BIRTH CONTROL

I see a lot of people on Sup Forums say that electronics or lack of religion is the major cause for the change in western society. And while they are partially correct, nothing has had a bigger effect than birth control.

Other urls found in this thread:

dailymail.co.uk/health/article-105466/Fertility-timebomb-drinking-water.html
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070521-sex-fish.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

There's a gel being developed in India for men, harmless stuff, just kills the sperm, but you can still shoot loads. It lasts 6 months. Once that hits the US the birth rate will plummet, that's pretty much why it's not already here.

Ok

I'd stay clear of that, you never know what unknown side effects it might have. I'd be worried about permanently being made sterile by it.

Effective birth control is the single most disruptive event in human history, not just western society. It completely disrupts our biology.

I predict that in a few centuries it won't be used much as the drive to breed and raise children will take over from the drive to fuck, and people will generally choose to have kids rather than get them accidentally. Mormons Amish and Catholics will truly inherit the earth.

We've had birth control since ancient times you dense cunt

The impact of birth control is probably the most exaggerated. The withdrawal method and ovulation tracking were in the high 90% range of effectiveness, and condoms already existed for centuries. The pill changed hardly anything and definitely was not the cause of a shift in sexual morality.

>The pill changed hardly anything and definitely was not the cause of a shift in sexual morality.

Both factually wrong.

My wife was a complete bitch 100% of the time on birth controll pills now she is off the pill and takimg nothing and is only a bitch 50% of the time its fucking amazing

Explain. BC was not an improvement in effectiveness over existing methods which were free and/or widely available. It was just as easy to have "free love" without BC. So why did BC cause a "sexual revolution" as the narrative goes?

The pill was an INCREDIBLE improvement over previous methods of birth control. You have to understand that even if pulling out or tracking ovulation has a 90% success rate, if you make that bet over and over again (as humans do love to fuck) that eventually you'll get a child. Abortion being illegal until around the time of the pill, that would destroy a young unmarried woman's life. Thus she would have to be very careful and maintain gender roles in hopes of tying down a provider so she didn't literally starve to death in the streets because she wanted the D.

There are excellent books about the advent of birth control and the effect it's had on humanity, I recommend you check them out.

The pill is 1% more effective than condoms. Withdrawal plus ovulation tracking is almost 100%.

Shit skins won't use it. Poor won't use it either unless they make it a provision for recieving gibs.

Lol@ Catholics and Mormons. They use birth control, lol.

>The pill is 1% more effective than condoms.*
*When the condom doesn't tear. Interesting those real world failure rates.
>Withdrawal plus ovulation tracking is almost 100%.
When it's done perfectly logically and people don't fuck it up in a fit of passion. Which they tend to do because they're not robots.

Some but not all of them use birth control. And the big family catholics and mormons CHOOSE to have big families, they don't accidentally have a kid then decide might as well have my 2.1 kids and do my duty to god.

Over time the genes that lead one to try to have sex without reproducing will go away and the genes that drive one to have tons and tons of kids will proliferate. You don't need very many generations of 8+ child families to outbreed people who don't want children anyway.

Many women use it for things other than pregnancy prevention. Some are stupid like acne treatment, but it helps many women manage conditions like endometriosis and poly-cystic ovary disease without the use of opioid pain killers (no, tylenol is not enough). These conditions are debilitating for many women, usually around ovulation or menstruation, who aren't just fat tumblr snowflakes too lazy to work or lose weight (though those types often claim to have pcos or something similar).

I wish more people would consider this before trashing it. Thousands of men use testosterone for various medical conditions, just to function like a normal person. Yet many people would automatically jump to the conclusion they are DUDE JUICING to get ripped or something. It does/can have the similar effect of making you temporarily sterile just like the pill does for women.

Both are abused, but those with medical conditions should have access to treatment without being stigmatized or restricted by the opinions of the ignorant.

This stuff ends up back in the water and men are drinking it, its in fish etc.

