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

[Wells]

Doesn't matter, they accomplish the same goal for each party.

They really don't. A woman's choice to abort is either a "share burden or no burden for anyone" and Laize's demands give men the power of "no burden for me or no burden".

---------- Post added 2012-11-28 at 06:49 AM ----------

I feel like this is where the argument should end. The law can't compensate for biological differences, and it shouldn't.

I think it would be better to say that the law should not compensate for just unequality. Women have more options because they have more on the line.

[Xarkan]

Sure it is. It's her choice to bring the kid to term. Why shouldn't she bear the total responsibility if he's not ready? Can you provide one reason that doesn't involve the child's quality of life (Since she could have opted to nullify its life altogether)?

In the real world the only obligation forced on the man is financial though. Unless she gives the child up for adoption she is 'forced' to take care of a child a good 18 years. The two do not compare.

The man still has the choices about being a father or not, it is provider he must be in your scenario

[Laize]

"Too much trust" is pretty thoroughly informed by your crippling stance on women tbh. And I don't see why someone should be guaranteed a reactive way to avoid responsibility for the results of their decisions.

Because half the human population is. The other half should too.

Probably because you're still pretending there's no difference between a clump of cells and a child. Which is pretty stupid so I'm just going to let you keep doing it and ignore it when you do.

I'm not calling it a child. I'm calling it a human. That much is undeniable.

[starlord]

look. you want to be able to walk away from children you father. more power to you.

just stop pretending its in the name of equal rights by drawing whatever false equivalancies you can pull randomly out of a hat.

[Destruktion]

You're misunderstanding. The only power a woman has that a man doesn't, whether to carry, is a power only a woman could have. And her share of the burden is greater than the man's. Its perfectly natural she'd have an option he doesn't.

It may be natural, but that doesn't make it right. The man has the right to a hand in the decision-making process, and since it's unethical for a woman's body to be controlled by anybody but herself, there's only one other place where the man can have the say and that's whether or not to take responsibility for this child.

There are all kinds of ways for a guy to avoid getting a kid. IUDs are statistically perfect for instance. Just sleep with a woman who has one.

I've never met a woman who has "I HAVE AN IUD" stamped on her forehead.

A mother gets to choose to abort because its her body. No one is saying a man has to actually be a father in an meaningful way, but the child's need to be supported supersedes his desire not to have to pay for the result of his decisions.

The child's need does not supersede the man's because at the time the opt out is made the child is just a "clump of cells." The rights of a living person supersedes the rights of a clump of cells. It is the mother's decision whether or not the child will even have a need for support, and she should make that decision independent of the father.

[Wells]

Because half the human population is. The other half should too.

Half of the population has bodily autonomy as a relevant issue, the other half doesn't. Equal rights are for equal positions. Men and women are not in equal positions here so long as a woman's body is required for the creation of a child.

[DuckieMage]

So pretty much...
If the woman wants the child, the man should not be held responsible for the child and doesn't owe her anything and shouldn't have to give support.
But if the man wants the child, the woman must carry the child to term so he can have it.

It sounds like you want to have the say no matter what the woman wants and her wants, needs, and desires have to take a back seat to the man's desire.
You want total power with no compromise for what the woman wants. You are saying that the man is right no matter what the woman wants.
Sounds sexist and Male Dominate to me.

[kattarina]

Doesn't matter, they accomplish the same goal for each party. It ultimately comes down to the woman, as it always has, whether or not the child will live. She can make that decision just as well with or without the father's presence in the situation.

Perhaps this may sound like a very simplistic aproach to the issue, but knowing where a person stands when it comes to conception prior to intercorse seams like a very simple way to avoy any unwanted parental responsibities.

[Wells]

The man has the right to a hand in the decision-making process,

he does. The only reactive option a woman has is with regards to what is done with her own body.

The problem is you guys see women having an option that men don't have and then assuming that that means men need another option too, while completely ignoring the reason the woman has that decision and how that doesn't apply to men.

I've never met a woman who has "I HAVE AN IUD" stamped on her forehead.

You should try talking to a girl about birth control before you sleep with her.

The child's need does not supersede the man's because at the time the opt out is made the child is just a "clump of cells." The rights of a living person supersedes the rights of a clump of cells.

No one is saying the man has to support a fetus. He has to support the child that he created though.

It is the mother's decision whether or not the child will even have a need for support, and she should make that decision independent of the father.

The answer to "women get to decide if they should bear a child in the first place" is not giving men the power to decide whether they want to support their child after it is born. Those aren't analogous.

[DuckieMage]

I've never met a woman who has "I HAVE AN IUD" stamped on her forehead.

Then you better ask.
Because if you don't want the child, then you better have a good reason for not asking/having BC. And "It feels better without a condom" is not a valid excuse.

[Wells]

Perhaps this may sound like a very simplistic aproach to the issue, but knowing where a person stands when it comes to conception prior to intercorse seams like a very simple way to avoy any unwanted parental responsibities.

Don't you know women lie to men right and left about pregnancy all the time! They're out to get us I tell you!

