Remember that one Seinfeld episode?
| April 25th, 2005This post was removed by request of the author.
20 Responses to “Remember that one Seinfeld episode?”
Leave a Reply
If you have questions about the moderation policies here, please read this post. Short version: treat other posters with respect.
If your submitted comment fails to appear, without even an error or "waiting for moderation" message, then our spam-blocking software may have blocked your comment. Please contact the moderators immediately so we can rescue your comment. If this happens repeatedly, you might visit Akismet's comment form to tell them they're falsely identifying you as a spammer.
April 25th, 2005 at 6:08 am
There’s an implantable reversable contraceptive for men that’s out there in India. I’m tempted to get one, but right now, the only person I don’t use condoms with is on a 3′rd generation IUD, so we’re safe there, and seeing as I use condoms with everyone else, it’s not all that neccesary.
It angers me incredibly that more research hasn’t gone into male contraception, because there are single use items or exctremley minor surgeries that can be reversed with a good success rate. They’re just not in the US, because birth control is considered to be evil here, mostly by people who then bemoan the high teen pregnancy rate, and the amount of unwed mothers.
This comment was written by Josh Jasper.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 6:57 am
I think doctors should just start selling the prescriptions themselves.
This comment was written by Kat.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 7:04 am
Well, once they have enough people convinced that abortion=not letting sperm and egg meet, it’s open season on everything, I’d think.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 7:17 am
well, the sponge may be convenient, but it should be noted that it has a remarkable failure rate — you’d be better off finding room in your purse for condoms…
This comment was written by acm.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 8:28 am
I second acm’s comment. My son was a sponge baby. My OB/GYN also knew four other women who conceived while using the Today Sponge.
This comment was written by Trish Wilson.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 8:35 am
Well I hope they post those failure rates on their site. And people should also still use condoms anyway in order to protect against HIV and other STD infections that I’m sure the sponge doesn’t stop.
Trish,–”sponge baby?!” Ha! It makes you wonder how many of us are the “result” of contraceptive failure.
This comment was written by Pseudo-Adrienne.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 9:09 am
I tried those things once in college. It just sort of came loose and was bopping around inside there with me. I asked the girl if she thought that we did it right — she thought we followed the directions. I’m all for choice, but that sure did seem dicey.
This comment was written by Gadfly.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 9:32 am
More options are good — but really, if you’re trying to avoid pregnancy, there’s no excuse for a man not to use a condom during intercourse. The usual advice is to use two forms of birth control together. And mechanically, the simplest thing to do is to stop the ejaculate before it gets anywhere. Condoms are simple, reliable, cheap, and don’t have side effects.
Speaking of which, the other day I was looking for condoms (I haven’t needed them for a long time, and I was thinking I should have some around, just on general principles) and I visited about half a dozen different drug stores in my neighborhood before I found one with condoms actually out where a customer could reach them. Another two had them behind the cashier, and the other three didn’t seem to carry them at all. Has this changed in the last few years? I thought they used to be a lot easier to find.
This comment was written by Brian Vaughan.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 10:10 am
Well, if the failure rates for sponges are that high, I’m certainly not going to be switching any time soon. I’d also like to add that if I were single and/or non-monogamous, I’d still want condoms even with the sponge.
I used to use sponges back in the late 80s, and what I remember the most about them are the damn contortions I used to have to go through just to get the damn things out.
As much as I like the idea of “empowering” choices for women, I have to say that every female-targeted contraceptive I’ve used/heard of has been waaaay more complicated, uncomfortable or just plain dangerous than condoms.
This comment was written by Crys T.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 11:19 am
‘The Well-Timed Period’ blog has a post on the various kinds of contraceptive sponge. It seems that the failure rate for the Today sponge is 9% for perfect use and 14% for typical use if you have never given birth and 11% for perfect use and 27% for typical use if you have given birth. That seems far too unreliable if the sponge is to be used on its own.
This comment was written by Katherine.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 2:04 pm
On shopping for condoms– they’re usually not where I’d put them, but there usually around, it just takes persistance in the hunt. [On reflection: Maybe I'm lucky being in California and take it for granted.]
In my local Albertsons, they’re under the pharmacy window, but not behind a counter. At FoodMaxx, they’re beside the feminine hygine products– the same for Longs (a local drug store). Rite Aid’s got them below the pharmacist window again (but still publically accessible).
The stores that have them away from the feminine hygine usually confuse me, only because there are usually some forms of birth control beside the feminine products and it seems unintuitive to split up contraception. Of course, the first time I looked around Longs, I didn’t look in the feminine products aisle, ’cause condoms are clearly a “guy thing”, which made my hunt a very long one.
This comment was written by ScottM.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 5:18 pm
I’m sure they’ll make it one of those “behind the counter” items so that the folks behind the pharmacy counter can tell slutty women they’re not allowed to have them.
