I ran across an article called The Vindication of Humanae Vitae by Mary Eberstadt published in "First Things." It's well worth a read, and cites many non-Catholic studies which seem to bear out Pope Paul VI's predictions re: what would happen the more widespread a contraceptive mentality were it to become widely accepted (as it certainly has throughout society at large and among Catholics. )
To quote just a bit:
"That there is no auxiliary literature of grievance for men—who, for the most part, just don’t seem to feel they have as much to grieve about in this new world order—is something else that Humanae Vitae and a few other retrograde types saw coming in the wake of the revolution. As the saying goes, and as many people did not stop to ask at the time, cui bono? Forty years later, the evidence is in. As Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver observed on Humanae Vitae’s thirtieth anniversary in 1998, “Contraception has released males—to a historically unprecedented degree—from responsibility for their sexual aggression.” Will any feminist who by 2008 disagrees with that statement please stand up?"
While I do not necessarily agree with all the observations in full, for instance, although Muslims don't believe in contraception, I don't think they respect women more because of that - I find most of these observations to ring true and they seem to be backed up by empirical data.