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

[starlord]

You know what? Sure. Let's go with that since you're so insistent. I want the option to walk away from the possible result of a decision I made to have sex. Not because I'm a bad person but because I have no desire to be a father and don't believe my obligations should be dictated to me by a woman whose goals are antithetical to mine.

so can we stop pretending its about equal rights?

[obdigore]

Well vasectomies have a 1:2,000 change of failure, but that also goes down over time.

There are flawless ways to sterilize.

Yes I was speaking of vasectomies. I'm unaware of other ways of healthy male sterilization, but they don't sound fun.

[Destruktion]

if its unborn it has no rights. and he has none to exercise on it. you cant opt out of what you dont have.

Just because an unborn has no rights does not preclude its existence and legal relevance.

What? Do you know what an IUD is? Its statistically flawless birth control. Sleep with a girl who has one. You're not getting laid while actively making sure you haven't going have a child.

I have yet to meet a woman who has an IUD, let alone sleep with one. Perhaps IUDs are more common for women in their later years, but not women in their early to mid 20's. And yes, I do understand that IUDs are as easily removed as they are implanted.

Which again, is more power than the woman has.

She either gets to absolve all burden or share it.

The man either gets to absolve his burden or share it.

So the guy decides to walk away.

He's now changed the woman's options to "abort or bear the entire burden"

That's why people are saying this gives more power to men than women have. Its not ok.

"Abort" is equivalent in this case to "absolve [her] burden." I'm sorry the woman has to go through the abortion procedure, but that's just the way women are built. I'd go through a male equivalent if I could, if it meant not having to support a child I don't wish to support, if that's any consolation.

Good thing I'm not saying you have to pay to support a fetus. Once the child is born it needs care. Its need for care trumps your desire to not care for it.

The fetus's right to my responsibility is less than my right to withdraw from responsibility. Responsibility doesn't begin at birth, as you have said it begins from the moment I do the deed.

[DuckieMage]

And the woman has legal recourse to have that man supplement her income with a portion of his. The man has no legal recourse if they agree not to have a child then she decides to. What part of this aren't you getting?

I'm under the impression that men are more likely to walk away from a pregnant girlfriend than a girlfriend forcing her boyfriend to care for her child.

Plus, typically, if the woman finally decides against an abortion, it's more likely she wants it out of love for the unborn child, than her thinking it's a way to milk her boyfriend dry.

[Laize]

And thus, why you can't take away mandatory child support, even if you don't want the child.
Because most the the time, men don't want it and doesn't want the responsibility of taking care of what his sperm made.

Most of the time men don't want the responsibility? Where the fuck do you get that misandrist idea?

Look, just because the situation is shitty if the man changes his mind doesn't make it right to force a shitty situation on the man if the woman changes her mind.

In a perfect world, none of this would happen.
Yes, to you and others, this system may seem archaic and an 'infringement on my rights', but there isn't anything out there that will make it work for both parties.
Welfare is so pathetic, it would never be enough to help a [now] single woman who must raise the child on her own. Even with her working 2-3 jobs, they often won't make ends meet.
Child support eases the pressure and it makes alot more sense than throwing the woman to the wind and telling her to 'fix your own problems, I don't want them'.

Welfare is pathetic? That's funny, because I just read this report earlier today about how current welfare makes it so a single mom is better off earning $29000/year and collecting welfare than she is earning $69,000 and not collecting. That's $40,000/year in welfare benefits.

[DuckieMage]

Actually male sterilization has a chance of not taking. Just like the pill has a chance of not working.

Just like female sterilization has a chance of not taking.

I'm pretty sure that if you really don't want a child, you can find a way to get 100% sterilized...

[Wells]

Yes I was speaking of vasectomies. I'm unaware of other ways of healthy male sterilization, but they don't sound fun.

No, I'd imagine they'd suck pretty bad. I'd say on the real world scale of "nothing is ever truly perfect" a vasectomy is functionally perfect though.

I have yet to meet a woman who has an IUD, let alone sleep with one.

Well you could broach the subject with your would be squeeze.

"Abort" is equivalent in this case to "absolve [her] burden."

No its not. Aborting absolves all responsibility. Walking away absolves only the mans. They're not equivalent.

I'm sorry the woman has to go through the abortion procedure, but that's just the way women are built. I'd go through a male equivalent if I could, if it meant not having to support a child I don't wish to support, if that's any consolation.

And we're back to being ok with legal inequality now because its in your favor.

The fetus's right to my responsibility is less than my right to withdraw from responsibility.

You have no responsibility for the fetus.

Responsibility doesn't begin at birth, as you have said it begins from the moment I do the deed.

Your responsibility for the eventual outcome of your decisions exists, yes. If you have sex and a child results you are responsible for its well being. That is not the same as saying you have a responsibility for the fetus.

[obdigore]

I'm under the impression that men are more likely to walk away from a pregnant girlfriend than a girlfriend forcing her boyfriend to care for her child.

Plus, typically, if the woman finally decides against an abortion, it's more likely she wants it out of love for the unborn child, than her thinking it's a way to milk her boyfriend dry.