Studies have shown that male fish change gender if exposed to female birth control in their water

Worst case scenario, the pill is 7% more effective. That's hardly a "revolution". Stop eating up simple narratives.

Proofs
'The study on roach stocks from ten rivers found nearly half of male fish had eggs in their testes or female reproductive ducts. A tenth were sterile and another quarter had damaged sperm.'
dailymail.co.uk/health/article-105466/Fertility-timebomb-drinking-water.html

news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070521-sex-fish.html

Roastie detected

Not at all.
kill yourself for having nothing of value to contribute to the conversation.

I think we have to take into account the attitude shift in a women and man's perspective of casual sex when they feel like they can't get pregnant even if they tried

Why would they feel that way more so after the pill? A woman who takes the pill is explicitly trying not to get pregnant. If they were trying to get pregnant they wouldn't take the pill, either.

I agree with this 100%. And its not a bad thing.

The difference is the pill put the power of birth control into the womens hands. They can now decide for themselves whether or not they want to be fertile.

Oral contraceptives also reduce the rate of breast cancer and cervical cancer in women.

Without it, millions more men would be paying child support for unwanted children. It's not like men will stop fucking women if there was no pill. "Ah well, you might get pregnant so I'll just go home instead of going home with you."

Way more measurable pros than cons for 1st world society.

It's mostly the massive amount of new xenoestrogen/proestrogen combinations from industrial waste that gets you that effect. The estrogen in birth control pills is miniscule in comparison (but by no means harmless, don't get me wrong)

Blame industrialization and especially the capitalism that has totally destroyed our environment with pollution (which is causing the Sixth Mass Extinction currently underway on the planet: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction )

Birth control gave women control.
This was a bad thing

Before you would really have to think about the person that you would get into bed with because this could possibly lead to them being your child's parent.

Yes you can pull out but there's still that hesitance to jump in bed earlier. Now that they can't have kids in their mind it makes the woman more open to opening their legs sooner since there can be far less consequence (raising a child).

>crashes goy fertility
>causes permanent brain damage
Literally no downside!

Low birth rates are not a problem, HIGH birth rates by shitskins, mudslimes and other degnerates are the problem.

they must be stopped.

Don't you think women were afraid of the same thing when the pill first came about

yeah like what, eating flowers that usually don't work or inserting a stick into the woman?

But I just showed you that even accounting for human error and malfunction, the pill was only a 7% improvement over existing methods. It's as if you're blaming widespread obesity on McDonalds adding 7% more fries to their combo meals (4 or 5 extra fries), or saying that there was a sudden and monumental shift in the economy because the middle class earned 7% more.

The pill allows you to have the cake and eat it too.

Give a pack of condoms with every welfare check, drop a ton of baby killing pills into subsaharan africa and label it aids medicine

>Give a pack of condoms with every welfare check

useless.
Make the spiral a precondition for receiving welfare.

no. Unnatural birth will just be the norm.

and the indian sperm killer medicine for men. You take the medicine in a supervised environment, and you're cleared for your next check.

BC in the water, chinese plastic and pesticide caused the feminization of men and the fast puberty of women - not us jews!

It's not the numbers friend. Women don't use logic like that. The majority of people don't even know those statistics today.

A woman thought, he might get me Prego I'd better not

A woman now thinks I am on this magic pill I can't have kids I'd better get some dick tonight

They don't bring up 7% pull out rate based off their random partners trust
You gotta think like an average woman not a rational scientist

Pill also fucks with women's heads and that fucks with guys. They settle for guys who are morr Beta than they normally would. In turn, men get really lazy because there's little incentive to do otherwise.

BTW: If you can find a woman who's NOT on the pill and she's into you, keep her. All others will end up banging the better version of you when they go off the pill.

Those 7% (if one accepts that rate) stack. Instead of fucking only once or twice in a weekend while being very careful, people end up fucking like degenerate rabbits. If they were to do that with "traditional" brith control methods, not only would it be very tiring, but the chance to get a pregnancy would increase A LOT. See what I mean?

