The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations
by Amanda Marcotte, RH Reality Check
February 12, 2008 - 8:53am (Print)
Since I can remember, we ("we" meaning the great collective of copulating Americans) have been promised that a male birth control pill is right around the corner. And for as long as I can remember, the lack of this pill on the market has caused a share of finger-pointing. It's understood that it's possible to develop such a pill, but not much incentive to provide the research money, because it's believed that men aren't interested in a birth control pill. To understand why men might not be that eager to take a birth control pill, we're left with a set of generalizations and stereotypes, many of which are unfair to a large percentage of men:
- Men think that only women can get pregnant, so unwanted pregnancy is a woman-only problem. This might be true for some men, but for a lot of men, probably most, the fear of an unwanted pregnancy haunts them as much as it does women. And unlike women, men lose control over the situation as soon as they get up out of bed. Good, decent men accept that this is only fair, but it does raise their incentives to make absolutely sure that it's taken care of ahead of time.
- Men exploit their privilege over women and assume that women should burden all the expense and risk and discomfort of contraception. In some cases, again, this is true enough. There are guys out there who automatically assume that women should be on the pill, even if any individual woman's body can't handle the effects of it. But to say that men don't have any relationship to sacrifice when it comes to contraception is to ignore the proliferation of the humble condom. Many, many men have embraced their duty to both buy and wear condoms, even if they feel it would be more fun to go without. If you could find a pill that was even less trouble than condoms, some of these men would probably snatch it up. Is that a market enough to put up money for research and development? Well, I'd ask Trojan, see if they've been making any money lately. (Answer: yes.)
- Men are careless idiots who can't be trusted to do anything right, and so it's pointless making something that requires them to keep a schedule. Ever notice how this sitcom stereotype doesn't stretch to include the main part of the day where both men and women have to be on the ball, keep their appointments, and just generally display responsibility? You know, work? We expect men to show up at their jobs every day on time and perform their responsibilities competently. But for some reason ("some" meaning sexism), the expectation that men be able to handle even simple domestic responsibilities like chores or contraception is deemed too much by many.
Well, I'm not having it. Many men are perfectly competent at swallowing a pill every day on time, and plenty of them have partners who trust them to do it. No reason to employ the soft bigotry of low expectations in this case.
Not that any of this means that I don't agree that the market for a male birth control pill might be small, but I don't think we have to slam men to arrive at that conclusion. No, I think it's that the burden of contraception use can already be evenly distributed between men and women in a huge percentage of cases, and that removes the need for a male birth control pill.
Here's the scenario that a number of men I've known have basically laid out for themselves with varying degrees of success: You're young and casually dating. During the periods of casual dating, you stick to condoms as contraception, so it's on you. If you get involved long-term with a woman, and you're both disease-free, you switch to pills. Go back and forth until you meet and settle down with your permanent partner. You have a couple of kids, or don't, but either way, you have no need for further fertility. At which point, you get a vasectomy.
In that scenario, men actually carry a fair share of the contraceptive burden already. Female sterilization is still more popular than vasectomy in this country, reflecting a widespread belief that even if it's more trouble for a woman to do so, the burden for birth control is solely on her shoulders. But a large number of men opt for vasectomy every year, realizing that if you consider the contraception burden a shared one, vasectomy is usually a better choice than tubal ligation, because it's more effective, easier, and simpler to recover from. I'm assuming that the market for the male birth control pill would be the market that's already interested in taking on the sterilization burden for equality's sake. In other words, vasectomy might have created a market saturation that works against a male birth control pill.
While I support the idea of more effective options for everyone, maybe it's best to see the non-emergence of a male birth control pill as an opportunity to reassess what men really need to be equal players with women in the responsibility game. Men who already believe that they should share the burden are wearing condoms and getting vasectomies. It would be nice to see those guys have other options, but at this point, I think the main priority is convincing more men to follow that good example.
Follow Amanda Marcotte on Twitter, @amandamarcotte
Here's to the next freedom in manhood
In order for more men to use birth control they need to have been shown the option exists which means free universal sex-ed.One has the right to say they support birth control,so by implication they can practice birth control since it doesn't in any way r estrict anyone else's rights or liberties in the process.This right is granted also in the ninth amendment since all rights retained by the people cannot be taken away by anyone in the government.There was no law against birth control when the Bill of Rig hts was accepted amending the constitution.But first knowledge must spread and that takes making sure every school child properly knows about the various options.The right(or most of them)would maintain the right to deny other people their liberty to make informed decisions between their medical practitioner and themselves and anyone else they might desire to so involve.No one's decision should be dictated by the state on it's own behalf or any other party but the person who,delivered by circumstance,might have need of rendering an informed judgement for herself.ˇ
There's also another potential market for the male birth-control pill: the paranoid. There are the reasonably paranoid, such as my friend who was a pill baby and who therefore always uses two forms of BC. Frankly, I'd also be more comfortable if both my partner and I were on BC.
And then there are the MRA paranoids, who whine about women who stop taking their BC in order to trap them into having kids. Granted, I doubt this kind of guy would buy the male pill, but it would be sweet to be able to shut them up by reminding them that they could, in fact, be able to take control of their own reproduction.
I have asked many many guy friends if they would take the pill if there was one available, i asked around 13. All of them said Hell yes, not yes, Hell yes. I know a couple of guys whose girlfriends have lied to them telling them they were on the pill just to get themselves pregnant and be set for life (or at least 18 years of payments). I would even be a human guinea pig for the companies doing the research to help the other guys out there. I hope this pill comes out real soon.
....it still leaves the question of why we sometimes see men on TV talking about men's "right" not to support children they never wanted (I'm not talking about paternity fraud here, mind you - it's clearly wrong when courts punish men for not knowing it was some other man's child) and we NEVER see men on TV demanding faster access to better male birth control. Why does that imbalance exist? Why don't men address that?
For that matter, why don't men complain a lot more loudly about paternity fraud than they do about having to support their own (unwanted) children?
If I had a teenage son, I'd probably make him get a contraceptive implant before I'd let him take Driver's Ed. (Then again, I probably wouldn't allow Driver's Ed before age 20 anyway. The last thing we need is more horny teens refusing to use condoms.)
I'm not sure if this crosses the line of what parents can require of their kids, but I'm a little concerned about the idea of control of one's own body.
On the other hand, we do accept that parents can and should require their minor children to see the doctor even if their scared, even if they don't want "stupid-looking" , or are afraid of shots. So perhaps requiring our minor children, incuding teens, to get contraceptive implants is simply the modern parental responsibility. If that's the case, I'll be ready to support it.
I'd suppose one reason men aren't clamoring for the pill is for the same reason they aren't clamoring for immortality - namely that they perceive that the pill is a wish-ful fantasy.
But maybe we're wrong?!?
I looked at Amanda's article. Are we really close to getting the male pill? I'm totally for it when its ready. But is this reality or a fantasy?
People asked the same questions about the Fountain of Youth. Ponce de Leon reassured him that "hope was on the way". Aye, vey.
Can you give reason to hope, to dream, to expect, the reality of this majestic male possibility?
Can we crack the code? Will our scientific abilities open this door? Can we make the same bargain with nature as we have with the female pill, the polio vacine, pasteurization of milk?
What is the true future of the male pill?
Yes, I am a scientific drama queen...
Some moms already take their sexually active teen daughters to the doctor for a month Depo-Provera shot. While that is admirable, why are boys being let off the hook re: responsibility for contraception?