And yet she has legal recourse to force involvement, if only monetarily, with the child. He has no way of forcing her to have the child, nor does he have any way of washing his hands of the child, as she does.

You are acting like Laize's thought that he wishes he had the same number of options as the woman is a bad thing. It isn't. What we currently have is probably the best we can do (if the courts were more fair, which they seem to be now compared to when my parents were battling it out), and I'm not advocating change. But for you to act like Men have just as much say in the matter as Women when the law specifically states that they do not is wrong.

[starlord]

Just because an unborn has no rights does not preclude its existence and legal relevance.

yes it does.

[Wells]

And yet she has legal recourse to force involvement, if only monetarily, with the child. He has no way of forcing her to have the child, nor does he have any way of washing his hands of the child, as she does.

You are acting like Laize's thought that he wishes he had the same number of options as the woman is a bad thing. It isn't. What we currently have is probably the best we can do (if the courts were more fair, which they seem to be now compared to when my parents were battling it out), and I'm not advocating change. But for you to act like Men have just as much say in the matter as Women when the law specifically states that they do not is wrong.

The problem is he hasn't proposed a way to give himself the same rights as the woman and he can't because the two situations are irreconcilably different so long as only one party is bearing the child. His proposal just gives men more power than women have.

[obdigore]

The problem is he hasn't proposed a way to give himself the same rights as the woman and he can't because the two situations are irreconcilably different so long as only one party is bearing the child. His proposal just gives men more power than women have.

I understand that. I'm just saying that men are inherently nearly completely powerless in the current situation and acknowledging that should be par for the course. As I said I don't have a better solution, but when a person claims that women keep children because they love them and men dont because they are heartless monsters is a little annoying to me.

[DuckieMage]

Welfare is pathetic? That's funny, because I just read this report earlier today about how current welfare makes it so a single mom is better off earning $29000/year and collecting welfare than she is earning $69,000 and not collecting. That's $40,000/year in welfare benefits.

Yeah.
Welfare is pathetic.
Looks great on paper, rarely actually works like that in real life.
Plus, that Pennsylvania. Not the whole country. Plus, that situation looks so fucking made up. I'm not going to lie. Not every woman is going to get 40k in welfare benefits.

[Destruktion]

Well you could broach the subject with your would be squeeze.

Pardon?

No its not. Aborting absolves all responsibility. Walking away absolves only the mans. They're not equivalent.

If the man has already walked away then aborting resolves only the woman's responsibility.

And we're back to being ok with legal inequality now because its in your favor.

Legal equality, you mean. I can stay or walk away. The woman can stay or walk away.

Your responsibility for the eventual outcome of your decisions exists, yes. If you have sex and a child results you are responsible for its well being. That is not the same as saying you have a responsibility for the fetus.

A child may or may not result from a fetus. All we have in front of us is a fetus. I should not be forced to bear responsibility for something that doesn't even exist yet. That is why this process would occur very early on. I am absolutely against a father walking away from a child, but I am not against a father walking away from a fetus that might or might not become a child.

[Wells]

I understand that. I'm just saying that men are inherently nearly completely powerless in the current situation and acknowledging that should be par for the course. As I said I don't have a better solution, but when a person claims that women keep children because they love them and men dont because they are heartless monsters is a little annoying to me.

The difference is the difference between a fetus and a child. You're pro choice, you understand the difference.

[Laize]

The problem is he hasn't proposed a way to give himself the same rights as the woman and he can't because the two situations are irreconcilably different so long as only one party is bearing the child. His proposal just gives men more power than women have.

They're not irreconcilably different. You just think it's unfair to the woman because you're manufacturing the idea that the man as a responsibility to a child he never wanted.

[starlord]

A child may or may not result from a fetus. All we have in front of us is a fetus. I should not be forced to bear responsibility for something that doesn't even exist yet.

you dont.

That is why this process would occur very early on. I am absolutely against a father walking away from a child, but I am not against a father walking away from a fetus that might or might not become a child.

hes not a father till its born.

[Destruktion]

yes it does.

I beg your pardon, but it really doesn't. That has never been the case with anything at any point in history.

[Laize]

Yeah.
Welfare is pathetic.
Looks great on paper, rarely actually works like that in real life.
Plus, that Pennsylvania. Not the whole country. Plus, that situation looks so fucking made up. I'm not going to lie. Not every woman is going to get 40k in welfare benefits.

Every state has general assistance, medical assistance (especially if you have children), housing assistance, food stamps (are a federal program) as well as energy.

That chart isn't unique to PA by any stretch of the imagination.

[starlord]

They're not irreconcilably different. You just think it's unfair to the woman because you're manufacturing the idea that the man as a responsibility to a child he never wanted.

manufacture us some reasons why he has rights to a fetus.

---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 11:58 PM ----------

I beg your pardon, but it really doesn't. That has never been the case with anything at any point in history.

you dont pay a dime till its born.

[Destruktion]

you dont.

Not according to Wells.

hes not a father till its born.

Good, and that's why we resolve the issue early on.

you dont pay a dime till its born.

Which is why this dispute is settled while the fetus is barely developed.