Debra

You’ve heard of beer googles, which wiki defines as

The term is often humorously applied when an individual is observed making advances towards, later regretting sexual contact with, a partner that is deemed unattractive, unacceptably scandalous, or repulsive when the prospect of sex is considered while sober. The “beer goggles” are considered to have distorted the “wearer’s” vision, making unattractive people appear beautiful, or at least passably attractive.

But did you know that “some people” claim there is such a thing as Pill Goggles? I kid you not. The very knowledgeable [no I couldn’t keep a straight face while typing that] at the pill kills campaign have glommed on to a study that claims

hormones in the pill and other hormonal contraceptives suppress a woman’s interest in masculine men and make boyish men more attractive

“We’ve gone from 1940s and 50s manly heroes Charlton Heston and Sean Connery to today’s baby-faced heartthrobs like Zac Efron and Johnny Depp,” said Katie Walker, American Life League’s communications director. “More reasons to never, ever go on the pill.”

Now remember how everyone thought Rock Hudson was a big old manly man but really he literally was a man’s man?

Well good ole boy Heston has a different love interest also

and Sean Connery while I love many things about him has also condoned domestic abuse, of course so do the type of misogynists who support orgainizations such as ALL and the Pill Kills.

Now for some sense

Firstly, it’s important to point out that this is a non-systemic review. A non-systemic review is one that doesn’t describe the methods used to choose the papers which are included in it. The authors say that 75% of the studies performed in the past decade support their conclusions. But how did they choose the 72 studies included in their review? How exhaustive was their search? Without explaining these methods, it’s entirely possible that the review is biased, focusing on research which supports the writers’ preformed conclusion. Small, non-random samples aren’t fit mathematically to be expanded to populationsBut even assuming that the choices were comprehensive when it comes to the literature, there are flaws in those, too. Most of these studies have incredibly low, non-random sample sizes (i.e. Furthermore, when comparing women who are on the pill to those who are not, the treatment group the women are in isn’t double blind or random. The two groups are self selected – aka women who are on the pill already versus those that aren’t. There is no control, no group that takes a placebo or, at least, goes from not taking the pill to taking it (with one exception – kind of. I’ll explain in a minute). No clinical studies into side effects – like those done on various pharmaceuticals – would be tolerated without these kinds of controls. It goes back to the underlying scientific question of the chicken or the egg. It’s possible that taking birth control affects one’s mate preferences. It’s also possible that those with certain mate preferences are more interested in taking birth control, particularly those interested in the pill over other contraceptive methods like condoms. The studies examined in this review lack the power and structure to determine the difference. After all, studies have shown that there are differences in contraceptive use between political, religious, and age groups. Is it not entirely likely that underlying factor might stimulate a woman to be attracted to ‘boyish’ men and take birth control, like her religious preferences? The only study covered in the review which did, at least, compare women before and after taking the pill, did not randomly select women for each group. The women elected to take the pill or not, which means it does not rule out all of these issues.

Full ALL email which I post for your viewing snark

Washington, DC (08 October 2009) – A British researcher has added to the growing body of evidence showing the link between the birth control pill and the rise of the effeminate heartthrob.

Dr Alexandra Alvergne, of the University of Sheffield, says the hormones in the pill and other hormonal contraceptives suppress a woman’s interest in masculine men and make boyish men more attractive, reports the UK’s Daily Mail.

According to the theory, the Pill could contribute to the rising popularity of effeminate men in the last 40 years.

“We’ve gone from 1940s and 50s manly heroes Charlton Heston and Sean Connery to today’s baby-faced heartthrobs like Zac Efron and Johnny Depp,” said Katie Walker, American Life League’s communications director. “More reasons to never, ever go on the pill.”

The research confirms an August 2008 study from scientists at the University of Liverpool showing that “when the women started taking the pill, their preferences shifted towards the scent of men with more similar genes to their own.”

ALL’s project director for “The Pill Kills Day,” Marie Hahnenberg, reported on the potential hazards this places on relationships.

“There is mounting evidence that the pill can seriously disturb a woman’s healthy, natural tendency to be drawn toward a mate with different immune system genes. This, in turn, can lead to having a genetically similar mate, which increases the risk of infertility and miscarriages. It also means that the pill can change a woman’s love interest so much that she could end up in a relationship with someone to whom she normally wouldn’t be attracted.”

American Life League’s “Pill Kills” project is dedicated to exposing the hidden emotional and physical ramifications of the birth control pill. In August 2008 ALL’s Michael Hichborn also released a video

reporting on the hormonal phenomenon of “Pill Googles.”

“While previous generations of women dreamt about rugged intellectuals carrying them off into the sunset, today’s women are expected to pine over break-dancers who own hair dryers and wear skinny jeans,” Walker said. “Give me Charlton Heston any day.”