Why don’t men take hormonal contraceptives? Unlike women, men are fertile all the time.
While I argue that men AND women should not be on hormonal contraception for scientific & moral reasons, I want to delve into this idea more. Get curious with me and let’s explore the “why” together!
In the 1950s, Margaret Sanger’s wish for a “magic pill” to help women avoid pregnancy became a reality. You can read about the history of the pill here. At that time, men’s hormonal contraception was not addressed. In part, because Sanger didn’t believe in men being held responsibility or maintaining sole responsibility for birth control. She argued that women should have bodily autonomy and take contraception to protect herself from her husband. A woman’s job was to be responsible for the pregnancies she may or may not wish to undergo and it her job to be responsible for those decisions (through contraceptive use).
However, in recent years, women have expressed the burden of being solely responsible for family planning and the possibility of becoming pregnant. Additionally, women have expressed health challenges and side effects of hormonal contraceptive use that is becoming more popularly discussed as unfair and an injustice to women yet again.
- Why should women have to turn off their bodies?
- Why should women have to undergo side effects (including side effects that impact libido, thus adding unenjoyable sex to the list)?
- Why should women alone have to navigate long-term health impacts from hormonal contraceptive use?
In recent years, studies have been conducted introducing hormonal male contraceptives and many studies have failed to continue or produce results because men were very vocal about the adverse side effects and unwilling to continue.
Additionally, pharmaceutical companies aren’t inclined to invest in male contraceptives because hormonal contraception makes billions of dollars and is quite lucrative as an industry right now. To introduce male hormonal contraceptives may mean a decrease in female hormonal contraceptives, which would mean a decrease in profits altogether.
Unfortunately, an altruistic view of women’s health isn’t what we’re talking about given the combination of side effects from hormonal contraception, money involved in sales of said contraception, and lack of body literacy education for women of all ages. Women have been navigating side effects for years, so the awkward question arises: Why should women have to sacrifice their bodies & experiences to enjoy sex without children? Shouldn’t men also have to sacrifice and put up with side effects, too? In a sense, to “meet in the middle”?
Herein lies the challenges of contraception and the separation of babies & bonding, separating sex from marriage, and believing the lie that only good sex comes without the possibility of children. Sex is designed to procreate life.
While family planning can be practiced responsibly, should it be done at the expense of one’s own health? Or, could a safer, more holistic alternative be utilized to help women AND men honor their bodies?
In a world that screams women’s rights are important and necessary for freedom: What have we given up? What are we putting up with in order to reach this elusive freedom? And, is it really freedom?
