General Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

For the sake of birth equality why not have "legal abortions" for men?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (21100 points ) December 18th, 2009

Before all the feminist and pro choice supports start lighting torches and sharpening pitch forks slow down and read the question, the logic will come to you. Feminist are always talking about gender equality, same pay for the same job, and the same opportunity of advancement or success. When it comes to birth equality, psst can you hear the crickets chirping and tumbleweeds rolling? Women have been saying since Roe v Wade “its my body and I will do with it what I want” 1st of all that is a crock, no one can do whatever they want with their body. I can donate anything usable after I die, however, if I wanted to sell a lung or a kidney to someone who needed one for money, then my body is not my own to do as I please. When it comes to babies it should not be all behind the woman, half the DNA of that child is the fathers. Fathers have no say, if he do not care to be a father and she wants to keep the child, he is forced to be a father and they come after him for money. If he wants to be a father but she don’t want to keep it because it will interfere with Spring Break or that cruise to the Bahamas he loses that chance at fatherhood and gets nothing for it.

So, why wouldn’t it be equal for men to have legal abortions and DNA compensation? A man that do not care to be the father he can sign away ANY and ALL rights to the child before the 3rd trimester. Should he do so he will not appear on the birth certificate, and be no way connected to the child, in any way, and will not own not a dime of child support. The man who is denied the opportunity to be a father when he wishes to have the child is compensated for his part of the DNA, for his part of the child he is forbidden to father with $780,000 dollars not that that would equal the lost of fatherhood owed to him from the mother.

Why would that not even the birth playing field for men? How is that unequal when it comes to say over being or not being a father against your will?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

61 Answers

UScitizen's avatar

Does that mean that I could “abort” the bastard that works in the cube next to me? Give it any name you want. If I can prevent him from being in my sphere, sign me up.

HumourMe's avatar

There are so many arguments against your case I don’t know where to begin.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@HumourMe Then start with the least fair part of it?

Gossamer's avatar

sharpening pitch fork….$10.00…lighting torch…$5.00 (on sale at home depot)...angry mob mauling crazy question…priceless

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Gossamer Not being able to point out anything not fair about it 5x priceless

belakyre's avatar

I think that instead of making cumbersome laws, I would just bring the issue to court if I wish to abort my future wife’s kid. (Which I probably won’t)

HumourMe's avatar

I think the bottom line of it is this. The man and woman before having sex should know where each other stands on abortion. If the woman is against abortion but the man isn’t then you know you probably shouldn’t be engaging in sex unless you use copious amounts of protection.

But in the event of an accidental pregnancy the man has to realise there was a risk of this happening and has no right to then turn around and say well I want you to abort and/or want nothing to do with this pregnancy. If the guy was against having children with the lady he had sex with he should not have “done the deed” in the first place.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@belakyre You would not have to waste the court’s time and money, if you wanted to do such a thing and you don’t you can sign off on them before the 3rd trimester and have no legal connection to them. De factoly they are not yours so on one can ever come after you for child support for children or a child you never wanted.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@HumourMe And a woman going to a party in a short mini or mini dress and no panties should assume the worse if she goes there and get sloshed. Just because she was unwise to get too drunk to aid in her own safety she still has recourse if she is raped or made to have sex against her will. We are not speaking what one should expect but what is fair to even an uneven situation.

laureth's avatar

I can’t imagine any man who got a woman pregnant through casual sex not taking you up on this. Of course they would sign it away – they don’t want a baby, just a fun ten minutes – and then leave the woman with the lifelong duty of caring for his spawn. (This is a different scenario from a woman getting an abortion, because that doesn’t leave the baby on the man’s doorstep for him to be stuck with.)

