Isn't it about time the Mens' Rights Movement stopped being treated like a joke?

[Rukentuts]

I am all for choice be lets be honest abortion is not "family planning". It is a reaction choice to an unwanted(unplanned for) pregnacy in non-medical cases. Am I am going to look down on women who make that choice? No, it is not my body or my child so it really is non of my business. Family planning is more along the lines of taking the proper steps to ensure that you don't have an unplanned pregnancy or getting things in order for a planned pregnancy. Now when things go bad, failed birth control, no access to Plan B, or whatever that is when abortion or adoption steps in. When you really don't want a child or just can't afford one those are your last options.

Some women actually do use abortion as their primary form of birth control, believe it or not. I remember my mother's coworker has stated she has had six.

That is what I mean by people being choicey with who they have sex with. If you are with a woman and she tells you up front, "I don't believe in having an abortion or giving up my child for adoption", you know ahead of time your options with that woman. Either you stay with her and take on that risk or you find someone with the same mind set.

This is the same argument we had last night, and quite frankly abortion opponents used to say the same exact thing.

[Jackielope]

Some women actually do use abortion as their primary form of birth control, believe it or not. I remember my mother's coworker has stated she has had six.

This is the same argument we had last night, and quite frankly abortion opponents used to say the same exact thing.

The first comment reminds me of why I've thought that a strikes system might work, but as I think about it more it just gets more convoluted.

And if abortion opponents have said the exact same thing, there's going to be even more shit flying it seems...

[Destruktion]

The safe haven comment was half sarcasm. Meant to be as absurd as the majority of your comments. And just because you cannot weasel your way out of the things you say, or white wash them to make them seem less like the sexist drivel they are, doesn't make me any of the things you say I am.

You want an "opt out" option for men because women are allowed by law to decide the outcome of the pregnancy. "Preferably" before the child is born. How very generous of you. You cannot fast talk your way out of this.

Wow, you're practically foaming at the mouth here.
There is no valid reason for a woman to have unilateral decision-making power over the father's role in the child's possible life. Period.

[Ebildays]

Some women actually do use abortion as their primary form of birth control, believe it or not. I remember my mother's coworker has stated she has had six.

This is the same argument we had last night, and quite frankly abortion opponents used to say the same exact thing.

Just like some men will (if they were able to) use the ability to father a ton of kids and opt out of taking care of them stating they are not ready to be a father. But we are talking about the majority of people like Laize pointed out to me earlier in this thread.

No, the argument is vaild but even in the argument is vaild it is still no one's business about what a person chooses to do with their body. But I am just old fashioned and feel that people should know who they are having sex with and if you cannot talk to them about family planning before you have sex with them there is a problem. While I have an opinion on the issue I am not going to take away someone's choice because I may not agree with it, especially when it has no effect on me what they choose to do.

[Rukentuts]

No, the argument is vaild but even in the argument is vaild it is still no one's business about what a person chooses to do with their body. But I am just old fashioned and feel that people should know who they are having sex with and if you cannot talk to them about family planning before you have sex with them there is a problem. While I have an opinion on the issue I am not going to take away someone's choice because I may not agree with it, especially when it has no effect on me what they choose to do.

If you do not have a problem with one party having a choice, why is giving the other party the same choice a problem?

[Cephilia]

If you do not have a problem with one party having a choice, why is giving the other party the same choice a problem?

Because they aren't essentially the same choice. A woman in this case has a choice between keeping the baby and accepting the changes it's going to make to her body as well as taking the responsibility of taking care of a child and possibly life threatening and painful procedure of abortion and the mental impact essentially killing your child is going to have as a price (women start bonding with the child even long before birth). Man has the choice to not take responsibility, not have to pay anything and leave a fatherless child and being responsible father as well as being in economically worse situation. I'd say the woman has considerably worse consequences from her choice to be what I consider irresponsible.

And in the end, I really don't care about the bickering between parents here. What I think matters most is the child; if mother makes the choice to not be a parent, there will be no kid. If father decides he doesn't want to be a parent or pay child support, there will still be a kid to suffer from the decision they couldn't possibly have any say in. I agree it's not fair and that it is a difficult issue; but I also think this is an issue where we'll never be equal simply out of biological reasons.

