>Shulamith would not be happy with this outcome.
Of course, Firestone's alive, so what she thinks is not hypothetical. It's at least consistent that 60s feminist founders are often spoken about as though they're dead, establishment feminism buried them long ago.
>We also have to return to the well-worn feminist question of why, if it
>is possible to send a man to the moon to play golf, is it so hard to develop
>a male contraceptive pill? But the answer is, of course, simple: because
>even if a male pill were available, many men would not want to take it, and
>many women would not necessarily trust them enough to do so.
Ah, but a pill you have to take every day is so much more profitable than an injection once every 6 years ... (apologies if this was already posted here.)
>'Are You Using Anything?'
>By Cara Gardner, The Inlander
>
>January 6, 2004
>
[....]
>
>As contraceptive research continues, more effective forms of birth control
>– without the negative side effects – are being tested. The latest is a
>simple injection that can make the recipient infertile for six to 15 years,
>depending on the user's needs. It's non-hormonal, so there's no worry about
>weight gain, mood swings, losing libido or long-term effects such as cancer,
>blood clots or high blood pressure. Early testing shows it's reversible,
>if conception is desired. The most controversial aspect of this birth
control?
>It's for men.
>
>What's more, even though it's considered one of the safest, most effective
>forms of contraception available, most men will never have access to it
>– including American men.
>
>The injection is called Reversible Inhibition of Sperm Under Guidance (RISUG,
>pronounced RICE-ugh). It was developed by professor Sujoy K. Guha, an Indian
>researcher of biomedical engineering at the Indian Institute of Technology.
>Guha has tested RISUG on men for more than 25 years with successful results.
>His research has drawn praise from the World Health Organization, as well
>as doctors from around the world. Pharmaceutical companies in India and
>Egypt are vying to buy RISUG, and, if all continues well with Guha's
research,
>RISUG will be available on the Indian market sometime within the next few
>years.
>
>"RISUG is the most effective and advanced technology we've had in 40 years,"
>says Ronald Weiss, an assistant professor of medicine at the University
>of Ottawa, Canada. Weiss focuses his family practice on male health and
>has traveled to India to see the research on RISUG for himself. RISUG is
>an injection of two chemicals into the vas deferens, the place where sperm
>leaves the testicles. The whole procedure is less invasive, causes fewer
>complications and promises to be easily reversible as compared with vasectomy
>or rubber plug devices (other currently used methods of male contraception).
>
>The entire procedure is virtually painless and becomes effective within
>one hour of injection. There are no known side effects, aside from slight
>swelling immediately after the injection. Guha reports some of his test
>subjects were sexually active on the same day they received the injection.
>None of the men who has tested RISUG has gotten a woman pregnant.
>
>"We applied three or four years ago to do a clinical trial [in Canada],"
>says Weiss. "But it will never be approved. The [RISUG] studies that have
>been done to date have fallen short – it's not to say the studies weren't
>good or aren't useful, but they don't meet the criteria for Western
acceptance."
>
>So why can't the studies be completed in Canada or the United States in
>order to test RISUG by Western standards?
>
>"In order to obtain approval to study RISUG, we need to duplicate a number
>of the studies and that means you need money," Weiss says. "That either
>comes from a benevolent rich person, which is hard to come by, or a
pharmaceutical
>company."
>
>Herein lies the problem: RISUG may be too effective. Pharmaceutical companies
>are pouring millions into research on male contraceptives, particularly
>the male version of the pill, but none is interested in RISUG.
>
>"What does a hormonal contraceptive [like the Pill] represent to a
pharmaceutical
>company?" Weiss asks. "Recurrent sales. It's like women's birth control.
>They sell it over and over and over again. They want something they can
>make an ongoing profit from. Business is business."
>
>RISUG renders a man infertile for six to 15 years; on the Indian market,
>it'll cost about $500 for the injection. In contrast, the average American
>woman spends between $3,000 and $4,000 every 10 years for birth control
>pills. Even though RISUG might be a promising contraceptive, pharmaceutical
>companies would lose money on it. It takes about 10-15 years and costs
>anywhere from $20 million to $70 million to bring a contraceptive method
>through research, development and final approval for marketing by the Food
>and Drug Administration.
>
>"To be fair, pharmaceutical companies are in the business of making money
>and answering to their shareholders," Weiss says. "It's physicians who
>are looking for what's best for their patients. I don't blame big business.
>Hormones – that's where all the research and money is."
>
>Though men in most Western countries won't have the option of RISUG, men
>in parts of the developing world may be able to use it. Some say cultural
>and religious beliefs, in addition to fear and suspicion over science-based
>fertility control, might hold men back from getting the injection. Still,
>RISUG is a sign of hope in a world where 125 million couples cannot access
>current methods of birth control.
>
>In the Western world, men will soon have the option of controlling their
>fertility with hormones. Weiss says he guesses the male pill will be on
>the market in five to 10 years.
>
>"The only people who should be excited about the male pill are pharmaceutical
>companies," Weiss said in an interview with Grist Magazine. Pharmaceutical
>companies will have plenty of opportunity to make a profit on the male
>pill. [...]
full at http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17432
Jenny Brown