However, somewhere along the line, people realized that the unwanted kids often grow up to be a drain on society. Perhaps Mom goes on welfare, perhaps kid doesn’t get a proper education, perhaps he ends up in prison. The Courts decided that the good of the many (all of us) outweighs the good of the man (bio-dad) and so he pays support (or doesn’t, if he can weasel out of it). Yes, it’s horribly unfair to make a man pay for the fruit of his one night stand or whatever, but it’s for the greater good of the child’s, and society’s, future.

Now, I hear a lot lately about the man being just as equal in responsibility to a woman as far as what should happen in an unwanted pregnancy, and in the best of all worlds, you’d be right. But it’s never going to be the best of all worlds. Until men grow a kid inside their guts, and then are saddled with taking care of it biologically, it will never be fair, even if men contributed 90% of the DNA. They don’t gestate, they don’t birth, they don’t breastfeed, and they don’t feel the imperative demand of a baby’s cry like the mom will.

There are some good men out there who will do the right thing and stand by their kid. But there is no good reason to give the dregs of manhood a way to stick the mother with it and get away with it legally.

HumourMe's avatar

@laureth You hit the nail on the head, great answer.

Leanne1986's avatar

I am all for the man being able to sign away any rights (and expense) of being a father if the woman chooses to go ahead with the pregnancy against his will. I think that if a woman wants to keep a baby and the father doesn’t then he should be able to walk away providing he does so before a certain point in her pregnancy and he signs an agreement to say that he will never try to get in touch with the mother or child unless the child gets in touch with him after the age of 18 years old.

I believe that women should take responsibility for their own bodies and if she is sexually active before she wishes to start a family then do so with the knowledge that she may end up supporting a kid on her own. I have also known of a few occassions where women have used pregnancy in order to trap a man (ie: claiming to be on birth control etc) and I think that is the lowest of the low.

Yes, it is the womans body and so the ultimate decision of whether to keep the baby or not should be up to her but she should make that decision with the knowledge that the main responsibility could lie with her.

I don’t agree with you suggestion of men getting compensation for a terminated pregnancy though because plenty of men could say that they “wanted” the baby in order to get money even if they didin’t want the baby. I see no way of monitering this and it would be yet another thing that the tax payer would have to fork out for.

Vunessuh's avatar

@HumourMe One of the most common misconceptions about women who are pro choice is that if they get pregnant they will automatically be wishy washy about whether or not they want to keep the child. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. A women standing up for her and other female rights to choose doesn’t automatically make her promiscuous or irresponsible and it doesn’t mean she is preaching to people that she would personally get an abortion IF it was an unwanted pregnancy. I know plenty of women, including myself, who despite being choice, would never get an abortion, but feel it’s important for other women to have that choice. With that being said, I disagree that if a couple have different views on abortion, that means they shouldn’t engage sexually. That’s ridonkulous.
I do however agree with your first post that there are so many arguments against this, I have absolutely no idea where to begin and am actually getting a headache thinking about it.
@Hypocrisy_Central You’re talking about uneven situations. Wouldn’t it be uneven if we were to pass all of the laws/rules you want to pass? You’re making it sound like it only takes one person to get pregnant – the female. It takes a man as well. You also sound really bitter towards women in all of your posts JUST because it’s the female that has to ultimately carry the child. I suppose I could give you this argument: If you trick a woman into getting pregnant because you really want a child, (perhaps tampering with her birth control, poking holes in a condom etc.) do you still feel you have the right to fight for keeping the child when the pregnancy wasn’t previously agreed on?
There are SO many different ways for a female to get pregnant. Not just because so-and-so is a whore and spreads her legs for anything with a pulse. There are also cases where a man and a woman agree on having a child and during the pregnancy the father freaks out and leaves the mother. Does he really have the right to sign away his rights completely and leave this women to take care of this child on her own? I don’t think so.

