Poll: Male reproductive rights

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Verlander said:
Gotta love a bunch of upset middle class white teenagers throwing their toys out of the pram because they are obviously discriminated against by everyone and everything. This idea is ridiculous and unreasonable, and no human should have a contract over another humans physical or psychological life. That's what we in the industry refer to as slavery.
So does your rule here apply to men and their court ordered labor as slavery?
 

Liquid Paradox

New member
Jul 19, 2009
303
0
0
wait... if I read this correctly... you are suggesting that a man should have the right to force a woman to have an abortion, regardless of her political/religious/ethical beliefs?

Umm... no. Not now, not ever. When you fuck, you do so understanding that a child may be the result. yes this goes both ways, but there is a reason that in the end, it is the choice of the woman.

Of course, if you turned it around, that would be a different story: If the father of the child has been genetically proven (via blood testing) then consent must be signed by the father before the woman can have an abortion. Like I said, when you fuck, you know that a child may be the result. However, if the female wants nothing to do with the baby, the child could still live with the father. As the father, this should be his basic human right, to raise his own child.
 

lucaf

New member
Sep 26, 2009
108
0
0
Crono1973 said:
Vrud said:
Crono1973 said:
Vrud said:
A man has an orgasm and is done.

A woman gestates for nine months, goes through excruciating pain, and suffers hormonal side effects for long after.


Do you see why this might not be equivalent?
Let me fix this for you.

A man has an orgasm and is done. After the baby comes he will work many more hours to give the money away whether he wanted the child or not.

A woman gestates for nine months, goes through excruciating pain, and suffers hormonal side effects for long after.


Do you see why this might not be equivalent?


When you put it like that, it seem like men are getting a raw deal.
. . . Except, doesn't the mother have to pay for the child to live, too? :p
Yes but she is not told how much she must pay every month with the threat of imprisonment. Further, if she doesn't have enough money, she can get welfare so in the end she can live off of food stamps, medicaid, welfare and child support. Everyone except her is paying for her child.

If he can't afford to raise his child, he gets punished. If she can't, she gets paid.
and don't forget, if she doesn't want the burden of raising a child she doesn't have to; she can give it up. if he doesn't want that same burden, tough, he needs to pay. for... reasons
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
lucaf said:
Crono1973 said:
Vrud said:
Crono1973 said:
Vrud said:
A man has an orgasm and is done.

A woman gestates for nine months, goes through excruciating pain, and suffers hormonal side effects for long after.


Do you see why this might not be equivalent?
Let me fix this for you.

A man has an orgasm and is done. After the baby comes he will work many more hours to give the money away whether he wanted the child or not.

A woman gestates for nine months, goes through excruciating pain, and suffers hormonal side effects for long after.


Do you see why this might not be equivalent?


When you put it like that, it seem like men are getting a raw deal.
. . . Except, doesn't the mother have to pay for the child to live, too? :p
Yes but she is not told how much she must pay every month with the threat of imprisonment. Further, if she doesn't have enough money, she can get welfare so in the end she can live off of food stamps, medicaid, welfare and child support. Everyone except her is paying for her child.

If he can't afford to raise his child, he gets punished. If she can't, she gets paid.
and don't forget, if she doesn't want the burden of raising a child she doesn't have to; she can give it up. if he doesn't want that same burden, tough, he needs to pay. for... reasons
That's the reality of things.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
Oh where do I begin. Well first of all, stop bring religion into an argument of what amounts to civil liberty. Woman can use religion as a reason to not get an abortion but there are plenty of other reasons that they don't get one including "I don't want to." Bring this in is just unnecessary and stinks of more religion flaming which these threads are already full of. (on the topic of changing marriage I agree but only because I think if the church has exclusive rights tot he word "marriage" it will solve the gay marriage problem by forcing everyone to have a civil union and letting the church muck around with marriage on its own terms without having people demand the right to it since it will be a privately owned right.)