[Rukentuts]

Because they aren't essentially the same choice. A woman in this case has a choice between keeping the baby and accepting the changes it's going to make to her body as well as taking the responsibility of taking care of a child and possibly life threatening and painful procedure of abortion and the mental impact essentially killing your child is going to have as a price (women start bonding with the child even long before birth). Man has the choice to not take responsibility, not have to pay anything and leave a fatherless child and being responsible father as well as being in economically worse situation. I'd say the woman has considerably worse consequences from her choice to be what I consider irresponsible.

But to speculate, do you think a woman would prefer to know before or after birth that a father wants no part?

[Ebildays]

If you do not have a problem with one party having a choice, why is giving the other party the same choice a problem?

If you look at one of my above post you will see that I took the time to lay out how I would like to see that choice come about. While I don't agree with it, I would still vote for it. I don't 100% agree with abortion especially when people use it as a form of birth control but I am pro-choice and I support that right. While it may be hard to believe I do try to look beyond my own personal morals and focus on the bigger picture.

My problem is trying to lable that option as not abandoning the child because you are abandoning your child. It is the same if a woman or a man chooses to give up rights to that child for whatever reason. People are trying to pretty up the fact that what they want is "Hey I don't want this kid never did so let me remove my rights to it and move on with the rest of my life". Or making it seem like people are trying to make them be fathers when what people are saying is "Just give the cash over, you don't even have to see the kid if you don't want to." I just don't like the sugar coating of what they really want. Plus it does not help that most of the men in this thread come off as woman haters and I still am wondering why they just don't date other men. It would solve all the problems they are talking about.

Now by the same token if a man is willing to support a woman while pregnant and take the child after birth, I don't see why a woman would not listen to that request, at that point she can just call herself a surrogate mother. Or if she wants to give up her rights by adopting the child out why not give the man the option to take the child. Some men really do want their children and when a woman does that to them it is hurtful to them.

[Cephilia]

But to speculate, do you think a woman would prefer to know before or after birth that a father wants no part?

I think it would be before, since I see no advantages in hearing about it after compared to before. The father's view is hopefully a part of the decision (unless it's a case of, for example, a woman who's personal ethics don't allow abortion and that's why she doesn't consider that option) and also because there's a lot of planning and arranging to do before a baby is due. It's certainly good to know what kind of support you have available and whether or not you have to take in to account the fathers interests (for example; if you are moving to a large apartment, which is quite common, how far can that apartment be? If the father wants to keep in touch with his child, moving 1500 miles away might not be the best choice).

A bit different subject, but it's the first time I've encountered clear and enraging male discrimination in my own life (small things are always there, but this made me actually angry because I feel it's an important thing). Where I live, we have an exceptional and admired health care system for pregnant families and children under the school age. The idea is to offer support and information as well as guarantee a good home for every child, monitor growth and catch illnesses as soon as possible etc, and there's tons of good material there. They seem to take the whole family in to account; the parent's relationship, alcohol use, how the father feels, with one glaring difference; only women were asked about violence in the relationship. No one asked the father if he thought the mother was violent or if there was a risk of violence towards the child. It seemed not only like saying violence towards men wasn't an issue, but also a failure to securing the best possible conditions for the baby.

[Destruktion]

Because they aren't essentially the same choice. A woman in this case has a choice between keeping the baby and accepting the changes it's going to make to her body as well as taking the responsibility of taking care of a child and possibly life threatening and painful procedure of abortion...

Let's drop the part about abortion being "possibly life threatening." Abortion is safer than childbirth.

[Ebildays]

Let's drop the part about abortion being "possibly life threatening." Abortion is safer than childbirth.

That source does give a .6 chance of death out of 100,000 abortions so that does make it "possibly life threatening".

[Destruktion]

That source does give a .6 chance of death out of 100,000 abortions so that does make it "possibly life threatening".

