The Student Room Group

Male pill keeps sperm 'in storage'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25184076

Naturally feminists are against this.
(edited 10 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Typical
Reply 2
Original post by PoliticalMan14
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25184076

Naturally feminists are against this.


The article doesn't say anything about feminists...
However a remarkable discovery.
Original post by PoliticalMan14
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25184076

Naturally feminists are against this.


That article says nothing about feminists. Don't be a dick, although it's probably too late for that.

And anyway, I can't see why feminists wouldn't support this. I do, and I'm a feminist. Right now, the responsibility for not getting knocked up is mostly on women in long term relationships (apart from condoms, every other form of contraception has to administered by women). So it's a damn good idea.
Reply 4
Awesome, at least it's getting closer. Although, wasn't there one a good couple years back that made the test group infertile, or was that just a rumour? =/
Reply 5
Why would feminists be against this? Surely they're more likely to support it if anything?

I'd consider using it depending on the side effects. If the side effects are less of a problem compared to female contraception then why not?
Change is gonna come ! Gone are the days of having to carry round condoms yeaaaah man !
Reply 7
This is pretty cool scientifically.

I thought it was bad to keep sperm in too long though? Don't they go dodgy or something (do I really almost have a medical degree :colondollar::colondollar:)
Reply 8
Original post by Sacapunta
This is pretty cool scientifically.

I thought it was bad to keep sperm in too long though? Don't they go dodgy or something (do I really almost have a medical degree :colondollar::colondollar:)


Sounds like the whole blue balls thing? (which IS REAL...damn, even if not everyone gets it). But no I don't think it would be damaging, the only thing I've read before is that apparently more regular ejaculation, not sure if it would matter if it included sperm or not, is supposed to lessen the odds of prostate cancer, but I have no idea if that's based on any evidence.
Reply 9
Original post by joey11223
Sounds like the whole blue balls thing? (which IS REAL...damn, even if not everyone gets it). But no I don't think it would be damaging, the only thing I've read before is that apparently more regular ejaculation, not sure if it would matter if it included sperm or not, is supposed to lessen the odds of prostate cancer, but I have no idea if that's based on any evidence.

Yaaa! I'm sure I've read somewhere that more regular ejaculation=healthier sperm cos they longer they're stored, the older they are and the genetic material gets damaged?
Idk if this is actual fact or something I've picked up from overhearing male conversations though.
Original post by Sacapunta
Yaaa! I'm sure I've read somewhere that more regular ejaculation=healthier sperm cos they longer they're stored, the older they are and the genetic material gets damaged?
Idk if this is actual fact or something I've picked up from overhearing male conversations though.


I don't know about that, too regular and you'd lower your sperm count, not sure how long it takes you to have the maximum number of sperm per ml of ejaculate that you can, but I'd assume it takes a day or so to build them back up. I doubt you'd have damaged sperm though, I mean many people don't have sex for quite some time for what ever reason, I don't think if you then sampled their ejaculate they'd have "old sperm" which was damaged. I'd assume like all cells sperm have a "life" span and after this they break down and are replaced, which would be happening all the time.
Reply 11
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
Right now, the responsibility for not getting knocked up is mostly on women in long term relationships (apart from condoms, every other form of contraception has to administered by women).
There isn't any responsibility on women.
If they want to get pregnant they can forget to take the pill and use our corrupt family courts to steal money. If they don't want it they can get the morning after pill or an abortion.
Original post by Coffinman
There isn't any responsibility on women.
If they want to get pregnant they can forget to take the pill and use our corrupt family courts to steal money. If they don't want it they can get the morning after pill or an abortion.


Nope, all the responsibility is on women since they're the ones who have to make those decisions.

And it's not stealing money. If you get someone knocked up, you should pay. If she's a conniving cow who "forgot" the pill, tough **** - the poor kid needs the money, and they're the real victim. Plus, there is always a chance of getting someone pregnant no matter what contraception you use, therefore it's complete crap to imply you shouldn't have to pay regardless of the situation.
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
Nope, all the responsibility is on women since they're the ones who have to make those decisions.

And it's not stealing money. If you get someone knocked up, you should pay. If she's a conniving cow who "forgot" the pill, tough **** - the poor kid needs the money, and they're the real victim. Plus, there is always a chance of getting someone pregnant no matter what contraception you use, therefore it's complete crap to imply you shouldn't have to pay regardless of the situation.


I like how your trying to justify blackmail and how basically putting it is the person getting blackmailed that should pick up the bill.

And you wonder why men are pissed off with your ideals of "equality" .

Logic
Not
Even
Once
Original post by Jaegon Targaryen
Change is gonna come ! Gone are the days of having to carry round condoms yeaaaah man !


Well, if you don't mind potentially catching various STIs.... :unsure:
Reply 15
I'm not exactly a feminist lover myself, but I don't see what this has to do with feminist's being pissed off.
Original post by PoliticalMan14
I like how your trying to justify blackmail and how basically putting it is the person getting blackmailed that should pick up the bill.

And you wonder why men are pissed off with your ideals of "equality" .

Logic
Not
Even
Once


No, actually, it's common sense. The original purpose of sex is to procreate. If, by having sex, you manage to create a baby - ****ing well done Sherlock, you've cracked the case, that sometimes happens. No form of contraception is 100% guaranteed therefore there is implied consent in the act that you will pick up the ****ing bill. Considering the woman has to actually raise the child, should she decide to keep it, you're getting a light deal.

TLDR? Sex=chance of baby. So pay up, dumb ass.
Original post by Kiss
I'm not exactly a feminist lover myself, but I don't see what this has to do with feminist's being pissed off.


Google it and you will see.
Original post by Jelephant
Well, if you don't mind potentially catching various STIs.... :unsure:


Excluding that obvious l , eft out , all important factor , It is pretty promising :tongue:
Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons
No, actually, it's common sense. The original purpose of sex is to procreate. If, by having sex, you manage to create a baby - ****ing well done Sherlock, you've cracked the case, that sometimes happens. No form of contraception is 100% guaranteed therefore there is implied consent in the act that you will pick up the ****ing bill. Considering the woman has to actually raise the child, should she decide to keep it, you're getting a light deal.

TLDR? Sex=chance of baby. So pay up, dumb ass.


If a contraception failed that's a different matter, don't twist your words to try and out smart me.

You sound really angry, can I entertain you to a box of tissues?
(edited 10 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending