you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 102 points 2 years ago (56 children)

“Extra Level”? It's more about taking the burden off the women for me. Why do they, and only they, always have to mess up their bodies?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 56 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    You can already do that with condoms and no one is messing up their body...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Exactly.

    Condoms would be 99% effective if they could be made idiot-proof.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Sucks you're being down voted, I mean maybe saying "idiot-proof" isn't nice but comprehensive sex ed should cover helping those with a noodle understand how to find ones that fit comfortably and what main causes there are for breakage n whatnot. I'm currently having that discussion with my sex buddy, and I can't tell you the amount of times I've had people try to coerce me into letting them go raw dog in the past. Like keep in mind I'm in a state that has not only criminalized abortion but is defunding all planned parenthoods now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Like keep in mind I'm in a state that has not only criminalized abortion but is defunding all planned parenthoods now.

    Bummer.

    2/3 of the states will follow in another year. That's what happens when we elect people no matter how badly they do their jobs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    I'm not voting for this scum, but yeah, we'll see. Hoping it'll make it to the ballot so the people can actually vote to amend the state constitution like others have. The people may be dumb at electing Representatives, but get a straight forward measure up for vote and the people seem to follow through in correcting it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Condoms are only 99% effective. You NEED a second layer of defence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    They're 100% effective, the only reason there said to be 99% effective is to prevent lawsuits from people using then incorrectly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I'm a human, I can make mistakes in the heat of the moment. I've had friend couples I know get pregnant even though they're "professional condom putters onners".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    It's not the condom's fault if you make a mistake. Condom material doesn't let sperm through, it's that simple, it's been used incorrectly if it did. Companies don't want to lose time and money with lawsuits hence 99%.

    Also, anecdotal evidence while you weren't in bed with them isn't much of a proof, it's as valid as me telling you I've never got any girl pregnant even when we weren't using any protection therefore pulling out is 100% effective.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago* (6 children)

    The hippocratic oath, in this case. Medicine is all about risk management, the worse the "disease," the more tolerant we are of side effects for the cure. Pregnancy and birth are still pretty traumatic events that, while much safer than they used to be, are still dangerous. Female BC just has to be less risky than that. Male BC on the other hand, has to be as low the risk for a man impregnating a woman, which is to say, almost zero. Pretty much any negative side effect is worse than that, so it's very difficult to pass. I would gladly take one with comparable side effects to female BC, but sometimes unflinching ethics are inconvenient. Better than the alternative, but still.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Somehow, we manage to accept organ transplants despite it hurting one healthy person a little to help an unhealthy person a lot. What's stopping us from treating birth control the same way?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago*

    It's medical ethics, not the Hippocratic Oath. Most doctors swear to an ethical standard. Besides, "first, do no harm" is a bit unhelpful if you're a surgeon.

    Otherwise you're right, the risks of pregnancy outweigh the side effects of birth control, which is why birth control for women doesn't have as high a standard for mitigating other consequences.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago (7 children)
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    yeah, not wanting 10 children is a matter of cost, of course. It's baffling to me how unreflected and naive opinions regarding reproduction still are...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (30 replies)