Rights of the father. Watch

DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#181
Report 4 years ago
#181
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
It's the result too
Ok. SO how many women have been impregnated by sexual assault?
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#182
Report 4 years ago
#182
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Ok. SO how many women have been impregnated by sexual assault?
No idea. What tends to happen when a sperm meets an egg?
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#183
Report 4 years ago
#183
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
No idea. What tends to happen when a sperm meets an egg?
So. You don't know.
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#184
Report 4 years ago
#184
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
So. You don't know.
It's fertilised :fyi:
0
reply
RandZul'Zorander
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#185
Report 4 years ago
#185
(Original post by Wade-)
This is essentially pointless because you're talking about something completely different to me. My solution is what happens once a woman becomes pregnant but you're fixated on pre pregnancy.

Yes I do want men to have an option to bail out, just as women do. You've constantly contradicted yourself by saying that if you don't want to get a woman pregnant then use contraception but you don't have the same stance on women's choice to opt of having a baby after pregnancy. You're constantly talking about this health risk to women as though we live in the 14th century


Posted from TSR Mobile
In addition to what some other posters are saying there is huge difference in the approach we have to take pre-birth and post-birth (or pre-viability/post-viability). When we are talking pre-birth the responsibility is not necessarily to preserve a life and so the father has no obligation or risk. If the father has nothing at stake then there is no reason they should be allowed to have any 'rights'. Even if we assume a father does have a right over a fetus that does not equate to having a right to decide for a mother. Seeing as there are no viable options to enforce a father's right to keep a fetus/baby (forcing a mother to carry to term is essentially 9 month forced servitude) we follow the woman's right over her own body.

Often time's people bring up potential financial liability to the father as a reason that they should have a right to be a factor. Sadly, this financial burden is non-existent during pregnancy as you don't have a financial obligation to the woman (or at least you don't necessarily). Even if you did that obligation can often times be severed. So prior to birth there is no financial burden or obligation and again doesn't lead to a 'right'.

This all changes post-pregnancy. In this case there is obligation because a life has been produced and as such this person has it's own rights which now must be taken into account. It is often considered that babies have a right to be cared for. This is due to their inability to care for themselves. Now how do we decide who has an obligation to fill that right? Generally it works hierarchically. We say that first there is a familial obligation. The parents who produced the child have an obligation to care for it, as they produced it (even if accidentally). Even if accidental this responsibility remains due to the actualization of a burden on the child and society if the parents were to neglect this right.

However, this obligation is not absolute. There are ways to sever this obligation (like adoption). If for whatever reason the parents cannot care for the child we often look to extended family and then the State.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#186
Report 4 years ago
#186
(Original post by Doctor_Einstein)
I never said women don't have physical and financial responsibility during pregnancy. Have a look again at what I was responding to, and my comment and see if you can piece together my point.
So, you are writing something irrelevant then. The reasoning behind a woman's decision for an abortion doesn't change what I have written.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#187
Report 4 years ago
#187
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
It's fertilised :fyi:
Again, that wasn't my question. So stop acting stupid. You don't have to talk to me.
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#188
Report 4 years ago
#188
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Again, that wasn't my question. So stop acting stupid. You don't have to talk to me.
likewise. And you're right. I'll stop replying.
0
reply
limetang
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#189
Report 4 years ago
#189
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
No. You ignore that Men have a choice. They ignore that choice Pre-Pregnancy. Pregnancy is too late.



Women have the choice to bail out because they have all of the Financial and Physical risk during Pregnancy and Men have zero. They have absolutely no rights during Pregnancy because they have no risk.

Well, someone like you is a liar that wants to pretend that walking across the road is more dangerous than pregnancy. You have to ignore the fact that Pregnancy causes permanent injury to a woman's body as well as taking 9 months out of her life. Since, you are talking zero percent of the risk. You have no rights during it.
Exactly. Agency with respect to pregnancy therefore lies entirely with the woman. This means that she has the bulk of the rights when it comes to pregnancy, but it also means she has the bulk of the responsibility (the two must go together). It is women who are entirely responsible (in the case of unplanned pregnancy) for preventing themselves from getting pregnant, it is after all their body. As a result this is why I believe the "he made his choice when he had sex" argument fails spectacularly, if women are to have the bulk of the rights when it comes to pregnancy they also must carry the bulk of the responsibility.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#190
Report 4 years ago
#190
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
likewise. And you're right. I'll stop replying.
Not likewise. You are want to use the issue of men being sexually assaulted and then take the piss.
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#191
Report 4 years ago
#191
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Not likewise. You are want to use the issue of men being sexually assaulted and then take the piss.
likewise. you are the one that is taking the piss. (well I won't reply seriously anymore anyway )
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#192
Report 4 years ago
#192
(Original post by limetang)
Exactly. Agency with respect to pregnancy therefore lies entirely with the woman. This means that she has the bulk of the rights when it comes to pregnancy, but it also means she has the bulk of the responsibility (the two must go together). It is women who are entirely responsible (in the case of unplanned pregnancy) for preventing themselves from getting pregnant, it is after all their body. As a result this is why I believe the "he made his choice when he had sex" argument fails spectacularly, if women are to have the bulk of the rights when it comes to pregnancy they also must carry the bulk of the responsibility.
She has all of the rights and all of the responsibility during Pregnancy.