The point is that the mortality rate here is so low compared to childbirth that by calling the procedure "possibly life threatening" is being not only pedantic, but also disingenuous (or even deceptive) by presenting it as a serious concern.

[Spectral]

That source does give a .6 chance of death out of 100,000 abortions so that does make it "possibly life threatening".

I guess so. By that standard though, just about everything is life threatening.

[Ebildays]

The point is that the mortality rate here is so low compared to childbirth that by calling the procedure "possibly life threatening" is being not only pedantic, but also disingenuous (or even deceptive) by presenting it as a serious concern.

No, it is a serious concern because if you have ever had to have any kind of surgery where it could be life threatening no matter how small of a chance you think about it. Are you saying that if a doctor told you that you need to have surgery and that there is a small chance of death you are not going to think about it? I know I would be thinking "Knowing my luck I would be .6%.

I guess so. By that standard though, just about everything is life threatening.

Final Destination says so.

Joking aside yes, but if we live in fear of being hurt or dying people would never get out of bed. So we put aside the fear of dying to everyday things so we can function day to day. But when it is something outside the norm for us ( like abortion) we will think about that risk of death.

[Aalyy]

Wow, you're practically foaming at the mouth here.
There is no valid reason for a woman to have unilateral decision-making power over the father's role in the child's possible life. Period.

Describing my post with hysterical adjectives doesn't make it any less valid. Yes, sexism pisses me off esp. thinly disguised sexism where someone talks out both sides of his mouth about how fathers are so discriminated against but they should be allowed to walk away scott free from any responsibility if they don't happen to want a child. I mean, get real!

If men get to bear zero responsibility for a child just because they say so then that leaves the woman with 100% of the responsibility because of Biology regardless of her choice. That isn't fair. What was someone saying about making laws to circumvent Biology's inherent inequality??? Well there ya go! That's what we have on the books now.

[Rukentuts]

If men get to bear zero responsibility for a child just because they say so then that leaves the woman with 100% of the responsibility because of Biology regardless of her choice. That isn't fair. What was someone saying about making laws to circumvent Biology's inherent inequality??? Well there ya go! That's what we have on the books now.

Bull, it's entirely fair. She can either choose to have the child and take responsibility or not.

Or course, you love ratting on men for not wanting to be a father, but when women have an abortion because they don't want to be a mother, it's all fine and dandy. Stop it.

[Laize]

Describing my post with hysterical adjectives doesn't make it any less valid. Yes, sexism pisses me off esp. thinly disguised sexism where someone talks out both sides of his mouth about how fathers are so discriminated against but they should be allowed to walk away scott free from any responsibility if they don't happen to want a child. I mean, get real!

If men get to bear zero responsibility for a child just because they say so then that leaves the woman with 100% of the responsibility because of Biology regardless of her choice. That isn't fair. What was someone saying about making laws to circumvent Biology's inherent inequality??? Well there ya go! That's what we have on the books now.

So what you're saying is "Men have no reproductive rights but we should bleed our hearts out for women's"? Am I reading you correctly?

[starlord]

Bull, it's entirely fair. She can either choose to have the child and take responsibility or not.

Or course, you love ratting on men for not wanting to be a father, but when women have an abortion because they don't want to be a mother, it's all fine and dandy. Stop it.

because abortion doesnt leave a child that needs taken care of.
and by placing all of the responsibility on the mother you make it so if she doesnt abort, she is putting her child at a disadvantage in any case.

[Laize]

because abortion doesnt leave a child that needs taken care of.
and by placing all of the responsibility on the mother you make it so if she doesnt abort, she is putting her child at a disadvantage in any case.

It's not placing responsibility on the mother.

She still has the option to abort or adopt the kid away. No one is taking those choices from her.

Do you really not see how she's choosing to bring the kid to term and, as such, if the father wants no part the entirety of the consequences of that decision should rest on her shoulders.

[starlord]

It's not placing responsibility on the mother.

She still has the option to abort or adopt the kid away. No one is taking those choices from her.

it is. isnt the whole argument that men have no choice, and therefore no inherent responsibility?

the kids quality of life is *entirely* her responsibility. if she doesnt abort she is doing it a disservice.