Secondly, your argument is an argument for equal rights its an argument for reversing the sexist double standard. Whereas women in your argument have exclusive rights to controlling birth here, in your proposed solution men will have the exclusive right as woman can't have children without a man's consent. That doesn't solve anything. If a man doesn't care but wants to torment a woman he can choose to not sign and force her to get an abortion. Not to mention that it creates a huge headache for hospitals since they have to verify the identity of the father to make sure the contract is legal and if its a child of rape then the their would need to be a special outlet for getting the thing waved since the father obviously didn't sign. If someone is from another country where such a contract is not needed there is the question of what to do with the foreign woman in labor. Not to mention the medical ethical implications of not treating someone because the law says not to touch her if she's giving birth without a slip of paper (or worst, that they have to murder the resulting child). Admittedly this is more a secondary concern on legal complications but you can see how putting together such a thing not only doesn't solve anything since it just transfers power to the other sex but it also creates numerous new problems. Having some way for a man to have more influence is good but this particular idea is bad.
 

DeathWyrmNexus

New member
Jan 5, 2008
1,143
0
0
xXxJessicaxXx said:
Crono1973 said:
RachaelHill13 said:
Crono1973 said:
xXxJessicaxXx said:
Crono1973 said:
Here's the reality, when men can't afford to raise their children, they are punished. When women can't afford to raise their children, they are given welfare.
Child support is set at a percentage of income so it is never beyond their means.

LOL, yeah right. Child support is alot more complicated than that. A court can set child support based on your POTENTIAL.

In other words, if a court decides you could be making $100,000 a year they could set the amount based on a percentage of that. That percentage could be more than you make at your current job. Further, child support doesn't take into account any abnormality you may have. Let's say you get laid off because the economy sucks, because your city got flooded or whatever, the child support will build up and if in three months you don't pay...you could be in jail or have your license suspended making it even harder to pay said child support.

Luckily I have never been in such a position but it could happen to me as I have seen it happen to others.

So again, LOL, yeah right!
This happened to my father almost word-for-word. He worked for the government, so his projected income was wonky and the child support was much more than the standard 1/3. Then his job got outsourced a few years back, and the amount he was expected to pay didn't change.
Indeed, it's pathetic that so many support treating men as slaves for committing the crime of having sex that resulted in pregnancy.
Accepting responsibility for your actions must be horrible indeed. If there are flaws in the system then fair enough but that's not to say that the entire idea is flawed.

Men should have to accept responsibility for making a child as much as the woman who 'is left holding it' so to speak.

The casual attitude towards abortion in this thread is kind of shocking I'm pro choice but it's not like going to have your appendix out.
She has every choice in the world. He has... No choice. Yes, that IS horrible. See, if she didn't want a kid, she can keep it in her pants too. Consent to sex isn't consent to parenting. It isn't and never will be. It is her body and thus her right to opt out of being a mother, regardless of his decision.

If he wants to be a father, she can say fuck it anyway. After all, it is her body. However, if SHE makes the choice to have a kid, he is suddenly responsible for her choice? Um, sex isn't the same as being a parent and making the choice to one isn't a locked in deal for the other. If the choice isn't going to be equal, then we need to fix it.

It isn't that abortion is being cavalierly thrown around, it is that men have no choice at all. We can consent to one thing and be forced into another, entirely at the whims of another. That... is fucked up.
 

Caffeinemancer

New member
Dec 17, 2009
11
0
0
I... was deeply hoping this thread was just some kind of troll.


...


I'm still not entirely sure it isn't.

That being said, watch me reply anyway!


Do I think there ought to be birthing contracts? Not a chance. Do I think the general masses need to be a little bit smarter about using protection? Actually yes. And do I think there need to be some changes made to the system, that prevents women from working guys over (in the not-so-happy way)? Absolutely. I just think your suggestion as to how to fix the problem is utter derp, that's all.

If you don't really want a child, then try your hardest not to encourage an unwanted pregnancy along. Take the pill. Use the condoms. Buy some spermicidal lubricant. All of the above. Or hey, do the best thing ever and just buy a chastity belt! Your woohoo goes nowhere near her whazzit. Safest sex ever. All the cool kids are doing it. And for the record, contrary to popular belief, it is not JUST the woman's job to make sure babies don't happen. That responsibility falls to the man, too. Do your part: Wear tight pants. It helps. ... Really.

