Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why shouldn't men have more reproductive rights? Watch

    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    You seem to be suggesting that the side effects of the abortion are a likelihood. Haemorrhaging, which I think you referred to, occurs in about 1/1000 cases. NHS guidance states that abortions carry few health risks, particularly if carried out in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
    You understand that it's one of the hardest decision a woman has to make right? It's not just "getting an abortion" its not taken lightly. Ofcourse you think it is because your male and don't actually have to make the choice or go through with it, or live with it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    You understand that it's one of the hardest decision a woman has to make right? It's not just "getting an abortion" its not taken lightly. Ofcourse you think it is because your male and don't actually have to make the choice or go through with it, or live with it.
    But a man certainly has to live with the "womans" decision. Which in effect is forcing them to 'live' with it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    You understand that it's one of the hardest decision a woman has to make right? It's not just "getting an abortion" its not taken lightly. Ofcourse you think it is because your male and don't actually have to make the choice or go through with it, or live with it.
    Thanks for your kind assessment of my gender.

    I might suggest that you don't speak for the entirety of womankind. I've spoken to my girlfriend about this at length and she would have no qualms about going to the abortion clinic if she got pregnant accidentally. From what I have read on here in threads on the matter, she is far from alone.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanB1991)
    But a man certainly has to live with the "womans" decision. Which in effect is forcing them to 'live' with it.
    Like I have said time and time again. You don't actually have to have anything to do with the child you choose. You simply have to contribute financially to its upbringing.

    Think of it as paying for the right to not giving the child a male parent.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    Thanks for your kind assessment of my gender.

    I might suggest that you don't speak for the entirety of womankind. I've spoken to my girlfriend about this at length and she would have no qualms about going to the abortion clinic if she got pregnant accidentally. From what I have read on here in threads on the matter, she is far from alone.
    And that's great but you'll still never comprehend the situation as you're male. And similarly your gf can't say what she'd actually do in that situation as I'm assuming you've never got her pregnant.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    Like I have said time and time again. You don't actually have to have anything to do with the child you choose. You simply have to contribute financially to its upbringing.

    Think of it as paying for the right to not giving the child a male parent.
    And what if the father 'does' want to be involved in the childs life?

    It's rather hypocritical, mother is presumed parent, but father is presumed wallet? And god forbid the child is not actually his? No refund at all.

    You do realise how much harder it is for a man to claim financial support for a child if they are the single parent?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanB1991)
    And what if the father 'does' want to be involved in the childs life?

    It's rather hypocritical, mother is presumed parent, but father is presumed wallet?

    You do realise how much harder it is for a man to claim financial support for a child if they are the single parent?
    If they want to be involved that's awesome and obviously what is best for the child. And if a woman doesn't want a child and gives parenting rights to a father they have to pay just the same. This isn't a male issue. It's a parenting issue.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    If they want to be involved that's awesome and obviously what is best for the child. And if a woman doesn't want a child and gives parenting rights to a father they have to pay just the same. This isn't a male issue. It's a parenting issue.
    Main problems are these.

    Women doesn't want child, MAP, Abortion or adoption as options. Man Doesn't want child, has to depend on the woman's decision.

    Women has child, doesn't want to be the parent, no financial responsibility. Father has child, doesn't want to be the parent, has financial responsibility.

    Mother wants to be parent, is parent automatically (aka child has to be taken away in the case of poor parenting). Father wants to be a parent, has to prove he is a good father, otherwise is A) Relegated to secondary status (aka visitation rights every second weekend) or B) Relegated to simply financial supporter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanB1991)
    Main problems are these.

    Women doesn't want child, MAP, Abortion or adoption as options. Man Doesn't want child, has to depend on the woman's decision.

    Women has child, doesn't want to be the parent, no financial responsibility. Father has child, doesn't want to be the parent, has financial responsibility.

    Mother wants to be parent, is parent automatically (aka child has to be taken away in the case of poor parenting). Father wants to be a parent, has to prove he is a good father, otherwise is A) Relegated to secondary status (aka visitation rights every second weekend) or B) Relegated to simply financial supporter
    The woman always has financial responsibility just as the father does. And every father has a legal right to see his child (unless bad parentjng same as mother)
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SnooFnoo)
    The woman always has financial responsibility just as the father does. And every father has a legal right to see his child (unless bad parentjng same as mother)
    Technically yes, but the court will always presume the Mother is the 'primary' carer. The father then has to present the case of being just a good a parent. Which A) cost's money B) Place Burden of proof on the male and C) Will get slowed down, in some cases literally by years if the woman claims any wrongdoing.

