"Impregnating a woman" is a choice men make now!? Yea no, i do not think so, having sex isn't even remotely the same as impregnating a woman. Or are you going to say here that all sex is solely for impregnation and that it isn't something pleasurable that humans do for fun? Having a child is 100% a choice that the woman makes, when you choose to do something then you should also bare full responsibility for that choice.
Nice opt out, okay i'll give you that one, but okay then, it seems you have mistaken my words for something else then.
Again, those pill are not something that is an option now, it might be in the future, and that would be great! But it isn't right now, so again, not a choice on the mens part.
If you dont want something to happen then don't let it happen is blaming someone to not let something happen that he has no control over if it happens or not.
Again, because having a child is 100% a choice the responsibility for this choice should be had by the people who made this choice. Why do you think that someone else should be responsible for the choice that someone else made?
- - - Updated - - -
Again, you wont get one, doctors often flat out refuse young people for this, and, having to surgically remove bodily functions is not really a choice. Having to alter your bodies in order to get the same privileges as someone else gets naturally is ethically not something you can sell.
Last edited by mmoc4a3002ee3c; 2017-12-17 at 01:52 PM.
Assuming he won 200K a year, he just threw that much money away. Feticide is legally murder in Virginia, where this happened.
So ponder this - he wasted 200K (and his life) to save 40K for 18 years.
But even without the maths... anyone committing or even promoting forced abortion is the scum of the fucking Earth. Present company not excepted.
That's an interesting fact, but you're dodging the subject.
Parenthood is no longer defined at the moment of conceptions, we have pills, condoms and abortions. Do the father get a say in if the pregnancy go to term or is aborted ? If the answer is no then they cant really be held responsible, they simply had no control over this decision and much like the mother, parenthood must be a voluntary act.
"You can get a vasectomy" And she can get her tubes tied. So let's outlaw abortion because CLEARLY it's not needed at all.
This is the most hypocritical stance ever.
The woman is very happy to have the right to her body, her life, her choice and the luxury of the 21th century technological advancement at the tip of her fingers.
But when it's about the man he suddenly doesnt have any rights, he just have responsibilities, it's like he's some peasant from the middle age, abortion doesnt exist in his world and he doesnt even have the right to his own money.
The more I read the absolute insanity posted here, the more I understand the man in the OP.
The entire argument here is that women are trapping men into parenthood that men are affronted to bear some financial responsibility for--I am suggesting ways men can avoid the situation. The rest of what you're saying is nonsense. Of course women can get their tubes tied, and if women start showing up here kvetching about all their unwanted pregnancies they have to deal with even though they don't wanna, I'll tell them as much.
- - - Updated - - -
Women's options aren't peachy either. But not liking them is still not the same as not having them.
The problem is not about "trapping someone", wether the intent is malicious or not, parenthood is a 2 people job and the man should have his say.
The fact they dont have ANY say in the abortion decision and still full responsibilites in the consequence of it is a basic lack of rights. Which would be solved by allowing them to opt-out of parenthood. This way bodily authonomy of the woman is untouched and equality is restored by giving the man options, this would very easily prevent the scenario in the OP.
Would you really ? Would you actually tell them to take responsibilites and that abortion isnt an option ?if women start showing up here kvetching about all their unwanted pregnancies they have to deal with even though they don't wanna, I'll tell them as much.
Arn't peachy is no were as bad as sterile, sterilizing your self in order to get some right others are granted naturally really isn't an option, and you know it. An after morning pill is nowhere as bad as having to surgically sterilize yourself.
So no, men do not have a choice, no matter how much you whine that they do, if i where to suggest that abortions are bullshit because if she doesn't want to get pregnant all she needs to do is not have sex or tie her tubes you would not believe the outrage there'd be. But you are perfectly fine laying this law down on men.
If you want to make the argument against abortion, then feel free to try and make that argument. He did give his permission, by being an adult who is willingly having sex with a fertile female. No other action is necessary, making them equally responsible for the outcome.
The man does have a say--I've outlined it repeatedly. You may elect not to exercise it or dislike your options but you have them, just like women do. By the way, having an abortion IS dealing with the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy. I think what you're trying to capture is that you don't quite find it punitive enough.
You DO have choices; you just don't like them.
They have been much more active on here ever since r/incels got shut down. It's both hilarious and a bit frightening at the same time.
Half of them probably can't even find a woman to stick their dick in, yet men's pregnancy rights are apparently one of their most pressing concerns.
The thing you outlined perfectly is that you're the same hypocrites as the rest : You're dancing around the issue. You're telling "both parties" that they have "options" and to be "responsible" while completely denying that they are in complete asymmetrical situations.
The man doesnt have any right in abortion. His child could be taken from him right in front of him and his opinions would be worth nothing. If the woman decide to keep the child against his wishes, his opinions is once again worth nothing. If the pregnancy carry to term, his money is no longer his. He's expected to pay for a decision he had no control on.
The woman is on the opposite side, she decide everything unilateraly, and the man is expected to suffer the consequences of her actions. Whatever she does.
The more I talk about it and well, the more it become clear that the man in the OP isnt so bad after all. Because taking an unilateral decision to end the child life or not and have the other party suffer the consequences is litteraly what happen everyday in legal abortion decision and you're somehow absolutely fine with it.
The only thing that really shock you or disgust you in this case, is that the role were reversed for once. That's pretty fucking shameful.