Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Reproductive Justice and Gender

The "Tex-Mex" Theory of Contraception

By Amanda Marcotte, RH Reality Check. Posted May 24, 2008.


We're lucky to have the Pill, but a wider variety of contraceptive options would do womankind good.
Advertisement

Recently, a public interest group with no anti-choice agenda that I'm aware of filed a petition with the FDA requesting that the contraceptive patch be pulled from the market, saying that the patch's uneven distribution of hormones that varies from woman to woman made it too dangerous for use. Without getting into the debate over whether or not the group, Public Citizen, successfully made the case in their complaint, I can say that the whole situation has highlighted a situation in contraception development that I'd like to call the "Tex-Mex Factor." In Texas, we make cracks about how the diversity of the cuisine called Tex-Mex is an illusion: it's all rice, beans, cheese, meat, tortillas and chilis, and you just call it different names depending upon how you roll it. That's fine if you like those ingredients, but if you don't like tortillas, for instance, you won't find much to eat in Tex-Mex.

Women seeking a contraceptive method that's effective, reversible, and doesn't require you to fiddle with devices in the middle of a sexual encounter seem to have a myriad of options: the pill, the patch, shots, implanted devices, cervical rings. But like with Tex-Mex, it's all the same thing, just called different names depending upon how you roll it. All these methods are variations on the original earth-shaking and still controversial birth control pill. It's great if you're good with hormones, but like a person who wants Tex-Mex but doesn't like tortillas, you're out of luck if hormones don't work well with your body (IUDs have filled in the gap for some women, but they are uncomfortable to insert and still have a bad reputation, despite huge improvements in the technology).

Most adaptations on the hormone theme are driven by the question of how to conquer the problem of inconsistent use, which is no small problem. As a recent Guttmacher report shows, half of women who intend to avoid pregnancy put themselves at risk every year through inconsistent contraception use. And the pill, for all that it beats the shot and the patch for dosing women just right, also lends itself to inconsistent use. Taking a pill every day at the same time can be hard to remember to do, and as the report shows, big life changes that mess up your daily schedule -- moving, a job change, or a personal crisis -- makes it even more difficult to keep a consistent dosage routine. The beginning or end of relationships also present an opportunity for inconsistent use. When transitioning from "coupled" to "single" in either direction and the frequency of your sexual contact changes, a daily pill can seem like a mismatch for your needs. I can attest that when you're single and not getting laid a whole lot, you begin to wonder why you're bothering to swallow a pill every day. If you remember it, you do it for the same reason you get dressed every day even when you work at home -- a combination of optimism and propriety. (Read the whole report and the PDF as well, because there are many more reasons for inconsistent use I don't delve into here).


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: contraception, birth control, reproductive justice

Amanda Marcotte co-writes the popular blog Pandagon. She is the author of It's a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I'd like to see nanotech messengers.
Posted by: Zenobia on May 24, 2008 1:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd like to be able to swallow a nanobot that acts as a scout for ripening eggs. I'd get a daily report in my email from my nanobot telling me the very precise odds of getting pregnant that day based on a reading of not only ovulation, but also the quality of the egg that month, and all other internal conditions like stress, acidity of my system, etc.. (Quality of sperm would have to be assumed to be maximum.)

Maybe the nanobot would include some thoughtful words of wisdom and positive thoughts in the report, too, like we get on tea bag tags.

No muss, no fuss, no hormones, no loss of sensation. It would require obstaining for maybe 1-3 days day each month. Unlike old fashioned natural methods, though, there would be no margin of error , no guessing, no worry about ovulation patterns getting thrown of from travel or an exceptionally tough week at work.

V2.0 could perhaps zap the egg with a tiny charge, negating any need for periodic abstinence. The zap would be on command, of course--2-way communication would be possible with the nanobot--because some people might use this same device to AID conception.

Like the IUD, you'd only need to replace it every 10 years. Unlike the IUD, it would not give you cramps or make you bleed more. Afterall, it's nano! Smaller than a blood cell! Your system would not even detect it!

OK, that's my invention idea. My sister, having gone through 2 hard gestations, has the list of inventions to optomize pregnancy and childbirth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fertility Awareness Method -- why is nobody talking about this?
Posted by: ristretto6 on May 26, 2008 1:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or how about making information about FAM (fertility awareness method) more widely available, and educating doctors about this option so that they can pass it on to their patients?

I was on the pill for eight years, the latter five of which were spent trying to get off of it, but being told over and over by my doctors that it was the only choice that made sense for me.

After reading Toni Wechsler's "Taking Charge of Your Fertility" over a year ago, I was outraged at how this information was never even suggested to me until I sought it out for myself, and how the misconception of FAM as being the same thing as "the rhythm method" is still so prevalent, and keeps such a safe, inexpensive, and accessible method of contraception (or fertility enhancement, depending upon how you choose to use it) out of mainstream use.

While FAM does not protect you from STDs (as is the case with all other non-barrier methods), it can be a life-changing discovery for women who are willing to take charge of and become more knowledgeable about their bodies and how they work to prevent or encourage pregnancies.

I highly encourage anyone who is through with hormonal methods but thinks there is no other option, to take the time to read up on the Fertility Awareness Method. The most comprehensive and well-known book on the topic that I know of is Toni Wechsler's book that I cited above, but much of the rudimentary information is on the website at www.tcoyf.com.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]