CMaz's avatar

Why not just get it snipped if you can’t control how to use it.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Vunessuh @Leanne1986 @laureth There is always someone trying to game a system. If we are going to look at the small amount that would try and adapt a “do no harm” attack to make sure not a single mother gets stuck with a kid on her own or the state doesn’t have to pay and I can see a very slippery slope if that were taking to the max then we should abolish the dealth penalty. It is too late to look at the DNA and discover he didn’t do the rape and murder after the needle was put in his arm. Just as guys know they can get stuck now and have a pocket of condoms, if the female thinks she might have a child with no legal father and she don’t aside from trusting him enough to boink him trust him, she is free to brining her own or lock up her birth control, she is a big girl she can take measures. Those women who have babies to hook, punish, or whatever a man, or get single mom perks is not gaming the system? And what of the gals who really DON’T know who the baby’s daddy is, and don’t care? The state is stuck paying for them…...

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@ChazMaz Why can’t she get her eggs removed if she can’t control it? See? that can go both ways.

Vunessuh's avatar

LOL at lock up her birth control.
And you’re correct, there is always someone trying to game the system. You’re putting all of that blame on a woman though. Men can be and are just as guilty.

CMaz's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central – It does. But, it is cheaper for the man. And, he is usually the one pushing the issue trying to get her into bed.

Also, she is the one having to do all the work if pregnant. The man just has to find a rock to crawl under.

Leanne1986's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I’m not entirely sure why you addressed that last comment to me, I agreed with you for the most part. I just don’t think we should be encouraging people to “game the system” by offering men money if the woman terminates a pregnancy against his will, or so he says.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Vunessuh Not in the least. I was responding to the men tampering with the pills or poking holes in condoms to get her pregnant with the hope she won’t kill it and pay him. Guys will, and can, game the system just as women do now they are the only legal players (or players who can control the game) right now.

Vunessuh's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central So then it looks like we’re getting no where because everybody is freaking guilty. Sighs
I could really go for a pizza right about now.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Leanne1986 Oops….......my apologies, I think you got caught up in the wrong response red faced

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Vunessuh Too early for that. Get a ham and cheese omelette and some buttermilk pandcakes screw the diet if you are one one, life is too short.

Vunessuh's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I’ve never dieted in my life. You’re right, life is too short to count calories at every meal. Which is why pizza sounds so damn good and since I have yet to go to sleep, it doesn’t feel like breakfast time to me. :)

Kelly_Obrien's avatar

That would be murder. Men are too old to be aborted.

Strawberries's avatar

Well thats a dumb idea. There go’s my 2 cents.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

With this statement you made me not want to engage in any meaningful debate with you
“Before all the feminist and pro choice supports start lighting torches and sharpening pitch forks slow down and read the question, the logic will come to you.” but I will forgive your ignorance and asinine assumptions and answer your question regardless.

Believe me, this concept of yours is NOT revolutionary and has been discussed within feminist circles long before your crickets came around to chirp (lucky I was asleep when you made that comment) – as a feminist, I have always advocated for father’s rights along those of the mother – I have always fought for the idea that when a person gets pregnant, the other biological parent deserves to know (unless there is a threat of violence). Furthermore, if the other biological parent doesn’t want the child but the woman does, she should, at the very least, be supported throughout pregnancy and one year post-partum because the implication of pregnancy is always there when one chooses to have sex. As a mother of 2, a person who has been pregnant 3x, had a miscarriage and severe postpartum depression after the birth of my first child, I can tell you that pregnancy and labor and the postpartum period are a lot more difficult than it is possible to describe on paper or even put a value on.

In terms of family law, things, too, are shifting – because of the recession and many fathers being laid off and people’s general increased focus on the family, more and more fathers are winning custody battles and getting to be full custody holders for their children – this is perfectly acceptable to me, a feminist, because one shouldn’t assume that it would be the mother who will automatically be the best parent…and working women are now paying more and more child support as they should be since they are making money and we, feminists, have no problems with that…

We want true equality – we want men and women to work and get paid the same money for the same job, we want men to stay at home if they want and for women to work outside the home if they want..we want gendered expectations to shift..I have argued, even, that if a woman wants to abort her child but the father does not, that his voice should be heard, the woman supported emotionally and financially through the birth at which point the father can take over legal custody

now you were saying something about tumbleweeds? I see none around me because I, for one, am ready and willing and able to discuss anything regarding sex politics that you want. Bring.it.on.

nikipedia's avatar

You raise another interesting point but have once again done so in such an offensive manner that I don’t see how you can hope for a measured and enjoyable discussion.