And you know what? Sometimes, despite you doing everything RIGHT to prevent a pregnancy, it just isn't enough. Sometimes, it's not anyone's fault. It just happens. Forcing a woman to have an abortion as a result though...? That's so many shades of wrong there, buddy.

This isn't easy stuff. We're not talking about a trip to the dentist where you're in, you're out and you're on with your day (with a slight migraine and maybe a sugarfree lollipop.. strawberry, preferably). This is a serious decision and not one to be flippantly thrown around as being the answer for EV-REE-THRING. Abortions, in some cases, can destroy a woman's ability to have children ever again - period. It's painful. It's emotionally destructive. And it's something a lot of women never ultimately forgive themselves for doing. (Because you know. FYI, some people really honestly have religious beliefs and a moral compass that consider this stuff murder, which they do not merely whip out as an excuse to stick it to the men in their lives every chance they get. Just sayin.)

These are some hefty risks and I can't name a single woman who would be thrilled about being bound by legal documentation, pushed into making those choices. That's her body. She has to live with whatever ultimately happens, long after the act itself has been carried out. We're not just living incubators, you know. Sometimes, when things get broken inside, there's no way to fix them. Producing kidlets is something that is natural to the human body - forcibly removing them is not and there are consequences to that.

While we're on the subject, the abortion pill isn't much better. Do you know what the side-effects on that thing are? Among the charming pain/nausea/diarrhea line-up, you've also got bleeding so severe that without surgery to stop it, you'd best have a current restore point.

Now I don't know about any of the other ladies out there, but if my choices were suddenly reduced to "unwanted pregnancies with Mr. Fabulous must be terminated at the possible cost of my health BY LAWZ" or "keep the dang pants ON PLZ", guess what Mr. Fabulous is never going to get anywhere near? Do not pass whazzit. Do not collect sexytimes. Just no.


Then again, if your aim in this is to get people to start practicing a looooot more abstinence, then I guess sure. Achievement!
 

Jazzeki

New member
Jun 29, 2011
49
0
0
allright so by listening to the majority here we can conclude that women should not be alowed to have abortions under any circumstances. because that would not be fair. they chose to have sex knowing that they might get pregnant so if they didn't use protection it's their own damn fault... oh wait no that only counts for men because when it's the women you get to be hypocrits and decide she has an other chance to make a choice.

i must admit the idea of forcing abortions is stupid. it's not okay because yes a woman decides what happens to her body. it does create an unfair situation where a woman can chose to become a single parent but a man can't but adoption could be used to solve that unfairness.
the other problem as others have suggested could be solved by the man having the option to opt out of the parrenthood. this would mean no responsibilty but no rights either. it is under no circumstance fair to force the responisbilty on the man when it is not possible to do it the other way around.

i for one have decided that i do not want kids. luckily i don't have a need for sex so i should be safe but should i for some weird reason come in a situation where a woman was pregnat with my child i would not ever acept to have to pay for some shitty brat that i'd be perfectly happy to have never been born.
 

VelvetHorror

New member
Oct 22, 2010
150
0
0
Perhaps there could be a form that allows a man to forgo any rights he has to the child and in return doesn't need to pay child support. This can only be done in the early stages of pregnancy or the first time the father is documented of finding out about the child. He can't see the child or make him his heir. By all legal rights, that man will not be the father, but just the genetic material donor. Maybe something similar to the rights of a sperm donor who donated sperm or a single parent who gave up the child to adoption.

However, I guess this could pose a problem for the man if he still wants to stay in the relationship.
 

6unn3r

New member
Aug 12, 2008
567
0
0
It's fairly simple, dont want kids but want to have sex?

Use condoms.

99.6% effective.

No problem.
 

Jazzeki

New member
Jun 29, 2011
49
0
0
Twilight_guy said:
Secondly, your argument is an argument for equal rights its an argument for reversing the sexist double standard. Whereas women in your argument have exclusive rights to controlling birth here, in your proposed solution men will have the exclusive right as woman can't have children without a man's consent.
actually it would be equall rights. the man can say no and the woman can say no. nowhere did he say only the man get's to decide. true the man has less of a conflict but the rights are equall.
 

NotSoNimble

New member
Aug 10, 2010
417
0
0
Alex Gray said:
Ariseishirou said:
you really need to get out of whatever dating circle you're currently in because it appears to be populated by the most frigid women I've ever heard of.
Here's something to consider, guys: once you have a child, and you're involved in his/her life any more than financially, and ESPECIALLY if the child is legitimate, you're stuck in one particular "dating circle" for the rest of your life. God help you if the stress of childrearing didn't finish off every trace of your interest in sex or female companionship.

(And sex and the presence of children are nearly mutually exclusive for a large number of reasons, most of which should be obvious.)

In fact, maybe we shouldn't waste time waiting for Big Pharma - maybe men ARE better off taking our fates into our own hands (in the form of a handgun or power tool, with a high-proof general anesthetic of your choice administered beforehand). Yes, there are well-documented ill effects to a lack of testosterone such as weight gain and gynecomastia, and of course the risk of bleeding to death, but consider the alternative.

Downtrodden testicle-slave, OUT!
Sheesh, where to start! I guess at the beginning of your post.

Why would you think you are ever stuck in any kind of one "dating circle"? Unless you live in the Arctic or some remote area with a population of a hundred people, you can always date other people.

Fatherhood finishes off interest in sex or companionship? I heard a drunk guy at a bar say something like that once. Then I found out he has 5 kids! lol

What's Big Pharma?

What are you talking about guns and power tools for?

Why do you think such dark thoughts about raising a family? It can be a beutiful thing.
 

funguy2121

New member
Oct 20, 2009
3,407
0
0
This is a question for Dwangela.

Seriously, though, it's a ridiculous idea and will never happen in Western society. The man doesn't have to put his own health at risk and carry a human being inside of him for 9 months, and there are plenty of barren/gay parents out there who want to adopt a child. It's the woman's decision, case closed.
 

Yechezkel

New member
Jul 29, 2008
35
0
0
Thanatos5150 said:
What you are proposing [is] that a man should be legally able to force a woman to have an abortion...
And that's really all that needs to be said. That one person should be able to legally force another person over whom they do not have power of attorney to undertake a medical procedure they neither need nor desire is ridiculous at best and tremendously dangerous at worst.
 

Dags90

New member
Oct 27, 2009
4,683
0
0
We really shouldn't even be discussing forced abortions.

Women can get pregnant and you can't:
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
funguy2121 said:
This is a question for Dwangela.

Seriously, though, it's a ridiculous idea and will never happen in Western society. The man doesn't have to put his own health at risk and carry a human being inside of him for 9 months, and there are plenty of barren/gay parents out there who want to adopt a child. It's the woman's decision, case closed.
You know, one of the reasons that men die sooner is because they work more. So, all the extra hours he puts in to pay for a child he didn't want IS putting his health at risk.
 

Pegghead

New member
Aug 4, 2009
4,017
0
0
So uh, where do rapists sit in this equation.

In all seriousness, men are the ones who begin with control. They don't want a child, they shouldn't be waving the kiddy stick around. if they want a child, find a woman who they know wants one.
 

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,589
0
0
I could say something, But i feel id get banned or suspended or warned for the comment.

So I'll say that like many things, in theory, a test is agood idea, but in the end, ultimately useless.
 

Jazzeki

New member
Jun 29, 2011
49
0
0
Pegghead said:
So uh, where do rapists sit in this equation.

In all seriousness, men are the ones who begin with control. They don't want a child, they shouldn't be waving the kiddy stick around. if they want a child, find a woman who they know wants one.
ohh i get it now.
so women get's to decide if they want the child by themself and men get to decide if they have sex by himself. i need to remeber women are not alowed to say no to sex next time i'm out. oh wait... so no men are not the ones who begin with control. we share that... and then it's given entirely to women.