That is why she has the right to abort and the man has no control over the issue.

Oh...and he does have the choice before Pregnancy. Unless, you are claiming that men have no control over their sexual urges.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#193
Report 4 years ago
#193
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
likewise. you are the one that is taking the piss. (well I won't reply seriously anymore anyway )
Nope. I asked a question. You ignored it.

I thought you were bringing up a serious issue like Sexual assault. Instead you want to take the piss.
0
reply
ChickenMadness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#194
Report 4 years ago
#194
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Nope. I asked a question. You ignored it.

I thought you were bringing up a serious issue like Sexual assault. Instead you want to take the piss.
it is a serious issue and you were taking the piss with a dumb question lmao. Doesn't matter how much something happens. What matters is that it can and does happen and the law doesn't give a toss. If it only happened once it's still bad.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#195
Report 4 years ago
#195
(Original post by ChickenMadness)
it is a serious issue and you were taking the piss with a dumb question lmao. Doesn't matter how much something happens. What matters is that it can and does happen and the law doesn't give a toss. If it only happened once it's still bad.
I thought you might have statistics on the issue since I have never looked it up.

If it was an issue that actually happened then I can change my position as appropriate.

Actually, it is very important how much something happens. If it is non-existent then there is no point changing the law on the mater with regards to child support and etc.
0
reply
Wade-
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#196
Report 4 years ago
#196
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
No. You ignore that Men have a choice. They ignore that choice Pre-Pregnancy. Pregnancy is too late.
If you actually read over what I said I haven't ignored that at all, I've repeatedly said that men have the choice to wear condoms but I've also demonstrated why it's stupid and discriminatory to not give them any rights after pregnancy occurs.

(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Women have the choice to bail out because they have all of the Financial and Physical risk during Pregnancy and Men have zero. They have absolutely no rights during Pregnancy because they have no risk.

Well, someone like you is a liar that wants to pretend that walking across the road is more dangerous than pregnancy. You have to ignore the fact that Pregnancy causes permanent injury to a woman's body as well as taking 9 months out of her life. Since, you are talking zero percent of the risk. You have no rights during it.
So a man in a relationship with a woman has no financial cost caused by pregnancy? Don't be so ridiculous. You're making yourself rather silly by repeatedly talking about this 'risk' which is so tiny that doesn't even come into most people's mind.

Well it's factual that being run over is more likely to be the cause of someone's death than pregnancy complications so that's not really a lie. It doesn't cause permanent damage to a woman's body, I have no idea where you've got that impression



Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
limetang
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#197
Report 4 years ago
#197
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
She has all of the rights and all of the responsibility during Pregnancy.

That is why she has the right to abort and the man has no control over the issue.

Oh...and he does have the choice before Pregnancy. Unless, you are claiming that men have no control over their sexual urges.
Two things

1) His choice is hardly comparable, so his responsibility for unplanned pregnancy is hardly comparable

2) When we look at pregnancy (specifically unplanned pregnancy) it's not simply an issue of pregnancy has potentially negative effects for her, but an issue of pregnancy is something that happens exclusively to HER body. But that doesn't simply imply she has rights with respect to pregnancy and her body, it means she has AGENCY with respect to it. This means that the rights and responsibilities for pregnancy and protecting against it lie entirely with her. (There is of course an exception in the case of a planned pregnancy as that is a situation where the nature of it being planned means that both partners are consenting to be parents).

There seems to be this pervasive idea that sex is simply something that men do to women. It's reflected in the language we use to describe pregnancy "he got her pregnant". What needs to be remembered here is that we're dealing with grown women here no toddlers. They are perfectly able of taking the responsibility that sits squarely with them when it comes to pregnancy and its condescending to suggest that women and men share equal responsibility for pregnancy and childbirth, they don't, the agency with respect to that sits with the woman.