[Grizzly Willy]

I've never met a woman who has "I HAVE AN IUD" stamped on her forehead.

You can't ask?

[DuckieMage]

don't you know women lie to men right and left about pregnancy all the time! They're out to get us i tell you!

those welfare queens are watching and they know which men are the most fertile.
They are coming for you and your money men.

[Grizzly Willy]

I'm also interested in how often of an occurrence it is that women are screwing men over on child support.

[starlord]

those welfare queens are watching and they know which men are the most fertile.
They are coming for you and your money men.

the scent of paranoia is better than the finest cologne.

---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 11:06 PM ----------

I'm also interested in how often of an occurrence it is that women are screwing men over on child support.

as payers or payees?

[DuckieMage]

the scent of paranoia is better than the finest cologne.

Delicccccccciooouussssss.
I could eat all those fertile men up with my lies of affection and love and then I drain them of their money and life force and then eat them to find another male specimen to destroy.

[Destruktion]

it doesnt accomplish the same goal.

I've just shown you how it does.

They really don't. A woman's choice to abort is either a "share burden or no burden for anyone" and Laize's demands give men the power of "no burden for me or no burden".

Men can always choose to share the burden, you know. Not all men are misogynistic, chauvinistic pigs. So really the choice for men reads, since the "no burden" option is derived from abortion and thus available to the woman alone, is "shared burden or no burden for me."
And let's clarify the woman's position as well. "No burden for anyone" sounds too altruistic for my taste. In reality, the woman is making the decision for herself because she has to answer to no one; the decision made for the man is incidental and can be good or bad.

Perhaps this may sound like a very simplistic aproach to the issue, but knowing where a person stands when it comes to conception prior to intercorse seams like a very simple way to avoy any unwanted parental responsibities.

I'm sure it works great on paper. No guarantees once the rubber hits the road.

he does. The only reactive option a woman has is with regards to what is done with her own body.

The problem is you guys see women having an option that men don't have and then assuming that that means men need another option too, while completely ignoring the reason the woman has that decision and how that doesn't apply to men.

This isn't some knee-jerk reaction to a supposed inequality spotted from afar. This is a real issue where men are forced to pay for children whose existence they had no say in. If there were a solution that satisfied that issue yet kept the inequality that is according to you justified by a woman's extra burden, I'd be totally fine with that.

You should try talking to a girl about birth control before you sleep with her.

Again, looks great on paper, but not so much in the real world.

No one is saying the man has to support a fetus. He has to support the child that he created though.

Of course he has to support the child he created. That is why this argument takes place while the child is not a child but a fetus, or a "clump of cells" as you so delicately put it.

The answer to "women get to decide if they should bear a child in the first place" is not giving men the power to decide whether they want to support their child after it is born. Those aren't analogous.

The problem is actually "men are forced to support a child they did not want."

Then you better ask.
Because if you don't want the child, then you better have a good reason for not asking/having BC. And "It feels better without a condom" is not a valid excuse.

I am very concerned about using proper protection during sex. The problem in discussion happens regardless of whether or not protection is used. The only pre-conception solution to this problem is abstinence.

[Laize]

look. you want to be able to walk away from children you father. more power to you.

just stop pretending its in the name of equal rights by drawing whatever false equivalancies you can pull randomly out of a hat.

But it is about equal rights. Women have an out because of biology. Laws exist to smooth out differences in biology (ie. I'm stronger than you but I'm not allowed to hit you.). Ergo - men should have an out too.

[DuckieMage]

The problem is actually "men are forced to support a child they did not want."

The problem is actually, "women are forced to have children they do not want."

[Wells]

Men can always choose to share the burden, you know. Not all men are misogynistic, chauvinistic pigs. So really the choice for men reads, since the "no burden" option is derived from abortion and thus available to the woman alone, is "shared burden or no burden for me."
And let's clarify the woman's position as well. "No burden for anyone" sounds too altruistic for my taste. In reality, the woman is making the decision for herself because she has to answer to no one; the decision made for the man is incidental and can be good or bad.

Do you see the double standard you're employing here? And its still no burden for anyone. That's what abortion results in. No burden for anyone. Why is irrelevant.

This isn't some knee-jerk reaction to a supposed inequality spotted from afar. This is a real issue where men are forced to pay for children whose existence they had no say in. If there were a solution that satisfied that issue yet kept the inequality that is according to you justified by a woman's extra burden, I'd be totally fine with that.

The only time a man has no say in the creation of a child is if he's raped or tricked and I'm fine with him not paying support in either case.

Again, looks great on paper, but not so much in the real world.

Ah yes that real world where women are tricking dudes left and right. If you're this paranoid ask for proof.

Of course he has to support the child he created. That is why this argument takes place while the child is not a child but a fetus, or a "clump of cells" as you so delicately put it.

saying "i'm not going to take care of the child" while its a fetus does not mean its not your child anymore when its bored.

The problem is actually "men are forced to support a child they did not want."

Whether you want to results of a decision you make or not is irrelevant on whether you bear responsibility for the outcomes of said decision.