I agree that it would be nice to have equal abortion rights for both parents, but this is impossible thanks to the simple biology of the problem. Women are forced to make a decision one way or the other: baby or abortion. Both have serious physical and in almost all cases emotional consequences. Until men can bear the physical consequences of abortion, equality is impossible in this situation. So @laureth brings up a good point: let’s just do what’s socially best for all of us, rather than trying to create an artificial fairness between these two individuals.

ragingloli's avatar

I think a better option would be the possibility to refuse any responsibility, financial or otherwise, for the offspring in court, based on the financial ability of the father and the financial need of the mother with her spawn.

stranger_in_a_strange_land's avatar

I exercised my option at the age of 18 when I had a vasectomy. I have no desire to become a father or interfere with a womans body. Any paternity suit againsy me would be 100% certain to fail. That is all the option I desire.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@stranger_in_a_strange_land an interesting perspective, thank you – I don’t know how old you are now but you seem to be okay with your decision which is good…I’m sure a lot of people were against you do this ‘so young’...

stranger_in_a_strange_land's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I’m autistic (Aspergers Syndrome) and knew definitely at that age that I had no desire to father children and also no desire to produce more “freaks” like myself. I wasn’t formally diagnosed until two years ago. but I have had no reason to regret the descision I made 35 years ago. No one had any objection to my doing this at that time. My parents probably chose not to have any more children after seeing how strange I was. I never consulted anyone on my decision but implemented it as soon as I became legally an adult. It turns out that my intuitive notion was correct as it is now known that autism is a genetically heritable condition.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@stranger_in_a_strange_land thank you for sharing that with me. I hope you don’t actually think of yourself as a freak. You’re not and neither would be your children, but I am glad your decision was the right one for you.

laureth's avatar

I can’t think of any reason to increase a man’s incentive to get a woman into bed, or to increase a woman’s disincentive to get into bed, either. It’s not going to make a woman “think about having to raise a child alone” rather than boink a random guy, because those that think this, already think it – and those that don’t, won’t. Besides, I’ll say that the idea of raising a child as a single parent is already far more likely to be on a woman’s mind than a man’s. Women have babies appear for them to care for, but I doubt too many men fear random babies appearing on their doorsteps when the woman ran off.

Leaving aside your classic slippery slope, @Hypocrisy_Central, I’ll say this. Allowing men to leagally shirk their half of a baby and leave it all on the woman is likely to lead to lots more disadvantaged kids, and for what? It would harm a significant portion of the next generation, and for what? If your principles lead to a world full of suffering kids, perhaps it’s time to take a closer look at the validity of your principles.

stranger_in_a_strange_land's avatar

@laureth Bravo! A man has an option. It is only that his option ends at the instant the womans option begins. The mans option is easily exercised and preempts the woman from having to make a choice: vasectomy, condom or keep it zipped.

laureth's avatar

This whole debate could be ended with that one bumpersticker, too – “just say No to sex with pro-lifers.”

Vunessuh's avatar

@laureth LMAO. I want one of those.

fireinthepriory's avatar

Herein lies the difference: child support is paid for a reason – to help the child. Crazy reverse child support from a woman to a man if she has an abortion but he wanted the baby is helping no one. No woman would ever ever tell the father of the baby she was getting an abortion if this were the law, because he’d be sure to claim the money whether or not he wanted the baby. The man doesn’t need compensation, he can find another woman to have a baby with (or adopt a baby) if he wants a baby that badly.

As for signing away his rights to the baby, this would unfairly pressure women who wanted their baby but felt financially like she couldn’t support it into having abortions when they don’t want them. That this already happens in the form of a man giving a woman $200 and pressuring her to “take care of it” if he doesn’t want to pay child support. This kind of policy would make that even more prevalent.

As was mentioned above, until men can get pregnant this issue will never be “fair” between two people who accidentally make a baby together. It sucks for everyone involved, so deal with it.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@fireinthepriory there would definitely be some men to abuse the system – yet I do feel for those fathers who don’t get to be fathers because the woman didn’t even tell them she was pregnant – there are all sorts of situations, I understand but it’s high time we stopped assuming that men don’t care.

fireinthepriory's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir You are very right. I suppose being a woman myself it’s easier to forget about the feelings of the men who are involved in these situations. I know many men who would be heartbroken if their partner (or even a one-night-stand) had an abortion without telling them.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@fireinthepriory didn’t know you were a woman, thought you were a man…not that it matters, to me…or in general…just an observation

fireinthepriory's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Oh, really? Cool, I thought I was way more transparent than that. Androgyny is fun!

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Dude, do not let some chuckleheads you had to go to class with all your life define you. YOU are not the freak they are just a bunch of hypocritical Neanderthals with dirty undershorts for brains. I bet you are quite unique.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@laureth So, a woman who don’t want to carry the child when as it has been said often, even here, it takes two to get pregnant (actually just her if she goes to a sperm bank) she is not selfish? Because she don’t care to be pregnant, have to change her life style for 9 months, or give up drinking etc she is not selfish, and her wanting to toss his part of the child out with hers is not selfish either? Chaild support is an after fact that comes into play after SHE made the choice of if the child lived or died. But men who do not want to be fathers are by in large not paying now so what is the difference? We the people are paying anyhow, as well as those children who mother’s do not even know who their daddy is. Getting a vasectomy is a before hand measure, like condoms or of the woman has her tubes tied. Once a child is conceived everything else is mute. It is never perfect on less both parents are on the same page with what to do. So you go with the most fair outcome you can. To go by what is best for socirty that would be to have a fireman who could carry a 310lb man down 3 flights of stairs in 90 second, and whoever could not do that don’t get to be a fire fighter. If that means most women couldn’t, so be it. But that is not the case, they weaken the requirments to make it easier for more to pass.

fireinthepriory's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Yes, having an abortion is selfish. By definition, the woman is choosing herSELF over the fetus /her baby. But that doesn’t mean it’s never for the greater good, in terms of the mother, the father, or society. Sometimes its for the greater good of the mother but not the father, sometimes it’s for the greater good of the father but not the mother. You can’t make laws that take all of this into account, so because the woman is carrying the child and it affects her the most, she gets to make the decision. There’s sadly no better alternative to the system we have right now.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central what is your actual issue? you haven’t responded to any of my points so I’m assuming you agree with me. Do you have a problem with feminism? What kind of a world do you want to see? Everyone does what they can do best. Fine. I haven’t heard anything about them ‘weakening standards’ for firepeople. And we’re not discussing firepeople, we’re discussing ‘legal abortion’

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Oh, sorry. Yes I was telling stranger_in_a_stranhe_land do not be defined by some sloped brow chuckheads. They have to pick on someone in order to make that Gray matter they want to call a brain stand for something.

laureth's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central re: ”...her wanting to toss his part of the child out with hers is not selfish either?”

I suppose we could always bow to the wisdom of Solomon.

1 Kings 3:22–25 ”[The women] argued back and forth in front of Solomon, until finally he said, “Both of you say this live baby is yours. Someone bring me a sword.” A sword was brought, and Solomon ordered, “Cut the baby in half! That way each of you can have part of him.”

Or, we could implant the whole fetus in the man and let him bring it to term, I suppose, if he wants his One-Night-Stand’s baby so much. Good luck with that.

