The male pill
There won't be a feminist in Australia who was surprised by the general disinterest in the announcement by British researchers on July 17 that a 100% effective male contraceptive pill will probably be available within five years.
Yet it was a remarkable announcement. Not only does this latest contraceptive place the responsibility for birth control on men, it seems to work 100% of the time — something women have dreamed about ever since sex de-linked from pregnancy was perceived as possible and desirable.
A 100% effective male contraceptive pill with minimal side-effects (the researchers claim that slight weight gain in some users is the only side-effect) is a big step forward for all people. It's especially good news for those women who, for various medical reasons, can't use the female contraceptive pill and have to rely on much less effective and less convenient forms of contraception.
A new choice of contraceptive — one which reduces the pressures on women to either risk unwanted pregnancy or endanger their health by using the inadequate existing contraceptive options — is a great thing.
Despite the enormous potential benefits of this new technology, however, Australia's media clearly pre-decided that the "average" man would be uninterested in taking responsibility for contraception. The announcement barely rated a mention. Unfortunately, if the vox pops on the issue that I heard broadcast are any indication, the media were right.
The general tenor of the men's responses was: "It's a good idea. I'd have control ... if I remembered to take it every day." The women tended to agree: "It's a great idea", most said, "and about time. But I'd have to keep taking the pill too, because sure as hell he'd forget to."
And that's the nub of the problem. Human reproduction, unlike animal reproduction, is primarily a social, not a biological, event. So, no matter how advanced medical science is in this area (and a 100% effective contraceptive pill is pretty advanced), until our social structures and norms catch up with science, the final responsibility for birth control will remain with women.
The fact that women give birth is used in present-day society to justify assigning them primary responsibility for the care of the child once it is born. Whether this is argued in terms of women being "naturally" more nurturing or in terms of god-ordained motherhood, all of the main institutions in capitalist society deem that women are the (most) "responsible" parent.
The result is that, while it takes a woman and a man to create a pregnancy, it is the woman who principally bears the consequences. It is she who must decide whether or not she wants (and is able) to take on the responsibility for the child's upbringing that her family members, church, friends and the law will inevitably assign to her.
This, in turn, means that, as much as women would like not to have to, they have little choice but to take ultimate responsibility for contraception — at least for so long as the society they live in makes them individually responsible for the consequences of pregnancy.
As progressive as the development of a male contraceptive pill is, much more priority (resources and attention) must be devoted to developing healthy, convenient, effective contraceptive options for women. Still today there is no 100% effective female pill and all women who use the pill for any length of time confront health risks.
Until women can exert the sort of control over their reproduction, health and sexual choices that the male pill would give to men, the campaign for contraceptive rights is not over.
As the famous poster of the 1970s declared: "... and because we still can't get an adequate, safe contraceptive, but men can walk on the moon ... we are part of the women's liberation movement".
BY LISA MACDONALD