8 ms·

Vasectomy is not 100% reliable. Even after a successful vasectomy about 1 in 2,000 men will become fertile again at some point in the future. Moreover, having

Vasectomy is not 100% reliable. Even after a successful vasectomy about 1 in 2,000 men will become fertile again at some point in the future. Moreover, having to engage in genital mutilation so as to avoid being tricked/lied/forced into fatherhood is hardly progressive.

arrrg 11y ago
A biological difference leads to different options for different genders. (The delineation isn’t even strictly along gender lines, though, since this only applies to people who can become pregnant. Most of those are women, sure, but many women cannot become pregnant, for example.) If you value bodily autonomy (which I really hope you do – otherwise this discussion is kind of pointless) the only person who can decide what happens with their own body is the actual pregnant person – and no one else. This consequently means that we can only put this decision into their hands. It’s a function of the biological difference. I mean, misogynist assholes like to bang on and on and on about biological differences (most often referring to things we don’t even really know are biological differences) and how those make it imperative to treat genders differently – but here we have a crystal clear example of a biological difference leading to different options for different people – and suddenly that’s no ok?
- iopq 11y ago
  OK, so what happens if the child is born and the woman drops it off at a "safe haven" without the father's knowledge? It's well out of her body, but a woman is never forced to be a mother if she doesn't want to be. On the other hand, a woman can have a child and force the man into fatherhood.
  - arrrg 11y ago
    Safe havens are about saving babies’ lives, not their parents. Also, no one can force anyone into parenthood since, you know, it’s necessary to at least have sex for that. All the rest is a function of where the baby is actually growing.
    - iopq 11y ago
      OK, let's assume a child exists. A woman can make a man pay. A man can't make a woman pay, she can just give the child up because she HAS MORE RIGHTS to the child.
    - NotableAlamode 11y ago
      Safe havens are about saving babies’ lives, not their parents. No, they are about women's convenience. Also, no one can force anyone into parenthood You are kidding, right. Sperm theft and rape of the father are counterexamples that have been discussed upthread.
      - bayesianhorse 11y ago
        "Sperm theft" and "rape of father" are so rare that this argument is utterly ridiculous in the face of persisting sexual violence against women.
        NotableAlamode 11y ago
        The discussion here is whether women have more rights than men, or not. Sexual violence against women is irrelevant here, since it's illegal (unlike sexual violence against men). You keep changing the subject. Clearly that is because you understand on some level that your interlocutors are correct, but for some strange reason you cannot admit this in public. I guess you are experiencing cognitive dissonance because the truth that is being put right in front of your eyes here is uncomfortable and diametrically opposed to what you have been told by mainstream society. As an aside, it is very questionable if there is much sexual violence against women. For a start the scope of 'sexual violence' has been expanded to infinity, so that saying "nice booty" now counts as violence, and moreover, victimhood pays (for women) and this is being milked, pace the many false rape hoaxes that came to light recently, like mattress girl or the UVA gang rape hoax. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
        iopq 11y ago
        "The father is 15 years old" happens frequently, and it doesn't even matter if the woman is an adult. He still has to pay child support.
- NotableAlamode 11y ago
  You are not addressing the issue. We are discussing whether men or women have more rights. The ability that women have to force men into parenthood is a clearcut example of women having more rights than men, regardless of whether one agrees with the the existence of this right or not. Moreover, the critical cases here have nothing to do with "bodily autonomy", that's a smoke screen. They have to do with alimony. A woman can rape a man, get pregnant that way and the biological father has to pay alimony [1]. A woman can steal a man's sperm, get pregnant and the biological father has to pay alimony [2]. That's outrageous! What are you doing to redress this injustice? As an aside, referring to "misogynist assholes" is rarely helpful. [1] http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/50/842.html http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/5... [2] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7024930/ns/health-sexual_health/t/sperm-gift-keeps-giving/#.Uu_svxaulEA http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7024930/ns/health-sexual_health/t/...
  - arrrg 11y ago
    This is about kids. If the kid exists both parents are responsible for it, no exceptions. That’s the overriding doctrine in the law. This is the basic doctrine I very much do support. Both parents are supposed to be equally responsible for their offspring once it is in the world, no ifs and buts. That the mother has the ability to not make the kid exist in the first place is a function of where the baby grows up, nothing more, and basically completely unrelated to that. Can we please talk about this basic doctrine and not weird edge cases?
    - NotableAlamode 11y ago
      If the kid exists both parents are responsible for it, no exceptions. I strongly disagree with this doctrine, because it disadvantages men in practise. If the child was conceived against the explicit will of one the involved parties, that party should not be coerced to pay for, or look after the child. Women absolutely need to acquire written conception consent prior to conception. No written consent, no alimony. No means no. It's shocking that one needs to spell this out in 2015!
      - 11y ago

