Boy... this makes me really eager to stop advocating mens rights...

[Deleted]

Sure it's a reasonable amount of time.

16 weeks is like, 2 weeks before having an abortion starts becoming a problem in sweden.

Beyond week 18 you need a good reason or the child being damaged for an abortion to take place, after week 22 you're not allowed an abortion at all.

[Deleted]

Except for it to be valid you both would have to sign and have it notorized by a legitimate 3rd party before the child was concieved.

Seeing has how a great many of these children are conceived via random no strings sex it would be quite awkward.
I mean if I find some drunken gal in a bar who is all hot and horny at 2am I don't think I am gonna be able to get her to a notary and keep her in the mood.

I was more thinking of something you sign with the government and not specific to any one partner.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Studys have shown. If a man has a comfortable relationship with his mother. He will less likely have problems with girls later in life.

Of course you add in some non-sense that literally has no bearing in this conversation..

[skrump]

My only concern with that would be how exactly to legally ascertain that the man was fully informed and made cognizant of the circumstances and their consequences.

Easy enough, Women should just be required to give the fathers information to her medical practitioner so that they can contact him, should she fail to do so she then defaults to 100% of the responsibility of the child.

I mean really the man has no motive not to talk to said doctor to varify he is aware of the situation and make it known that he doesn't wish to be held legally responsible.

The only downside with that is that the women might be unsure of who the father is in which case she should maybe stop opening her legs for random customers. (guess they could round up all the potential fathers they can find) but so many Dna tests could get expensive and as far as I am concerned the women should have to flip the bill for it considering it's her fault for the random fuckery.

---------- Post added 2013-01-20 at 02:38 PM ----------

I was more thinking of something you sign with the government and not specific to any one partner.

I dunno I could see men potentially abusing that and not informing the women they have signed such a document, though I can't see any logical reason for doing so other than being a complete jackass.

Furthermore with something like that you could essentially stay with that women half of the kids childhood before saying Oh btw I signed this long time ago and I am leaving now free of burden.

[Deleted]

The people arguing against a man's chance to opt out before the child is born either:

1. Don't have the mental capacity to grasp why it is currently hypocritical.

2. Are white knight's hoping that sucking up to females on MMOC might give them some karma points in real life! And/or hardcore feminists, who support equal rights..When it fits them! They are not mutually exclusive either!

3. Yelling "IT'S MA BOODAH".. Very good argument indeed.

[skrump]

16 weeks is like, 2 weeks before having an abortion starts becoming a problem in sweden.

Beyond week 18 you need a good reason or the child being damaged for an abortion to take place, after week 22 you're not allowed an abortion at all.

Here in the states I think it is legal up until roughly the 6 month mark.

Though myself I don't find it immoral to kill anything that doesn't have the mental capabilities to value it's own life so I wouldn't be against euthanizing newborn babies assuming it's what the mother wanted. (waiting that long would of course be retarded as you would then be required to pay for the burial or cremation.)

[Deleted]

Here in the states I think it is legal up until roughly the 6 month mark.

Though myself I don't find it immoral to kill anything that doesn't have the mental capabilities to value it's own life so I wouldn't be against euthanizing newborn babies assuming it's what the mother wanted. (waiting that long would of course be retarded as you would then be required to pay for the burial or cremation.)

After 25 Weeks its murder.

[skrump]

I wouldn't say a few weeks is shortly after.

Well due to pms I figure a women who is unwilling to admit it to herself would have to realize she was pregnant if she was more than a week late.
Assuming that is information she shares with the man when it first becomes a concern I don't see why he couldn't Opt out of responsibility before he was even 100% sure though he would be required to notify the female of his decision just like she was required to notify him of the pregnancy.

That said if their is an actual relationship between the 2 people I see no reason why they couldn't sign proper documentation before hand which could eventually allow the situation to be completely avoided once it becomes to late.