I don't know what the ideal system would look like, but I know this current system isn't it. It is ABSURD to think that it is right to enforce almost 2 decades of financial responsibility on a man simply because he ejaculated.

But a question to you, what exactly do you think would be wrong with affording men rights to say that they take no responsibility for the wellbeing of a child that comes about as an unplanned pregnancy as a result of recreational sex.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#198
Report 4 years ago
#198
(Original post by Wade-)
If you actually read over what I said I haven't ignored that at all, I've repeatedly said that men have the choice to wear condoms but I've also demonstrated why it's stupid and discriminatory to not give them any rights after pregnancy occurs.
It isn't stupid. Men have the choice.

It is only stupid because it doesn't fit into your narrative.

It doesn't matter if it is discriminatory. Women can get pregnant. Men can not. Therefore, they have never been in the same position.

(Original post by Wade-)
So a man in a relationship with a woman has no financial cost caused by pregnancy? Don't be so ridiculous. You're making yourself rather silly by repeatedly talking about this 'risk' which is so tiny that doesn't even come into most people's mind.

Well it's factual that being run over is more likely to be the cause of someone's death than pregnancy complications so that's not really a lie. It doesn't cause permanent damage to a woman's body, I have no idea where you've got that impression
It is a lie. You wrote that there is a 1 in 200 chance.

That is correct. A man has no financial responsibility to pregnancy unless he chooses to.

A simple Google search will tell you the Physical changes that a woman undergoes during pregnancy, The fact you are completely ignorant is not an excuse.

I am simply stating a fact. Pregnancy is dangerous. That is why hundreds of millions is spent on it on a year.
0
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#199
Report 4 years ago
#199
(Original post by limetang)
Two things

1) His choice is hardly comparable, so his responsibility for unplanned pregnancy is hardly comparable

2) When we look at pregnancy (specifically unplanned pregnancy) it's not simply an issue of pregnancy has potentially negative effects for her, but an issue of pregnancy is something that happens exclusively to HER body. But that doesn't simply imply she has rights with respect to pregnancy and her body, it means she has AGENCY with respect to it. This means that the rights and responsibilities for pregnancy and protecting against it lie entirely with her. (There is of course an exception in the case of a planned pregnancy as that is a situation where the nature of it being planned means that both partners are consenting to be parents).

There seems to be this pervasive idea that sex is simply something that men do to women. It's reflected in the language we use to describe pregnancy "he got her pregnant". What needs to be remembered here is that we're dealing with grown women here no toddlers. They are perfectly able of taking the responsibility that sits squarely with them when it comes to pregnancy and its condescending to suggest that women and men share equal responsibility for pregnancy and childbirth, they don't, the agency with respect to that sits with the woman.

I don't know what the ideal system would look like, but I know this current system isn't it. It is ABSURD to think that it is right to enforce almost 2 decades of financial responsibility on a man simply because he ejaculated.

But a question to you, what exactly do you think would be wrong with affording men rights to say that they take no responsibility for the wellbeing of a child that comes about as an unplanned pregnancy as a result of recreational sex.
Well, I don't care if they have to pay for 18 years. If they don't pay then the Tax Payer will. I am not paying for their idiotic mistake.

Women have ALL of the responsibility and rights during Pregnancy. Not men. They have zero unless they are asked to.

Men cannot have any rights during Pregnancy. You are asking a question that is completely impossible since they take none of the Financial and Physical risk during pregnancy.
0
reply
limetang
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#200
Report 4 years ago
#200
(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Well, I don't care if they have to pay for 18 years. If they don't pay then the Tax Payer will. I am not paying for their idiotic mistake.

Women have ALL of the responsibility and rights during and for Pregnancy. Not men. They have zero unless they are asked to.

Men cannot have any rights during Pregnancy. You are asking a question that is completely impossible since they take none of the Financial and Physical risk during pregnancy.
Where does this myth come from that that without child support a child will be doomed to a life in poverty unless the tax payer picks up the tab? You are aware that women can and DO work right?

Again you seem to be very happy to say that women have these rights and responsibilities but seem wholly unwilling to admit the obvious fact about what that means for the sake of what's fair when it comes to parental obligations.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How has the start of this academic year been for you?

Loving it - gonna be a great year (139)
17.77%
It's just nice to be back! (211)
26.98%
Not great so far... (281)
35.93%
I want to drop out! (151)
19.31%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed