Wednesday, April 05, 2006
While reading through my favorite blogs, I noticed that Mimi was a featured writer on Beauty vs The Beast on the controversial topic, Roe vs Wade for Men. I never knew there was such a thing as Roe vs Wade for Men so I decided to give my two cents on this issue.
I don’t even want to start a debate on abortion so I am not even going to focus on that issue. Supporters of Roe vs Wade will tell you this law is all about choice but there cannot be choice unless this choice is offered to both sexes. If you agree that people have the right to choice then it should be a right for both sexes and not just one.
Both the man and the woman consent to have sex so the irresponsibility of the pregnancy is the fault of both participants. This irresponsible act is the cause of the pregnancy so why give the choice to "opt out" to only one person? If one cannot "opt out" then neither should be able to "opt out". So the whole “pay if you play” argument should be extended to the female too. Why must only the man “pay to play”?
In this Case, however, irresponsibility was not the reason for the pregnancy. The woman repeatedly assured the man she was "safe". Now she is pregnant and wanting this guy to pay for half of her child. Can we assume she wanted a child all along? Can we assume she got pregnant on purpose and now the system allows her to collect money from this guy for something he was led to believe was “safe”? Regardless of the answers, she clearly wants this child so if she wants it then she should pay for it.
If you believe it is cruel to demand a woman bring a pregnancy to term against her will then you should also believe it is cruel to demand the man disrupt his financial future and plunge his life into turmoil for the next 21 years to pay for a child only the woman wants. If one party wants the child then that party should pay for it. However, if the man agrees to this “male” abortion, then he looses all rights as a father and can never reestablish contact with the child and this can next be undone.
Another complicated matter is if the man wants the baby but the woman does not. Now what do you do? Should the woman be compensated for her "services" in carrying the child to term for the man? Definitely, yes, she should receive something. And again, if she agrees to turn the child over to the father then she looses all rights as a mother and can never reestablish contact with the child and this can not be undone.
If you agree that men and women are equals then we are equal in all areas; you cannot pick and choose where equality should exist. If you look at what is fair then you have to give choice to both parties and not let one make the choice for both. If you do not think men should have a right to an abortion then we should overturn Roe vs Wade to even things out again.
I know that this post might anger many people and I am NOT trying to legitimize deadbeat dads but if you look at this topic without any emotional baggage you might understand what I am trying to say. Now you can “tee off” on me.
I don’t even want to start a debate on abortion so I am not even going to focus on that issue. Supporters of Roe vs Wade will tell you this law is all about choice but there cannot be choice unless this choice is offered to both sexes. If you agree that people have the right to choice then it should be a right for both sexes and not just one.
Both the man and the woman consent to have sex so the irresponsibility of the pregnancy is the fault of both participants. This irresponsible act is the cause of the pregnancy so why give the choice to "opt out" to only one person? If one cannot "opt out" then neither should be able to "opt out". So the whole “pay if you play” argument should be extended to the female too. Why must only the man “pay to play”?
In this Case, however, irresponsibility was not the reason for the pregnancy. The woman repeatedly assured the man she was "safe". Now she is pregnant and wanting this guy to pay for half of her child. Can we assume she wanted a child all along? Can we assume she got pregnant on purpose and now the system allows her to collect money from this guy for something he was led to believe was “safe”? Regardless of the answers, she clearly wants this child so if she wants it then she should pay for it.
If you believe it is cruel to demand a woman bring a pregnancy to term against her will then you should also believe it is cruel to demand the man disrupt his financial future and plunge his life into turmoil for the next 21 years to pay for a child only the woman wants. If one party wants the child then that party should pay for it. However, if the man agrees to this “male” abortion, then he looses all rights as a father and can never reestablish contact with the child and this can next be undone.
Another complicated matter is if the man wants the baby but the woman does not. Now what do you do? Should the woman be compensated for her "services" in carrying the child to term for the man? Definitely, yes, she should receive something. And again, if she agrees to turn the child over to the father then she looses all rights as a mother and can never reestablish contact with the child and this can not be undone.
If you agree that men and women are equals then we are equal in all areas; you cannot pick and choose where equality should exist. If you look at what is fair then you have to give choice to both parties and not let one make the choice for both. If you do not think men should have a right to an abortion then we should overturn Roe vs Wade to even things out again.
I know that this post might anger many people and I am NOT trying to legitimize deadbeat dads but if you look at this topic without any emotional baggage you might understand what I am trying to say. Now you can “tee off” on me.
posted by DarthImmortal at 7:26 AM
9 Comments:
Mimi,
Of course we will still be blogger buddies. This is a complicated issue but one that deservers debate. Thanks for your comments and I enjoyed reading your post on your blog.
We can all agree the purpose of sexual intercourse is for reproduction, right?
If a man doesn't want to have a baby with a woman, he shouldn't stick his dick in her. If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she could keep her legs closed.
I agree that ONE of the purposes of sexual intercourse is for reproduction. Sex is also equally valid for the pure physical enjoyment of it (with proper precautions taken so that's all that cums out of it), and also as another way for two people to build/maintain intimacy and connection with one another in the context of an ongoing relationship.
However it is true that women have deliberately trapped men by getting pregnant. Happened to a former co-worker of mine. I warned him about her, but like so many dysfunctional relationships, being in one he was blind to it. Technically, she raped him, (she was a big woman) and used her body weight to pin him down and mount him before he had put the condom on (which they had always used in the past). She told him they would be fine and of course, she did get pregnant (she is an ER RN and knows anatomy well, so it's unlikely she was uninformed about it) and tried to trap him in the relationship (which fortunately didn't work). He loves his little girl, but it's also an excuse now for her to continue to give him grief and added a financial burden to his life that both knew he wasn't prepared for (and both had discussed this previously). Certainly he is also to blame for trying to hold onto a dying relationship, but her entrapment using an unborn child is reprehensible. To put it bluntly, my former co-worker got fucked, and then got fucked over and there wasn't much he could do about it. How often do men get raped by women? Not too often, and who would have believed him when it's his word against hers!? So I agree with Jeff. It may be true that woman usually get the raw end of the deal, but if it takes two people to create a child, both should have say in it. But I'm not sure how it could ever be truly equal since the burden of carrying the child to term falls upon the woman.
I guess ultimately, men and women just have to evolve to a better understanding of themselves. When they understand themselves better, they will be better able to enter into relationships that are more compatible and have greater harmony, and thus more likely to avoid opposing viewpoints when it comes to pregnancy and children.
Poohba,
I do not think a woman should ever be forced to carry an unwanted child to term. So in the case of a man wanting the child and the woman not wanting the child the woman's rights should win.
But if you agree it is cruel to force a woman to carry an unwanted child to term then you should agree it is just as cruel to force a man to pay for an unwanted child just because the woman wants it. If she wants it then she should have to pay for it. There is gender bias but there should not be. How can we have equality when this is so inequitable? If we accept inequality on this issue then we should accept it on other issues too.
Shavonne,
I do NOT agree that the only purpose of sex is for reproduction. That is certainly ONE of the purposes. Most of the time people have sex for pleasure.
This is an interesting debate for sure. Thanks for your comments.
I would have to say that the act of carrying a child, giving birth, and other such things makes it harder for women to simply "give up" a baby than it is for a man. A man doesn't have the physical burden of this process as women do nor do they have the physical connection that comes with gestation. Furthermore, abortions are very dangerous even though they are legal. Most doctors don't really care if you have a healthy abortion or not. In fact, most abortion doctors are out of work/sued out of hospital OB/GYNs. Plus, there's so much stigma attached to the act itself. I believe there's much less stigma attached to deadbeat dads. Deadbeat dads at least aren't being called murderers of their own children!
With that in mind, if a man doesn't want to have a baby, then he should use a condom every time no matter what the woman says. Condoms are extremely effective if used properly, and they're a whole lot cheaper than abortions and less risky for everyone involved. Likewise for women, birth control is out there in hundreds of forms, and it's free if you go to the public health clinics in most cities. There's even morning after pills which are extremely effective if a condom breaks, which are also free or very cheap if you go to the public health center. In this day and age, aside from rape and/or deceit, there's absolutely no legitimate reason to not be able to prevent pregnancy. With that in mind, the decision to have a baby is made with the act of sex by both partners, not afterwards. In my own personal opinion, the only exceptions to this are rape, incest, statutory rape, or outright complete deceit. Other than that, BOTH parties should be more responsible for their actions and live with the consequences of acting without thinking.
To add to it all, to simply be able to walk away from your own child without punishment is disgusting to me. This goes for both genders across the board with the only exception being adoption. To deny someone their parental rights when they don't want them anyway is just a slap on the wrist, and the one who gets hurt is the child not the parents. If someone doesn't want a baby, use a condom, get on birth control, and/or both. Aside from rape, incest, statutory rape, or deceit, there's no excuse for it. Stupidity and hormones don't count as reason to abandon responsibility. If you were dumb enough to drink a gallon of beer then kill somebody in a car wreck, you couldn't just say, "it was a mistake!" and walk away, because you know that drunk driving puts you and other people at risk, yet you still did it. There's no difference on who is to blame in the DUI accident that kills somebody and the accidental pregnancy except that one act requires two people doing the deed instead of one. BE SMART people!
Liz,
You have some very interesting points and I agree with many of them. I do not agree that the act of sex is necessarily a decision to have a baby. Unless both parties agree with this decision to have a baby there is no contract. So if a pregnancy occurs, it’s either a trick or a mistake. It’s a tragedy that this life-altering decision is made by one person when both should have the same choices.
Another problem is that too many people are irresponsible with sex so many children are born without the advantage of a father. I do not want to compound the problem by creating another layer of law that men can hide behind but I do want both sexes to have the same choices.
I have been told for years how important equality is for the sexes. But are the people who are screaming for equality truly wanting equality? No they don’t because most of the hypocrites do not want equality on this issue. So here is yet another double standard we are forced to live with. I get pissed off when I hear people screaming for equality when they are against equality. It’s either “yes” or “no”; you cannot pick and choose which conditions you want equality. When I think of Roe v Wade for men I think of true equality for all sexes, which has always been the goal of many left wing women’s organizations. I would think they would support this but hypocrisy again rules the world.
I also find it disturbing that so many children are born into the same family with a multitude of fathers and there is usually never a father in any of their lives. The choices that women and men make to keep having these kids are irresponsible, especially when they expect society or the government to provide for them. I can understand one mistake and maybe two but when you do the same stupid act repeatedly you are very stupid and I have no sympathy for you.
Thanks for your comments.
I would still have to say that "mistakes" should be much more rare than they are. Birth control methods are extremely effective, and thereby, I stand by my argument that if you don't want a baby, then use protection all the time no matter what. That goes for both sexes. Of course, the exception is deception, which I have no tolerance for. Any woman who knowingly deceives a man so that she can get pregnant is a selfish malicious bitch. The same goes for men who are deceitful. There are a lot of instances out there where men don't want to use a condom and lie about vasectomies to women. Either way, it's incredibly selfish and mean. However, I am a firm believer in birth control, and anyone who doesn't want a baby should use a condom and/or other birth control methods. Sex is a very important part of life, but it does have consequences just like any action. When you have sex with someone, you are aware of the risks and you CHOOSE to take your chances anyhow with both disease and pregnancy. Therefore, it is a choice when you have sex.
I, too, have no sympathy for women who just keep having babies for whatever reason with multiple men. However, the double standard there is that a man can have babies with many different women, and it's more socially acceptable for that to happen and far more common. What about that?
The problem with "equality" is that there are inherent differences between the sexes that can't be avoided. Pregnancy is one of those things for which women have more of a physical burden than men. That's something that is biological and inescapable. It doesn't mean that men or women should be treated with any less regard than the other sex, but the fact is that women and men are physically different. The act of childbearing is significantly more strenuous and dangerous for a woman than it is for a man. It's also a hell of a lot easier, socially and financially, for a man to skip out on his child than it is for a woman to do the same. So, usually, "irresponsibility" about sex and pregnancy leaves the woman at a far greater disadvantage than the man. The man can just walk away and never have to deal with it again, and the woman either has to undergo a very risky abortion procedure, or she has to go through 9 months of pregnancy, then labor and delivery plus another 2 months of physical recovery plus a child to raise or to adopt away. Either way, there's some inequality going on. This is one of those inherent problems that comes with gender related issues that's simply biological.
As for what I think of as "equality," I think that it is and should be equal treatment under law. I DON'T think that a truely just society gives preference to either sex. The problem is that we aren't all the same physically, which creates a lot of problems for creating "equality" in the issue of childbearing and pregnancy.
I think you bring up good points. Coming from a family where my brother's dad abandoned him and only chose to participate in his life after he was 18 (therefore had no financial obligations and to this day leaves the burden of college & his meds - conditions which he inherited from the a-hole - up to us to pay) I'd argue that they do have a choice.
For the righteous guys that do get "stuck" - I feel bad for them and understand the point of questioning where their right to choose is.
Interesting debate!
People tend to get caught up in what to do now that the child is here and try to use that as a reason to make a guy pay child support. The problem is that you should have asked that question 5+mo ago. If you ask that days to 5mo after conception up to whatever the time is that abortion is cut off you will have your answer. Ask the guy 1mo in after the first period is missed. If he says he doesn't want it then... abortion it is. If the female chooses to keep it then its her responsibility. If he wants it then it should be put in writing, notorized and put into public record and he should be responsible. You could even get it before sex. Someone may say, why not get it before sex even occurs well, that is really unrealistic. There are one night stands and the fact that many pregnancies are unplanned and mistakes, it makes much better sense to offer it after sex although it can be obtained before sex. It should be assumed that a child is not wanted unless stated otherwise. Sure some will ask, why should it be assumed a child is not wanted... See above.
There are many other things such as the morning after pill and the abortion pill. I can just see it now. After a night of hot, sweaty or passionate sex a man asks the woman if she wants something to drink. Goes down to get the drink and crumbles up a morning after pill into the juice and gives it to his mate. She drinks, gets a side affect from the pill. Goes to the dr and finds out she was given the pill w/o her consent and then sues the guy for drugging her. This is assuming she may want to have the child if she is pregnant and/or feels her rights have been violated because she didn't get to choose. There is no win for men. Simple solution is to give men the right to say I don't want to be a parent after sex just like the right is extended to women or make abortion illegal. Just make the law equal.
Post a Comment
<< Home