arrrg 11y ago

A biological difference leads to different options for different genders. (The delineation isn’t even strictly along gender lines, though, since this only applies to people who can become pregnant. Most of those are women, sure, but many women cannot become pregnant, for example.) If you value bodily autonomy (which I really hope you do – otherwise this discussion is kind of pointless) the only person who can decide what happens with their own body is the actual pregnant person – and no one else. This consequently means that we can only put this decision into their hands. It’s a function of the biological difference. I mean, misogynist assholes like to bang on and on and on about biological differences (most often referring to things we don’t even really know are biological differences) and how those make it imperative to treat genders differently – but here we have a crystal clear example of a biological difference leading to different options for different people – and suddenly that’s no ok?

iopq 11y ago
OK, so what happens if the child is born and the woman drops it off at a "safe haven" without the father's knowledge? It's well out of her body, but a woman is never forced to be a mother if she doesn't want to be. On the other hand, a woman can have a child and force the man into fatherhood.
- arrrg 11y ago
  Safe havens are about saving babies’ lives, not their parents. Also, no one can force anyone into parenthood since, you know, it’s necessary to at least have sex for that. All the rest is a function of where the baby is actually growing.
  - iopq 11y ago
    OK, let's assume a child exists. A woman can make a man pay. A man can't make a woman pay, she can just give the child up because she HAS MORE RIGHTS to the child.
  - NotableAlamode 11y ago
    Safe havens are about saving babies’ lives, not their parents. No, they are about women's convenience. Also, no one can force anyone into parenthood You are kidding, right. Sperm theft and rape of the father are counterexamples that have been discussed upthread.
    - bayesianhorse 11y ago
      "Sperm theft" and "rape of father" are so rare that this argument is utterly ridiculous in the face of persisting sexual violence against women.
      - NotableAlamode 11y ago
        The discussion here is whether women have more rights than men, or not. Sexual violence against women is irrelevant here, since it's illegal (unlike sexual violence against men). You keep changing the subject. Clearly that is because you understand on some level that your interlocutors are correct, but for some strange reason you cannot admit this in public. I guess you are experiencing cognitive dissonance because the truth that is being put right in front of your eyes here is uncomfortable and diametrically opposed to what you have been told by mainstream society. As an aside, it is very questionable if there is much sexual violence against women. For a start the scope of 'sexual violence' has been expanded to infinity, so that saying "nice booty" now counts as violence, and moreover, victimhood pays (for women) and this is being milked, pace the many false rape hoaxes that came to light recently, like mattress girl or the UVA gang rape hoax. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
      - iopq 11y ago
        "The father is 15 years old" happens frequently, and it doesn't even matter if the woman is an adult. He still has to pay child support.
NotableAlamode 11y ago
You are not addressing the issue. We are discussing whether men or women have more rights. The ability that women have to force men into parenthood is a clearcut example of women having more rights than men, regardless of whether one agrees with the the existence of this right or not. Moreover, the critical cases here have nothing to do with "bodily autonomy", that's a smoke screen. They have to do with alimony. A woman can rape a man, get pregnant that way and the biological father has to pay alimony [1]. A woman can steal a man's sperm, get pregnant and the biological father has to pay alimony [2]. That's outrageous! What are you doing to redress this injustice? As an aside, referring to "misogynist assholes" is rarely helpful. [1] http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/50/842.html http://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/4th/5... [2] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7024930/ns/health-sexual_health/t/sperm-gift-keeps-giving/#.Uu_svxaulEA http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7024930/ns/health-sexual_health/t/...
- arrrg 11y ago
  This is about kids. If the kid exists both parents are responsible for it, no exceptions. That’s the overriding doctrine in the law. This is the basic doctrine I very much do support. Both parents are supposed to be equally responsible for their offspring once it is in the world, no ifs and buts. That the mother has the ability to not make the kid exist in the first place is a function of where the baby grows up, nothing more, and basically completely unrelated to that. Can we please talk about this basic doctrine and not weird edge cases?
  - NotableAlamode 11y ago
    If the kid exists both parents are responsible for it, no exceptions. I strongly disagree with this doctrine, because it disadvantages men in practise. If the child was conceived against the explicit will of one the involved parties, that party should not be coerced to pay for, or look after the child. Women absolutely need to acquire written conception consent prior to conception. No written consent, no alimony. No means no. It's shocking that one needs to spell this out in 2015!
    - 11y ago