Curious, though, why is it that every time Women’s Equality is brought up, people immediately start breathlessly mentioning all the ways that women and men are not equal (having babies, dragging overweight guys out of burning houses, etc.) and avoid discussion of what people really mean by Feminism and the ERA – that is, that women have a mind that’s just as good as a man’s, that equal work should mean equal pay, and both are alike in human dignity?

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Sorry if I miss any of your points. Surely ANYONE with a logical view point I love to entertain. It was certainly NOT a knock on you or a slight.
Lets start here 1st, “But I will forgive your ignorance and asinine assumptions and answer your question regardless.” OK, what is so asinine about it and what assumptions that I made? About pro-lifers and feminist getting the torches ready? OK, maybe not ALL do but plenty. I have seen many forums and answer type sights and the ones who get most animated are those about equal rights of women, those for and against religion, and those who love and supported G.W. Bush. Many times they do not even investigate the merits of the question, it just goes against what they believe so they make blasting comments devoid of much logic.
“As a feminist, I have always advocated for father’s rights along those of the mother – I have always fought for the idea that when a person gets pregnant, the other biological parent deserves to know (unless there is a threat of violence). Furthermore, if the other biological parent doesn’t want the child but the woman does, she should, at the very least, be supported throughout pregnancy and one year post-partum because the implication of pregnancy is always there when one chooses to have sex” Yes, I am for that. The father should ALWAYS know not just when they want his checkbook to come out. “As a mother of 2, a person who has been pregnant 3x, had a miscarriage and severe postpartum depression after the birth of my first child, I can tell you that pregnancy and labor and the postpartum period are a lot more difficult than it is possible to describe on paper or even put a value on.” I am sure there is no price that can be put on the child you lost. I am sorry for you. I am saying that same loss can and is felt by many fathers. Sure, they can tell you that go out and have other children, unknowing people could have told you that. But the real is any other child is not THAT child, not that child in a new body. I, for one, would not be stupid enough to tell you that the replacement makes up for the child lost. “In terms of family law, ……more and more fathers are winning custody battles and getting to be full custody holders for their children” That maybe so, but 1st there has to be a child, 2nd the father has to want it. He never gets the chance if she did not want to bring it to term. What will he have a crack at getting custody of, an aborted fetus? “I have argued, even, that if a woman wants to abort her child but the father does not, that his voice should be heard, the woman supported emotionally and financially through the birth at which point the father can take over legal custody” If legal abortions/DNA compensation was on the books the father WOULD have a say. Right now if she wants to be selfish and put herself before her child and his/hers father the ONLY winner is her; the child and the father loses, so there is no chance for custody down the road.
“I see none around me because I, for one, am ready and willing and able to discuss anything regarding sex politics that you want. Bring.it.on.” Know that I can appreciate that. If you had no game and only hollow insults you would not nearly have the respect you have earned of me, and not many through out there forums here and elsewhere have done that not to say I have all the complete answers but if anyone has better they can articulate it, so yeah we will mix it up civilly and logically. I would love it, love it, love it.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@laureth 1 Kings 3:22–25 ”[The women] argued back and forth in front of Solomon, until finally he said, “Both of you say this live baby is yours. Someone bring me a sword.” A sword was brought, and Solomon ordered, “Cut the baby in half! That way each of you can have part of him.”

But we cannot stop right there, you forgot 1 King 3:26–27. Verse 26 “The woman whose son was alive was filled compassion fir her son and said to the king ‘Please, my lord, give her the living baby! Don’t kill him!’ But the other said. “Neither I nor you shall have him. Cut him in two!” Verse 27 Then the king gave his ruling: “Give the living baby to the first woman. Do not kill him; she is his mother.”

