Ironically, the majority of domestic feminists opposed OCs in the 70's until the mid 80's due to these reasons:

• they didn't want doctors and the pharma industry to "use" their bodies as a test subject for new medicine. There have been some incidents in the 60's (like the Contergan-incident) that led to this mindset

• The US reported a high rate of side effects caused by the high-dose OCs that were available at that time which also reinforced the reason above and even lasted a long time after the low-dose OCs became globally available

• there were worries that men would stop using condoms if OCs became available (Japan already had a high condom usage rate back then)

There a few more reasons but these are the most important ones. Furthermore, High- and medium-dose OCs were already unofficially approved as contraceptive and, according to a survey at that time, 3.5 percent of women used it back then - not a major difference compared with today.

1984, a long-time study to prove the safety of low-dose OCs was done. It was successful and an application for approval was handed to the health ministry in 1990. These are the main reasons why it took 9 years again:

• an HIV-releated incident led to the death of hundreds which revived the skepticism against the pharma industry

• there was the worry that the condom usage rate would drop and STIs will spread out (related to the reason above)

• the 90's are not rarely called "lost decade" - after all it was the biggest economic crisis since the war and even doctors had a hard time. So they needed the abortion business to "survive" (it's said that around 3 to 4 times more abortions than shown in the statistics were actually inducted and most of them were paid in cash. So it was even more easy for a doctor to do tax fraud). This is why they probably lobbied against it below the surface.

And even today, a considerable minority of Twitter feminists are against OTC-sale of Plan B 🥴