Part One: The Women
A few weeks ago, I was scanning the news when an article caught my eye. The article detailed a process called RISUG (reversible inhibition of sperm under guidance) that had been developed in India and which was in the beginning stages of development in North America. The process was straightforward: a gel injected into the vas deferens which disrupted sperm membranes as they passed through and left them unable to fertilize an egg. The process was portrayed as cheap and quick, and clinical trials in India had one hundred percent effectiveness and no reported side effects other than a slight swelling which had later disappeared. The article came as a complete surprise to me: it had been in the development process in India since the 1990s, but I had never heard anything about it.
Although female contraception is widely discussed, male contraception is strangely missing from public consciousness. It’s not that there aren’t options (although all are in various stages of research and development, and none are available on the market). The problem, however, is that none of the potential leads seem to have been translated into a viable product with wide appeal and interest.
I was curious about how others viewed the topic, or if they even thought about it at all, so I interviewed a small group of individuals (three women and four men) to get their thoughts. They were all university students, single, heterosexual and in their early twenties: a combination of characteristics that should theoretically make them quite interested in thinking about contraceptives and the issues surrounding them. I gave them background information on options currently being explored for the development of male contraceptives and asked them a set of questions to get their opinions and begin a discussion. While this was a small and very homogenous group, many of the viewpoints they expressed were interesting and relevant to the topic as a whole. Of course a group of seven people cannot be extrapolated to an entire population of potential consumers, but the statements they made contained some interesting and revealing points and fulfilled my goal of starting some sort of dialogue about the potential of male contraception with people who would probably have an interest in it.
All of the women said that they either are currently using, or would be interested in using birth control. They gave several reasons beyond just contraception: for example, control of hormones and skin problems. When discussing “male birth control”, none of the men considered potential benefits other than contraception. One possible explanation is that birth control has been marketed to women in terms that span many areas of life: not just for contraception, but for the ability to firmly regulate and place under control physical irregularities such as unpredictable periods and mood swings, and to become more attractive through clearer skin and potential weight loss. For women, birth control is marketed not so much as a medical treatment targeting one issue, but as a product which can cause a complete-and positive-life transformation.
The women also all stated that, if a viable form of male contraception became available, they would want the man in a theoretical relationship to consider using it. The reasons they cited did not involve contraception for its own sake but invoked ideas of fairness. One said that pharmaceutical companies had put so much effort into products affecting women’s bodies that they should also spend time researching men’s bodies and contraceptive options for them, too. The others said that a contraceptive option for men-other than condoms and vasectomy-would spread the burden of responsibility more evenly between the man and woman. They did, however, say that even if they were in a relationship with a man, they would probably still use birth control themselves (unless there was a high degree of trust in the relationship); but that they would appreciate being able to have a conversation and deciding together which or both of them should be using contraceptives.
The issue of fairness and equality came up multiple times. The women all said that both partners in a relationship should be equally responsible (including financial responsibility) for contraception, but some stated that in reality, women bear more of a burden. They were explicitly referring to the financial burden. One stated that the income and health insurance of both partners should be taken into consideration when paying the cost of contraception, no matter who was using it. Interestingly, someone stated that this equal division extended to condoms also: if women are expecting condoms as the main source of protection, they should carry them and be willing to provide them, too. However, the overall sense was that contraception for women is much more of a financial burden than the options men have. One woman stated that because condoms are easily bought at the store, the price is easy to see and share equally. The process of getting contraceptives for women is quite a bit more complicated, as it involves doctor’s visits and figuring out insurance, so finding a fair way to share the cost is difficult.
This point of view changed somewhat when they were considering casual sex. In that case, all agreed that each partner was directly responsible for their own sexual health and wellbeing.