Men do not have a wise king to make a ruling, and their compassion for the unborn child means nothing, the law nor the government will hear them, they just got stuck with pantywaist judges and politicians who are trying to secure votes. Men do not even get a choice in the matter, no one cares about them unless he did not want to be a father and was forced to be one, then it is all about “We hear you now. Where is your checkbook again?”

laureth's avatar

If a man wants a kid bad enough, he can have one. He can adopt, or he can actually try to woo, marry, and form a family with a willing woman who would be more than glad to start one with him. If the only child he can muster up is one that he had with a ten-minute wonder, he has problems. Also, I think that it’s really stretching reality to the breaking point to bemoan the sad fates of all the men who’d intended to fertilize their friends-with-benefits in the hopes of obtaining a child that way. I expect that the vast majority would run the other way if a casual screw gets someone pregnant.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@laureth “If a man wants a kid bad enough, he can have one. He can adopt, or he can actually try to woo, marry, and form a family with a willing woman who would be more than glad to start one with him.” Oh? How can he adopt a child that is his own flesh and blood? And a lot of kids get conceived because the guy and the gal just wanted to have sex or have a regular sex partner. Then something happens, a child is on the way. If marriage was seen as great as it is we would not see so many people afraid to tie the knot instead of treating marriage as a commodity. “Also, I think that it’s really stretching reality to the breaking point to bemoan the sad fates of all the men who’d intended to fertilize their friends-with-benefits in the hopes of obtaining a child that way.” If some guy did then he deserves to get disappointed. But to those who just wanted a woman or women to boink if he wants to man up and be the kid’s father he should not be penalized just because he didn’t think as many, many do of not getting married 1st. Whatever happed before is mute once the child is on the way, then it comes to being fair between BOTH of the people that had a hand in creation.

laureth's avatar

I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree, then. I guess both genders have a go of it if they want to reproduce, and this is as it should be. The obstacle courses laid out for men and women are different, but men and women are different too. For a man wanting to reproduce, he has to find a woman willing to help. <shrug> I suppose this is how he shows his evolutionary fitness to pass down his genes.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central here’s where your problem is: you want people to stop assuming that men don’t give a shit, that they won’t take care of kids, etc. That is what I want as well…but in the same breath you make a lot of assumptions about how mothers will treat fathers, how all they want them for is the money…believe it is not reality that women go through all the pregnancies and the aftermath for the money only…that’s ridiculous

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Some men (not all) do man up and give a crap about the kid(s) they father. Let me clear it up, no, I have rarely heard of a woman having a kid she did not want just to get the child support, but many who take the kid to court don’t reject it or absolve the father from paying. The government surely don’t, or else it would not be manditory but if he chose to pay. Saddly some of those who would man up and be a father don’t have a chance when it is taken from him with as much regard as you’d give a bum on the street when you have to do road work and clear the area under the bridge, no one ask how he feels about it.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central there are no clear cut answers here – this is a complex issue that involves intersection of gender and sexism and history and policy…it’s all got to go back to destroying gendered norms that are harmful to everyone…assuming men don’t give a shit and that women always do is problematic and untrue.

1TubeGuru's avatar

In my opinion your proposal is somewhat far fetched .i raised my youngest daughter since she was two and my step daughter since she was eight as a single parent with full legal court ordered custody until both of them reached adulthood.my dead beat ex wife owes me for several years of child support. when a man and woman choose to copulate both should be equally responsible for the child.my youngest is the young woman in my avatar. she just turned 18 this month.based on principle I will wait ten years and then go after her mother for back child support+ interest.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@1TubeGuru when a man and woman choose to copulate both should be equally responsible for the child.
That is the rub; BOTH decided to boink like bunnies but the women want to control the outcome. If she wants to keep it, she wants the guy to pay for have with no accountability. If she doesn’t want to keep it, she wants to be able to get rid of it and owe the man nothing when half the DNA she is eliminating is his.

Furthermore, you have a very fetching young woman there, your ex-wife was a fool to miss out on her growing up becoming a beautiful woman; she can’t take credit in none of that.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther