Why shouldn't men have more reproductive rights?

Majority of condom failure is due to human error. Or perhaps stock the MAP just incase? So women don't have to go through the embarrassment/annoyance of getting it themself. And it means you've taken the responsibility tk prevent a pregnancy should a condom break. My bf used to keep it in just incase when we just used condoms as I did like the responsibility being soley on me. He doesn't want a baby, he can help prevent it.

and yes, the woman can get an abortion, but only under certain circumstances.

Specifically, the right to give up all financial responsibility and thus potential parent hood of his child (unless the caregiver wishes to include him)?

Currently, a man has no real rights if someone is carrying his baby. He can be forced against his will to financially care for the child for 18+ years. The payments are often far too much and there are plenty of examples of the money not going towards the child...

We don't force women to raise their children (rightfully so), they can abort the child if they desire (rightfully so)- after it is born, they can give it up for adoption (rightfully so). But if the mother so desires, she can force via the law another human being against his will to give large sums of money to assist in raising a child he wishes to have nothing to do with.

In some countries/states (US) there are cases of men being forced to pay child support even when the child isn't even there's.

Sure, it's her body - but it's also HIS wallet.

That's my view. Might come across a bit bitter, I've seen too much of this stuff recently:

Nothing wrong with what you suggest here.



Are you suggesting the option for abortion is only available in a limited sense?

Are you suggesting the option for abortion is only available in a limited sense?

That is technically true. 2 doctors need to sign off for an abortion and some women are refused...

Technically, yes. Women can't get abortion on demand. They need to get two doctors to 'sign off' on the abortion, and have a 'real' reason behind it e.g. can't financially cope, having another child would negatively impact any existing child's life, can't mentally cope etc.

I would be interested in some statistics on how many abortions are denied vs accepted. I tried to google but couldn't find any, do you have some?

I would be interested in some statistics on how many abortions are denied vs accepted. I tried to google but couldn't find any, do you have some?

Why is it 'dodgy'? There are many valid reasons a man (or woman) would not want to be a parent. Your bias is upsetting obvious.

You also talk about how to 'just wear a condom'? You do realize that condoms are only 99% effective in optimal lab conditions? And that actually they fail very very often. Likewise other birth-control can fail, and do often.

You also say things like 'If its that bad just date someone with birth-control'

Imagine if you had no reproductive rights and were forced to carry a child you didn't want, and the response was 'well if its that bad just date infertile men'.

What you are doing is victim-blaming.

Should a male reproductive pill be made readily available on the market I guarantee you that Durex would go into administration by the end of the week.

I think you're forgetting about STI's. Condoms are still the only form of contraception that prevent them. Given how many different partners people have these days, the (already one of the highest in Europe) rate of STI's would skyrocket.

Also, I dunno about other women but there's absolutely no way I would ever trust a man to be responsible for whether or not I get pregnant. There might be a male pill market for long time married couples who trust each other completely but even then I wouldn't risk it.

I think you're forgetting about STI's. Condoms are still the only form of contraception that prevent them. Given how many different partners people have these days, the (already one of the highest in Europe) rate of STI's would skyrocket.

Also, I dunno about other women but there's absolutely no way I would ever trust a man to be responsible for whether or not I get pregnant. There might be a male pill market for long time married couples who trust each other completely but even then I wouldn't risk it.

Me too, there's no way I'd trust a guy to take it correctly. If they get it wrong....I'm still the one that ends up pregnant, they can run off if they want.

This highlights the main problem. A man HAS to trust the woman if he wants to have sex and avoid being a parent, and even that is not guaranteed. Even if they are doing everything they can for contraception, the chance is still there, and the man can only trust that if an egg is fertilized that the woman will take the MAP etc.

Because they CAN'T run off if they want (at least short of moving to another country).

A male pill would help solve this. If the worst happens no longer would his fate be in the hands of the woman, but instead it is in his own hands. Trials for the male pill suggest 100% success rate, which is great so far.

A women does not need to put trust in the man, since she has all the contraceptives she wants, and even if she gets pregnant she still can opt out. But a man needs to put trust in the women. A male pill would balance this out with regards to contraception, and financial abortion would balance it out by giving a man the ability to opt out even if its too late.

This highlights the main problem. A man HAS to trust the woman if he wants to have sex and avoid being a parent, and even that is not guaranteed. Even if they are doing everything they can for contraception, the chance is still there, and the man can only trust that if an egg is fertilized that the woman will take the MAP etc.

Because they CAN'T run off if they want (at least short of moving to another country).

A male pill would help solve this. If the worst happens no longer would his fate be in the hands of the woman, but instead it is in his own hands. Trials for the male pill suggest 100% success rate, which is great so far.

A women does not need to put trust in the man, since she has all the contraceptives she wants, and even if she gets pregnant she still can opt out. But a man needs to put trust in the women. A male pill would balance this out with regards to contraception, and financial abortion would balance it out by giving a man the ability to opt out even if its too late.

I see what you mean. I have heard about women 'trapping men' deliberately by lying about taking their pill because they want a baby and the partner doesn't. But I think this is quite unusual. Obviously any woman who does this is a complete cow and I would support the man's right not to pay if he was misled. He didn't have to take her word for it though. Also there are men out there who tell their partners they want a baby, convince them to have it and then change their mind when the baby arrives.

Oh right, the male pill would work alongside the female pill. He has power over his own ability to get a girl pregnant, and she still has power with her pill. That would be a good idea. The only problem is if the woman still gets pregnant, how do we decide who is to blame?

Men can take responsibility they just don't want to because they don't like wearing condoms or feel getting the MAP is a woman's responsibilty.

Getting pregnant unplanned is a lose lose situation for a woman. They either have a baby they don't want, or go through with an abortion they don't want. A man can leave with out consequence as the system for chasing child support is so poor in the UK.

The way I always see it is, when two people choose to have sex, they understand that no matter what precautions are taken, there is always a chance of pregnancy, and therefore you're either willing to take that risk (both of you) and have the sex and face the potential consequences or you're not willing to take that risk and don't have sex.

You raise good questions. If a man has free reign to financially abort responsibility, how do we stop him convincing his SO he wants a child, then running off?

One solution could be that that man can only back away legally at least a month before the woman can legally abort. Or even 2 months. This means even if the man changes his mind, the woman always has the ability to back out. If he doesn't back out within that time frame, he has to pay.

You can google and find cases of men who have paid for decades of child support and then it turns out they were lied to and it wasn't there's. No refund.



I don't see how the proposed male financial abortion would change even if they were both on a pill and it failed. If a man was on the pill, and the women was trusting the man, and the pill failed/was not taken intentionally - the women still would have all the rights to abortion/MAP/others, so why shouldn't the guy in the other situation.



This is false. And the implication that the reason men want reproductive rights is so they can just not wear a condom is ludicrous. It is also immaterial as we have mentioned before condoms are not 100%. No contraception is.



This is faulty logic. You propose an unplanned baby means the women must either not want the child, or have an abortion they don't want. This isn't true and there is significant support for single mothers in the UK.

You are simply wrong about a man being able to simply leave without consequence.



This is true. And by the introduction of a male pill and financial abortion it reduces the risk of an unwanted pregnancy (and thus the hassle of MAP/abortion) and it also allows the man to state his intention of not being parent and allowing the woman to make a more informed decision.

how does it reduce risk?

You are financially responsible for the baby you created when you decided to take that (tiny) risk of having sex.

Are you seriously asking how additional contraception reduces the chance of conception?



This is the same argument religious nuts use to argue against abortion. 'You are responsible for the life you created when you decided to have sex'. But we don't say that, do we? We say 'No, a women isn't automatically responsible, she can choose to take no responsibility'. Financially abortion is giving a man the same choice. It ultimately helps both sides as it allows the woman to make a more informed decision as she knows from a legal standpoint whether the man would be in the child's life or not.