What does that even mean? If you mean ejaculate without a condom, you could cream a girl with a diaphragm and it was as effective as a condom.

How is that not birth control?

>They settle for guys who are morr Beta than they normally would

Interesting theory mate, I tend to believe it's the other way around. Idk about the US, but here it's pretty crazy, the 20/80 fucking distribution is visible in the streets at night.

No, the numbers represent the average chances of becoming pregnant over one year. And that's not how probability works. If you actually had a 2% chance of becoming pregnant each time you had sex with a condom, and you had sex 10 times, they don't "stack" to 20%, the actual chances are the same 2% every time.

Installing a diaphragm is not the norm, pretty sure it never has been. And then if you want to compare, what's easier? going to the gynecologist to choose and install one or go to the pharmacist and ask for the pill? Your arguments seem sound to me, but I think you underestimate psychology in all this

We're talking about the pill. Birth control wasn't invented in the 60s, it's been around since ancient times.

You don't "install" a diaphragm. You put it in before sex and then take it out.

Effective, readily available and easy to use birth control hasn't been. That's the point.

The pill is the most prominent example, because it's the most comfortable. Doesn't require you to wear a thing for hours prior to sex and at least 6 hours after, for example. And the ancient methods were even worse.

Purposefully obtuse or a dumbass. Kek are you the trannies leaf who shits up every thread

>women
>think
No

"Readily available" is relative, but certainly condoms were not hard to come by in the 20th century. But women have always tracked their ovulation with body temperature and calendars, which by itself is as effective as condoms or the pill when it is done properly, and combined with the withdrawal which is similarly effective, it is very easy to avoid pregnancy without using any prophylactics or pills.

The Pill dried up my woman like a desert and she had complications that put her in hospital. It was shit. Marry the bitch, make a baby or pull out like a pro. And always time the fertility cycle.

They said some people just don't do well with the pill. I don't think anyone does.

>which by itself is as effective as condoms or the pill when it is done properly

This just simply isn't true and you know it, why lie

Hormonal pill form birth control that her lady takes on her own sanctioned by the state and medical and educational institutions.

These are important distinctions.

Oh, my brain mistranslated then, sorry. Thought it was the copper loop you install inside the uterus.

But then you have the "feeling argument", sex is way better without a genital obstruction. That tends to motivate...

However:
You're misrepresenting what I said and still managed to get it wrong. In your example you would get an overall 18% chance to get pregnant. You only net to get into the 2% once out of every single fuck. see what I mean now?

GUYS this has been covered already the pill gives women frontal lobe damage and over a few years it literally turns a normal woman into shrieking SJW toxic mess. This is by design

Also taints city water supplies, but really that's the least of our problems

Hormonal=fools mother nature with consequences that are bad for most woman.
She is in control=another arrow in the sex as a weapon quiver changing the balance of things that evolved over xxxxxx years.
State Sponsored=Can be used as a political wedge weapon
Medical and education sponsored=normalizes permiscuious casual sex that is bad for most of not all woman.

The diaphragm sits against the cervix, so it doesn't obsruct the penis in any way (it's not like a female condom).

The way birth control effectiveness is determined is by seeing what percentage of couples is pregnant after a year of using the method. So, it's not a measure of the risk each time, and could be twice a day, or once a month. You don't add the probabilities together.

Alright new question then, who thinks birth control should be paid for by the state? Legit question, I'm on the front lines for selling this shit and 99% of the time they don't have to pay for it, the taxpayer does. Every time I argue with a normie about it, it ends up with "why are you against birth control?", as if women weren't responsible for their own choices

Correct. The separation of the act of sex with creating new life created such a perversion in our societal fabric that we're still seeing a lot of those effects today.

Thanks for bringing this up.

>So, it's not a measure of the risk each time, and could be twice a day, or once a month. You don't add the probabilities together.

