>don't they get the right to be squeamish about having an IUD or their hormones altered?
IUD exist without any hormones, and taking hormones generally are safe and extemely well tested. Saying "hormones altered" shows your bias, and you don't think blasting your balls with heat "alters" your hormones? Certainly men who get vasectomies produce less testosterone.
It literally doesn't, it's a weird repeated myth about vasectomies.
https://www.vasectomy.org.au/faqs/sex-life-myths/#:~:text=A%....
>> and taking hormones generally are safe and extemely well tested.
Well, if you are willing to accept an increased risk of cancer, sure, "extremely safe". Like, don't get me wrong, it's still one of the best options for pregnancy prevention, but let's not pretend like the pills are candy - they aren't.
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/h...
What is "Shows your bias" supposed to mean here? Look: There are women who don't like hormonal birth control. They feel bloated &etc. Trust me on this.
> IUD exist without any hormones
Yes, and theoretically and by the numbers it's effective, but did you know that it hurts to put one in? It's actually not a small ask. If a woman chooses it herself without prompting, fine. And in the context of a really long term relationship where you can "have a conversation", maybe. But it's not a little thing. In fact, it hurts enough that it can create a fair amount of resentment.
> you don't think blasting your balls with heat "alters" your hormones?
Actually no, that's not the mechanism at work here.
> Use condoms.
Well, that's reasonable advice, though you still do want to use multiple methods.
The "important problem" should be to have _even safer_ birth control, not male birth control.
Condoms require proper use every time and are not as effective as other methods.