[Spectral]

Women are nothing more then fields for Men to put their seed in. They don't deserve rights.

If it weren't for reading this board, I'd barely believe misogyny was a real thing any more, since I never really see it. That leads me to suspect there's a lot of e-tough sentiments expressed.

[Cybran]

Here in the states I think it is legal up until roughly the 6 month mark.

Though myself I don't find it immoral to kill anything that doesn't have the mental capabilities to value it's own life so I wouldn't be against euthanizing newborn babies assuming it's what the mother wanted. (waiting that long would of course be retarded as you would then be required to pay for the burial or cremation.)

What the hell is wrong with you?

[Cybran]

A lot of people seem to hide it in public and only express it in private it seems, and to them, the anonymity of the internet makes them feel like it's time to spout all of it, because they won't be caught by people they know irl(Most of the time, anyways)

Way to use a barely serious and inflamatory post to discredit the whole opposition. Classy.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

If it weren't for reading this board, I'd barely believe misogyny was a real thing any more, since I never really see it. That leads me to suspect there's a lot of e-tough sentiments expressed.

I believe he was being sarcastic.

[Cybran]

I believe he was being sarcastic.

Spectral obviously knew that. It just fit his narritive that we that we are mysoginists.

[Spectral]

Way to use a barely serious and inflamatory post to discredit the whole opposition. Classy.

Yeah, I'm sure you loudly inform potential mates that you consider their bodily autonomy to be a nonsense concept. There's no way that's not just misogyny expressed from behind a wall of anonymity.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Yeah, I'm sure you loudly inform potential mates that you consider their bodily autonomy to be a nonsense concept. There's no way that's not just misogyny expressed from behind a wall of anonymity.

Just like I bet the women hoping to find a baby daddy to support their babies loudly informs them as such. Sorry, man hating is as relevant as woman hating.

[Ebildays]

I hate to poo poo on anyone's parade but letting men have the same amount of time to "opt out" as a woman has to get an abortion is not going to work. I say that because it becomes dependent on the woman notifying the man in time for him to make the decision. TLC already has that show "I didn't know I was pregnant" and I see some women using that as an excuse for late notification of the men involved.

[Spectral]

Just like I bet the women hoping to find a baby daddy to support their babies loudly informs them as such. Sorry, man hating is as relevant as woman hating.

The difference is that people are openly expressing their loathing of females in this thread (see my signature), as where no one at all is defending the hypothetical entrapment scenario.

[Rukentuts]

The difference is that people are openly expressing their loathing of females in this thread (see my signature), as where no one at all is defending the hypothetical entrapment scenario.

Probably because it pretty much never happens, and is next to impossible to prove in court. This thread was started with fallacious hypothetical numbers in a feeble attempt to blow things out of proportion.

[Cybran]

The difference is that people are openly expressing their loathing of females in this thread (see my signature), as where no one at all is defending the hypothetical entrapment scenario.

If you had cared to read the thread you would see that most men are labled "deadbeats" that want to abuse any hypotetical from of legal abortion (aka cutting off ties to an unwanted pregnancy). I think that this kind of thinking "Most men are deadbeats that will leave their kids if they could" is much more sexist then asking for legal protection from Gold diggers and crazy teens poking holes in condoms.

As for your signature. Why should bodily autonomy have the power to ruin a man's whole life? Why does bodily autonomy have the power to extend over to some guy with his own body? Why doesn't anyone care about the bodily autonomy if baby boys that get their genitals mutilated?

Probably because it pretty much never happens, and is next to impossible to prove in court. This thread was started with fallacious hypothetical numbers in a feeble attempt to blow things out of proportion.

How can you say it never happens when it's so hard to prove? The numbers could be accurate for all we know.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

The difference is that people are openly expressing their loathing of females in this thread (see my signature), as where no one at all is defending the hypothetical entrapment scenario.

You haven't been here for the whole thread have you =p and if by "openly" you mean sarcastically, then "sure"