Scott: at the Wegman’s I go to, the condoms are next to the pads and plugs, it just seems odd placement to me (unless they’re going for the wall of embarassing shopping). But then I sure as shit don’t want anyone to go diving in the Red Sea, wetsuit or not.
This comment was written by Ol Cranky.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 7:27 pm
Well, I’m a conservative Christian who is pro-life and who is uncomfortable with the idea of post-fertilization birth control (e.g. IUDs, and in some cases the Pill and morning-after pills), but I have no problem with the sponge whatsoever and am happy to see it come back on the market.
Although I do agree, people should not rely on the sponge alone to protect them.
Just for full disclosure, I should also point out that I am a 26-year-old male virgin, so have been doing my part not to increase the problem of unwanted pregnancies.
This comment was written by Glaivester.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 8:50 pm
Post-fertilization birth control is an overblown concept–the morning after pill and the birth control pill supress ovulation, contrary to what right-wing propaganda about them being abortificants would have you believe.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 10:23 pm
I think that it’s reasonable, if a man and a woman are in a LTR (with no intention of having children) and they know each other are clean, for the man to ask to “trade off” on the use of a condom, if he finds the experience less pleasurable with than without. Maybe, half the time he can wear a condom, half the time she can use a diaphragm, that sorta thing. Condoms are a fine methods of birth control and antivenereal protection, but are they the be-all end all?
This comment was written by Julian Elson.Report this comment to the moderators
April 25th, 2005 at 10:26 pm
NOTE: I wasn’t really responding to the main post, which, of course, was about a non-condom method of birth control. I was mainly thinking of Brian and Pseudo-Adrienne.
This comment was written by Julian Elson.Report this comment to the moderators
April 26th, 2005 at 3:56 am
In reference to sponges, well, there’s no way to put this but bluntly: they have a spermicide which (apparently) doesn’t taste all that great. My partner at the time was not overly fond of them. Also, a lot of people have allergies or sensitivities to spermicides which can cause quite painful, unpleasant reactions.
No, but contraceptive preference also involves personal taste & personal requirements. Guys always talk about diaphragms as if they’re no big deal. Guess again: firstly, they have to be properly fitted, which means going to a doctor or clinic, and can therefore involve more money that a lot of us have. Also, you have to insert the damn things. For some women, that may be no big deal, but for some of us, that means ages getting into all sorts of outlandish positions trying to get them properly positioned or get them out again. And that process can be frustrating (not very conducive to getting you in the proper mood), uncomfortable and sometimes even downright painful. Penis length isn’t standard-issue and neither is vagina length.
Condoms, compared to other birth-control choices, are just easier, cheaper (at least looking at how much you have to lay down in one go), and don’t involve actual physical suffering on the part of either participant.
If a woman can & wants to use other altnernatives, great. But insisting on condoms isn’t necessarily a sign of selfishness.
This comment was written by Crys T.Report this comment to the moderators
April 26th, 2005 at 8:08 am
Ugh, the sponge. Got me started on the merry, merry path of chronic yeast infections.
This comment was written by zuzu.Report this comment to the moderators
April 26th, 2005 at 8:30 am
For men who don’t like condoms that are in LTRs, the vasectomy is the best bet. If you don’t want any or anymore children, that is. I would recommend it to every man who’s done with having children. Considering that once your baby-making days are over, you can get snipped and never use a condom as birth control again, using them in your youth seems a fair trade-off.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
November 7th, 2005 at 2:54 pm
I would be cautious about recommending vasectomies as a blanket one-size-fits-all sollution to long-term birth control for men.
Some research is now suggesting that there are significantly higher rates of prostatitis and benign prostate hypertrophy (enlarged prostate) in men post-vasectomy, both of which are uncomfortable and inconvenient at best. As well, there are cases where post-vasectomy pain has continued for years after the surgery.
To be clear, however, no higher risk of prostate cancer has been found in most studies.
For many men and many couples vasectomy may be a very good solution to the problem of long-term “no more kids, ever” birth control. However, it’s always important to be informed (and to inform oneself) about the risks in any surgical procedure, and to make sure to go to many sources for information.
This comment was written by Rainbow.Report this comment to the moderators
August 31st, 2006 at 2:09 pm
in Washington — where more than 2,000 women get Plan B directly from their pharmacists each month — many of Ramseth’s colleagues agree that they should not be forced to provide medication with which they have moral or ethical objections. Last year Pseudo-Adrienne wondered how long until they demand a conscience clause for cashiers? I should be wary of bringing it up again. Don’t want to give them any ideas! I pretty much stand by my view of pharmacists from last year:
This comment was written by aTypical Joe: a gay New Yorker living in the rural South.Report this comment to the moderators