It's averaged. French bro is right. If you used modern contraception AND also had less sex, the chances would be close to zero.

all right, clearer now. But then some nother user's point still stands, there's the psychological difference induced both by hormonal change of the pill and guaranteed non pregnancy (because let's be honest, should birth control fail, it goes hand in hand with abortion in our "modern" societies). I'm pretty sure (have no source though), that among those who have sex, "quantity" of sex is much higher nowadays than it was before.

As someone that works in a fucking pharmacy in the middle of urban degeneracy, >114812793 makes a very good point I believe

It feels good to think about pumping semen into fallopian tubes

condom sex sucks so if this is what it takes for condomless sex and letting me bust in her whenever then idc

fuck it

>condom sex sucks
Only if your genitals have been mutilated in the name of (((hygiene))).

Finally someone speaks common sense. That being said, I don't trust women with pregnancy and diseases. A lot of them have a child at the ripe young age of 22. No thanks. I prefer to carry the burden of condoms and be done with it.

Video games and the Internet are the biggest BIRTH CONTROL there is!!!

All my friends talk about is things on the internet and video games, I can't even remember when was the last time they talked about women.

Speaking as an uncut man, condom sex sucks.

>The withdrawal method and ovulation tracking were in the high 90% range of effectiveness

Do you have any reputable sources for this? The most favorable numbers I see gives coitus interruptus a failure rate of 4% if used perfectly, but 22% for typical users. For the calendar method I see figures like 9% failure rate if used perfectly, and 25% failure rate for typical use. I suppose you could argue that the combination of the two would yield superior outcomes to condoms alone, but the calendar method is not very popular and people who pull out aren't likely to combine it with the calendar method.

I mean, the OCP has a failure rate of 0.3% for perfect use and 9% for typical use. That's a monumental difference and OCP and condoms combined are much more common than coitus interruptus and calendar method combined. This is the difference between an unintended pregnancy every four years and an unintended pregnancy every 11 years.

More importantly, coitus interruptus requires the man to take initiative in birth control, while the OCP requires the woman to take initiative. This makes a huge difference because it is women that get pregnant and give birth, not men, so they have far more skin in the game. It's not mere coincidence that the sexual revolution occurred following the widespread use of the OCP. Now we have even more effective methods of birth control.

Lowered inhibitions at night. Look at the day to day.

>high 90% range of effectiveness
>mfw incels can't even imagine how much poonani us normies get

If you're getting your % from WebMD, you will see that 9% of typical users of the pill will get pregnant. That's an improvement of only 13% in the worst case of typical use, as you've pointed out. The difference is less for condoms in typical use (9%) and diaphragms in typical use (3%). Again, the pill may be more effective than previous methods, but it is not revolutionary in its effectiveness.

t. 12 year old

Birth control ruined women. Now they have no reason not to be stupid whores who fuck without though. Combine that with free on demand abortion, welfare, child support and free government daycare to raise and teach the kids for you.

A perfect storm for destroying family and community.

Suppose you had a bullet proof vest that would stop a bullet 85% of the time. If someone handed you a vest that stopped a bullet 92% of the time, would you act any more recklessly or feel more invincible? Would you act a lot more recklessly? Would it fundamentally change the way you live your life?

Here's a fact to consider: unintended pregnancies have not dropped since the pill, but have basically been steady since the early '60s with a slight uptick.

You say 13% like it's insignificant, but it represents a more than halving of the risk of pregnancy and gives contraceptive control to women rather than men. Whether that qualifies as a revolution depends on your threshold, but it was undoubtedly a large factor in the sexual revolution.

It should be noted that fertility rates in the Western world were already dropping before the sexual revolution took place, in response to the significant reductions in mortality rate that took place in the late 19th and early 20th century among Western nations.

Still, there was a significant drop in fertility rate which coincided with the spread of oral contraceptive pills and the sexual revolution. However, because the preceding decades were characterized by the Baby Boom, it's not clear whether this drop in fertility simply represents the end of the Baby Boom, or alternatively, that the Baby Boom ended because of the rise of OCP and the sexual revolution.

Birth control + condoms = no chance in hell you get a baby. Using only one or the other means you will probably get a baby.