4 ms·

> who denies the reproductive rights of others. It's funny that this is somehow forgotten when we're talking about men... if we allow women to abort children d

> who denies the reproductive rights of others. It's funny that this is somehow forgotten when we're talking about men... if we allow women to abort children due to any reason, even financial ones or "i just don't want a kid now", paper abortions for men should be a thing too (sign a paper, give up all rights and obligation to/from the kid).

peteforde 4y ago
> if we allow women to abort children I think you just said the inside thing out loud. Women don't need your permission.
- ajsnigrutin 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure doctors can't do procedures without being on some kind of a "approved list" of procedures (since anything outside - eg. experimental procedures - take a LOT of paperwork and liability paperwork). Men don't need permission to not-pay for unwanted kids either. Somehow we don't mind women wanting to get rid of unwanted responsibility, and we loathe men who do that, with both financial fines and even jail times.
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Women who abandon children after birth still face consequences. Before a child is born the mother faces significant risks to her health, mental well-being, relationships, and career if she gives birth. It's reasonable then that women and their doctors have a final say in whether a pregnancy continues.
    - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
      > Women who abandon children after birth still face consequences. If they abandon them "literally", sure. If they decide they don't want to care for the child and give it up for adoption, they don't face any. After a popped condom, they have many different ways to get rid of unwanted children, from a day after pill (plan B), to adoption after birth. A man is always one bad condom away from 20+ (up to 26 years in my country) of child support for an unwanted kid, while a woman has all the decision power to bring (or not bring) the child to life.
      - paulryanrogers 4y ago
        Men don't have nearly the same biological or societal obligations, should a condom fail. The law may compensate. Those who think this is still unfair have other means besides condoms alone: withdrawal, vasectomy, alternative acts, even abstinence. And they can negotiate with their partners about other forms of contraception.
        ajsnigrutin 4y ago
        > Men don't have nearly the same biological or societal obligations, should a condom fail. The law may compensate. Neither do women, if they don't want to, day-after pills are cheap, and even free in many countries, so are abortions (USA might be an exception here). Having a child in current times is a choice. > have other means besides condoms alone: withdrawal, vasectomy, alternative acts, even abstinence So do women. But if that fails, they have more options to still not-have a baby (to take a day-after pill/planB or abort...). In my country, vasectomy is even illegal before age 35 (same for women, no permanent steriliziation before that). The "if you don't want children, don't have sex" sounds very anti-abortionist to me... but to you, it seems fine, if it's targeted towards men.
        peteforde 4y ago
        The problem with the position that you're attempting to justify is that you are creating a false dichotomy; aggrieved men cannot have sex without responsibility and so you feel it's within reasonable purview to apply arbitrary restrictions on what a women can do with their body. I don't have to like your opinion, and I don't have much confidence that anyone here will change it. However, the reason I spoke up in the first place was to point out that the first step towards bodily autonomy is the acknowledgement of basic human equality. The assertion that [you/men/the state] should have any input in whether to "allow" someone to make adult decisions about their body because of their sex is repugnant. Go fight for men's rights, if you feel that is what you need to do... but leave women out of it. The opposite of women's rights is not men's rights.
        4y ago
  - heavenlyblue 4y ago
    How is this problem an opposite argument against women allowed to have an abortion? Surely these are two parallel issues that can be solved separately from each other. By your logic women should not be able to abort because there's still kids in third world countries suffering from hunger.
    - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
      > By your logic women should not be able to abort because there's still kids in third world countries suffering from hunger. No, by my logic, if women have that option, men should be given a "way out" from unwanted kids too, even if it's due to financial or other non-medical reasons. Obviously men cannot physically abort, so a paper abortion (giving up all rights and responsibilities) would be a way out for them/us.
      - heavenlyblue 4y ago
        I don't understand how this is directly related to the women's abortion issue though. This is whataboutism at it's best.
        ajsnigrutin 4y ago
        It's not. If we're talking about abortions as medical solutions (risky pregnancies, medical issues with the baby, etc...) then sure. If we give half the population an option to get rid of a result of a five-minute mistake, for personal, financial and even for reasons such as "I just don't want one now", why not give that way-out to the other half involved in that five-minute fuckup? Otherwise we're literally talking about 20+ years of relatively huge consequences.
paulryanrogers 4y ago
> if we allow women to abort children due to any reason, even financial ones or "i just don't want a kid now", paper abortions for men should be a thing too (sign a paper, give up all rights and obligation to/from the kid). In some states this is legal, so long as there is someone else willing to step up and provide for the child. Consider that the child cannot provide for itself, and the father has equal obligation to do so. If he didn't intend to produce a child then he should have taken reasonable measures. Women technically have a final say because they take on more risk and physical labor to carry the child to term.
- ajsnigrutin 4y ago
  > If he didn't intend to produce a child then he should have taken reasonable measures. Like what? A condom? That applies to women too, if they don't intend to have kids, use a condom (rape excluded). But we give them ther ways out too. If the condom pops, the next step would be a day after pill. That applies to women, men get no say in that. Abortion? Same. What reasonable measures does a man have after a bad condom?
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Men don't get a say in abortion or pills because they don't have to carry the child inside their bodies. Once the child is born their legal obligations are similar. Both are subject to child support if they want 'out', unless they agree to put the child up for adoption. Arguably this means men need to plan ahead more or take additional precautions. I don't think that's unreasonable considering men will never have to pay the physical price of childbearing.
    - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
      A woman doesn't even have to tell a man she's pregnant, and can give the baby away without the father even knowing (eg. if it's a one night stand). Noone can plan for a popped condom, and pregnancy comes when aditional precautions fail, and they fail for both people involved, not just for men... but we then give only one of them an option to get rid of 20+ years of responsibilities.
foogazi 4y ago
> It's funny that this is somehow forgotten when we're talking about men Just don’t ejaculate inside - then no baby
- ajsnigrutin 4y ago
  Yep, that's true for women too. But then they can get a day after (plan B) pill. Or a few different kinds of abortion. Or give the kid up for adoption after it's born. We give zero ways-out to men.
  - foogazi 4y ago
    > Yep, that's true for women too. How ? > We give zero ways-out to men. Pull out
    - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
      > Don't spread your legs if you don't want a baby (abstinence). Don't have sex without a condom. Switch to oral, when the guy is close to finishing. Just do oral to not risk even that. Only have sex with people and at time you want to have a baby with/at. This is like listening to an anti-abortionist. But after people fail to do this, we give women an option to get out of a few decades of responsibility and financial burden, and men should have that right too.
      - foogazi 4y ago
        Weird that this is framed adversarially (men vs women) when it doesn’t have to In procreation men are involved, but women are committed Do your part - don’t leave it to chance Full male control: - Pull-out - Condom - Double-condom Be a man, take full ownership of your own financial future
        ajsnigrutin 4y ago
        > Weird that this is framed adversarially (men vs women) when it doesn’t have to If women decide to either take a planB or or get pregnant and give birth to a baby, why should a man cary the financial consequences of that decision? > In procreation men are involved, but women are committed How? Women can get a pill or abort, men are commited to pay for 20+ years of something they didn't want. > Do your part - don’t leave it to chance So, would you tell women this? "You don't need abortions, just do you part, don't leave it to chance! Pull out, condoms, and double condoms!"? Also, double condoms are outright dangerous, so is pulling out. > Be a man, take full ownership of your own financial future Yes, this is the idea... you didn't want a kid, a mistake happened, you need a way out too. With modern medicine and some quick action, having a baby or not has become a fully womans choice. And there are cases, where you don't even need to have sex to be forced to pay child support: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/11/woman-who-impregnated-self-with-stolen-semen-from-billionaire-wins-child-support-battle/ https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/11/woman-who-impregnated-se... Even statuatory rape victims: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/02/statutory-rape-victim-child-support/14953965/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/02/statuto...

