Turn on thread page Beta

Why shouldn't men have more reproductive rights? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    If a man can't handle the consequences and responsibilities of having a child, they should do everything in their power not to get anyone pregnant in the first place. If they do get someone pregnant, why on earth should they get to just skip off into the sunshine and leave the woman with the costly job of raising a child that's half the mans whether they like it or not.

    However, I've heard of women spending child maintenance payments on themselves rather than their kid; that's obviously wrong and shouldn't be allowed to happen.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    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.
    Nothing wrong with what you suggest here.

    (Original post by aoxa)
    and yes, the woman can get an abortion, but only under certain circumstances.
    Are you suggesting the option for abortion is only available in a limited sense?
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    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:

    If you don't want a child, use protection. Problem solved.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    Nothing wrong with what you suggest here.



    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...
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)


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

    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    That is technically true. 2 doctors need to sign off for an abortion and some women are refused...
    (Original post by aoxa)
    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?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    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?
    No. I doubt any stats like that would be published considering how sensitive abortion is. I know most women get abortion on mental health grounds though.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    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'll have a Google tomorrow at work
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aoxa)
    What? If she gets pregnant, then yes the male still has a financial responsibility, and yes, the woman can get an abortion, but only under certain circumstances.
    What do you mean under certain circumstances? If the woman keeps it against the man's wishes, fine, but he shouldn't have to pay for it
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    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.
    Yes but it really isn't difficult not to become a parent. I don't understand how anyone would feel that is outside of their control?

    The implant is literally more effective than being sterilised, and you can see it in a girls arm.

    Except there are way fewer infertile men than women on birth control and you can't tell if a man is infertile by looking at him.

    In fact it shouldn't come down to that in the first place, why anyone would sleep with someone they don't trust to take their birth control is beyond me :/
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drunk Punx)
    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.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    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.
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    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.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    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? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    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.
    A man can CHOOSE to wear a condom, a man can CHOOSE to have the MAP to hand should a condom accident happen.

    Getting the MAP is either humiliating (from a clinic) and a general pain in the bum (usually waiting for a couple hours atleast meaning time off work) or really expensive (if buying from a pharmacy)for a woman. A man can choose to buy it and keep it in a drawer "just incase".

    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.

    If you both (partners) choose not to use condoms and she's on contraceptives then you have to accept the risk (even if it's tiny) that the sex you're about to have could result in pregnancy. If you don't like that risk, don't have sex or use a condom.

    You should always assume a woman will keep the baby. Prepare for the worst just like every woman has to.

    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.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    You have reproductive rights when you stick it in.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    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.
    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.

    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    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? :rolleyes:
    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.

    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    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.
    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.

    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    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.
    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.

    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    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.
    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.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamKeene)
    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? Nothing is 100% and if pregnancy occurs, body autonomy comes into play so a woman can decide to keep the baby or not. You are financially responsible for the baby you created when you decided to take that (tiny) risk of having sex.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Put something on the end of it, simples.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.