Since the invention of the rubber condom in the 1850 s, and the first vasectomy in the 1890s (not all heroes wear capes) male contraception hasn't made much progress in over a century.
And, to put it bluntly, why would it?
For decades, contraception – and the responsibility of preventing pregnancy – has been placed largely onto women, with options such as the pill, implant, injection and IUD becoming commonplace, along with their side effects. Ahem, blood clots? No biggie, right? Right?!
Yes, what was once heralded as the liberation of women from the fear of unwanted pregnancies, allowing them to have sex more freely and safely, may have also created a strange imbalance: somehow, contraception became women's problem to solve.
But this might be changing.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has just announced male contraceptives could be on shelves by 2031, with several hormonal and non-hormonal options undergoing clinical trials.
These include a daily hormonal gel designed to suppress sperm production, a non-hormonal pill that works by disrupting sperm production, and an injectable hydrogel that blocks sperm from travelling. The WHO has also released its first guidelines outlining the safety, effectiveness and reversibility standards for new male contraceptives.
Professor Lisa Wynn, from Macquarie University's School of Communication, Society and Culture and the Global Indigenous Futures Research Centre, has spent years researching reproductive health, contraception and the social and cultural forces that shape them.
Looking back at the history of contraception, she says there is something particularly strange (but not surprising) about how little progress has been made when it comes to men, especially when we consider the extraordinary medical advances made in other areas.
"It's really interesting to think about the fact that there is no male contraception other than vasectomies and condoms - we've had more than 65 years of the pill," reflects Wynn.
"It's really intriguing to think about why that is – especially since we have already solved so many really challenging biomedical challenges. Effective antiretroviral therapy for HIV, for example, has reached the point where HIV is no longer a death sentence – so the fact that it has taken so long to get new male contraceptives is a fascinating little conundrum."
Unsurprisingly, when it comes to inequalities in women's reproductive health, medical misogyny is an all-too-familiar culprit.
The imbalance has been shaped by the way medical research is funded, whose health problems are prioritised, and the social and cultural expectations placed on women.
Recent global data highlights this imbalance: PMS, menopause, maternal health conditions, cervical cancer and endometriosis account for 14 per cent of the women's health gap yet received less than 1 per cent of cumulative research funding between 2019 and 2023 .
In that sense, growing investment in male contraception signals a shift, driven in part by demand from men themselves.
"I think we're also seeing a realisation, even among more conservative men, that by not having anything other than vasectomy or condoms at their disposal, men feel like maybe they've got less control, and that having that option is actually really valuable, which has created a demand actually for a more effective contraceptive method for men.
"And that's also for both men who are not in committed partnerships and who don't want to risk getting somebody pregnant, and those in a committed relationship who want to be part of the solution.
"This is coming together with the realisation by venture capitalists that there's a lot of profit to be made in something that could be useful to a really large percentage of the world's population."
But contraception is never just about the technology. It's also about trust.
For some people, having control over their own contraception may be about making decisions about their reproductive future independently. For others, particularly those in committed relationships, it could open up a different conversation – if it takes two people to make a baby, why should the onus only be on one person when it comes to protection?
"I think the biggest of these new reproductive health technologies is going to be men who want to have control over their own reproductive futures, and who maybe don't trust the existing technologies," says Wynn.
"And then the other, is going to be from people in committed relationships who do trust each other, but they're having a conversation about who is going to be responsible for contraception. But no matter what contraceptive option you use, trust is always important."
And perhaps, the broader conversations male contraception sparks in society are just as important as the options it could offer.
Of course, a new method won't solve every inequality around reproductive health, but it could change how we think about reproductive responsibility, and who gets to share in it.
For Lisa, that means not only asking what male contraception makes possible, but how easily people can access it - both for men in the future, and importantly, for women right now.
"What we do know is when you have to get a prescription for something, you're so much less likely to use it," explains Wynn.
"I think there's still so much work to be done in terms of research and gathering data on male contraceptive options.
"But right now, I think one of the most important things that we could do in Australia is to lobby for policy change to make an oral contraceptive available without a prescription to women because it just increases choice and options of use – that is always a good thing."
Top image: Olena Malik/getty.com