peteforde 4y ago

> if we allow women to abort children I think you just said the inside thing out loud. Women don't need your permission.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago
I'm pretty sure doctors can't do procedures without being on some kind of a "approved list" of procedures (since anything outside - eg. experimental procedures - take a LOT of paperwork and liability paperwork). Men don't need permission to not-pay for unwanted kids either. Somehow we don't mind women wanting to get rid of unwanted responsibility, and we loathe men who do that, with both financial fines and even jail times.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Women who abandon children after birth still face consequences. Before a child is born the mother faces significant risks to her health, mental well-being, relationships, and career if she gives birth. It's reasonable then that women and their doctors have a final say in whether a pregnancy continues.
  - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
    > Women who abandon children after birth still face consequences. If they abandon them "literally", sure. If they decide they don't want to care for the child and give it up for adoption, they don't face any. After a popped condom, they have many different ways to get rid of unwanted children, from a day after pill (plan B), to adoption after birth. A man is always one bad condom away from 20+ (up to 26 years in my country) of child support for an unwanted kid, while a woman has all the decision power to bring (or not bring) the child to life.
    - paulryanrogers 4y ago
      Men don't have nearly the same biological or societal obligations, should a condom fail. The law may compensate. Those who think this is still unfair have other means besides condoms alone: withdrawal, vasectomy, alternative acts, even abstinence. And they can negotiate with their partners about other forms of contraception.
      - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
        > Men don't have nearly the same biological or societal obligations, should a condom fail. The law may compensate. Neither do women, if they don't want to, day-after pills are cheap, and even free in many countries, so are abortions (USA might be an exception here). Having a child in current times is a choice. > have other means besides condoms alone: withdrawal, vasectomy, alternative acts, even abstinence So do women. But if that fails, they have more options to still not-have a baby (to take a day-after pill/planB or abort...). In my country, vasectomy is even illegal before age 35 (same for women, no permanent steriliziation before that). The "if you don't want children, don't have sex" sounds very anti-abortionist to me... but to you, it seems fine, if it's targeted towards men.
        peteforde 4y ago
        The problem with the position that you're attempting to justify is that you are creating a false dichotomy; aggrieved men cannot have sex without responsibility and so you feel it's within reasonable purview to apply arbitrary restrictions on what a women can do with their body. I don't have to like your opinion, and I don't have much confidence that anyone here will change it. However, the reason I spoke up in the first place was to point out that the first step towards bodily autonomy is the acknowledgement of basic human equality. The assertion that [you/men/the state] should have any input in whether to "allow" someone to make adult decisions about their body because of their sex is repugnant. Go fight for men's rights, if you feel that is what you need to do... but leave women out of it. The opposite of women's rights is not men's rights.
        4y ago
- heavenlyblue 4y ago
  How is this problem an opposite argument against women allowed to have an abortion? Surely these are two parallel issues that can be solved separately from each other. By your logic women should not be able to abort because there's still kids in third world countries suffering from hunger.
  - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
    > By your logic women should not be able to abort because there's still kids in third world countries suffering from hunger. No, by my logic, if women have that option, men should be given a "way out" from unwanted kids too, even if it's due to financial or other non-medical reasons. Obviously men cannot physically abort, so a paper abortion (giving up all rights and responsibilities) would be a way out for them/us.
    - heavenlyblue 4y ago
      I don't understand how this is directly related to the women's abortion issue though. This is whataboutism at it's best.
      - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
        It's not. If we're talking about abortions as medical solutions (risky pregnancies, medical issues with the baby, etc...) then sure. If we give half the population an option to get rid of a result of a five-minute mistake, for personal, financial and even for reasons such as "I just don't want one now", why not give that way-out to the other half involved in that five-minute fuckup? Otherwise we're literally talking about 20+ years of relatively huge consequences.

paulryanrogers 4y ago

> if we allow women to abort children due to any reason, even financial ones or "i just don't want a kid now", paper abortions for men should be a thing too (sign a paper, give up all rights and obligation to/from the kid). In some states this is legal, so long as there is someone else willing to step up and provide for the child. Consider that the child cannot provide for itself, and the father has equal obligation to do so. If he didn't intend to produce a child then he should have taken reasonable measures. Women technically have a final say because they take on more risk and physical labor to carry the child to term.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago
> If he didn't intend to produce a child then he should have taken reasonable measures. Like what? A condom? That applies to women too, if they don't intend to have kids, use a condom (rape excluded). But we give them ther ways out too. If the condom pops, the next step would be a day after pill. That applies to women, men get no say in that. Abortion? Same. What reasonable measures does a man have after a bad condom?
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Men don't get a say in abortion or pills because they don't have to carry the child inside their bodies. Once the child is born their legal obligations are similar. Both are subject to child support if they want 'out', unless they agree to put the child up for adoption. Arguably this means men need to plan ahead more or take additional precautions. I don't think that's unreasonable considering men will never have to pay the physical price of childbearing.
  - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
    A woman doesn't even have to tell a man she's pregnant, and can give the baby away without the father even knowing (eg. if it's a one night stand). Noone can plan for a popped condom, and pregnancy comes when aditional precautions fail, and they fail for both people involved, not just for men... but we then give only one of them an option to get rid of 20+ years of responsibilities.

foogazi 4y ago

> It's funny that this is somehow forgotten when we're talking about men Just don’t ejaculate inside - then no baby

ajsnigrutin 4y ago
Yep, that's true for women too. But then they can get a day after (plan B) pill. Or a few different kinds of abortion. Or give the kid up for adoption after it's born. We give zero ways-out to men.
- foogazi 4y ago
  > Yep, that's true for women too. How ? > We give zero ways-out to men. Pull out
  - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
    > Don't spread your legs if you don't want a baby (abstinence). Don't have sex without a condom. Switch to oral, when the guy is close to finishing. Just do oral to not risk even that. Only have sex with people and at time you want to have a baby with/at. This is like listening to an anti-abortionist. But after people fail to do this, we give women an option to get out of a few decades of responsibility and financial burden, and men should have that right too.
    - foogazi 4y ago
      Weird that this is framed adversarially (men vs women) when it doesn’t have to In procreation men are involved, but women are committed Do your part - don’t leave it to chance Full male control: - Pull-out - Condom - Double-condom Be a man, take full ownership of your own financial future
      - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
        > Weird that this is framed adversarially (men vs women) when it doesn’t have to If women decide to either take a planB or or get pregnant and give birth to a baby, why should a man cary the financial consequences of that decision? > In procreation men are involved, but women are committed How? Women can get a pill or abort, men are commited to pay for 20+ years of something they didn't want. > Do your part - don’t leave it to chance So, would you tell women this? "You don't need abortions, just do you part, don't leave it to chance! Pull out, condoms, and double condoms!"? Also, double condoms are outright dangerous, so is pulling out. > Be a man, take full ownership of your own financial future Yes, this is the idea... you didn't want a kid, a mistake happened, you need a way out too. With modern medicine and some quick action, having a baby or not has become a fully womans choice. And there are cases, where you don't even need to have sex to be forced to pay child support: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/11/woman-who-impregnated-self-with-stolen-semen-from-billionaire-wins-child-support-battle/ https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/11/woman-who-impregnated-se... Even statuatory rape victims: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/02/statutory-rape-victim-child-support/14953965/ https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/02/statuto...