more easily reversible.

And before someone else points this out.... yes condoms were used until each person had a chance to get a clean bill of health from their docs.

[Fencergrl]

wouldn't it be the activity to acquire the specimen be the anti-depressant? As long as it's done correctly at least. :grin:

You have a point actually, sex in itself raises the chemicals in your body that makes you feel good... a natural anti-depressant. So I suppose the study is saying the women who absorbed the semen got an extra boost of anti-depressant.