    This is a great example, 12 years and £100,000 later a father finally get to 'see' his daughter http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ding-down.html, could you afford £100,000 to see your child?

    Another issue is child support, yes in theory this is correct, but for example in the US their Census Bureau produced stats show that 15% of mothers are owed to support the children, this compared to 85% for fathers (And guess who rounds the figure for women who actually get paid only 5% of support owed?). Also when the primary carer of a child earns more money, if they are male they also have to provide the secondary carer child support, a female primary carer does not.

    In the UK, we also have the issue of Father's being forced to pay child support, even when the child is in both households for equal amounts of time, while women do not.

    If they were limited examples it would be fine, but they're not, women time and time again are able to use they system to their advantage, whether or not the father wants to have a role in the childs life. My uncle himself was 'forced' to give up seeing my cousin due to not being able to afford the legal fee's, as such he's now 'forced' to pay child support even though his wife left him after having an affair, he has pretty much zero visitation rights and she earns around 4x more than him in earnings.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Instead of being selfish think of the child, imagine how hurt you would be if your dad signed a contract saying he wanted nothing to do with you. The pill isn't 100% effective, condoms arent' 100% effective, start taking responsibility for our actions, the day when men can get pregnant, and give birth I will support reproductive rights, maybe we should campaign for a male pill. A lot of men can and do walk away my friend got pregnant at 19 she didn't want the baby but he convinced her to continue with the pregnancy he was 26 and had a job, she gave birth the relationship broke down 4 months after the baby was born, he hasn't seen the child since october and he moved away, she does 100% of the childcare, lives in poverty and if she said she wouldn't go through the csa because he will just quit his job. He doesnt pay and he doesnt see the child and he wanted it!! It works both ways!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by voiceofreason234)
    Condoms ruin the feeling of sex, so forget about that!

    Moving abroad solves 99% of problems concerning child support.
    Yeah, let's create fatherless children all the time, and not give a damn about how the child will grow up. I wonder if your own father thought the same way.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    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.
    Possible scenarios to unwanted pregnancy.

    Man doesn't want to keep it. Women doesn't want to keep it and is ok with abortion etc. No problems involved.

    Man wants to keep it. Women doesn't. Since it is the woman's body you can't force her to carry out a pregnancy. It is inhuman. Man gets screwed over.

    Man doesn't want ot keep it. Woman does. Again, it is the woman's body and you can't force her to have an abortion for obvious humane reasons. Man has to pay his share for child he doesn't want.

    In all of these scenarios the ball is in the woman's court. None of the options leave the women having to pay for an unwanted child either (unless she can't bring herself to abort for moral or societal pressures and raises a child she doesn't really want). The man's opinion is irrelevant in all scenarios beyond the woman respecting his opinion. I'm sure there are women out there that would weigh the view of the man heavily in coming to their decision. But legally the man;s view is not important.

    It is unfair but that unfairness is unavoidable and a result of the fact it is the woman who is pregnant. Unless you think men should be bale to "opt out" and give then let the woman decide between raising a child financially interdependently or getting an abortion. This would involve the state having to subsides quite a lot of single mums much more heavily.


    (Original post by vickidc18)
    Instead of being selfish think of the child, imagine how hurt you would be if your dad signed a contract saying he wanted nothing to do with you. The pill isn't 100% effective, condoms arent' 100% effective, start taking responsibility for our actions, the day when men can get pregnant, and give birth I will support reproductive rights, maybe we should campaign for a male pill. A lot of men can and do walk away my friend got pregnant at 19 she didn't want the baby but he convinced her to continue with the pregnancy he was 26 and had a job, she gave birth the relationship broke down 4 months after the baby was born, he hasn't seen the child since october and he moved away, she does 100% of the childcare, lives in poverty and if she said she wouldn't go through the csa because he will just quit his job. He doesnt pay and he doesnt see the child and he wanted it!! It works both ways!
    That is of course despicable. Doesn't mean you can use that example as a reason to ignore the issue of male reproductive rights.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Not quite.

    Oh come on, I have maybe seen one thread on here about the male pill and about 100+ moaning about having to pay for kids. If it's that bad just make sure you date someone with the implant/coil.
    Men moan about having to pay maintenance costs because whether or not the mother is the best parent for the child to remain with, in the vast majority of cases the mother is picked over the father.
    Though a general exception to the rule, it brings to mind the story about the hearing over whether the child should stay with the mother who worked in London as a banker and was more devoted to her job (presumably out of necessity, she wasn't earning six figures for playing Solitaire on her computer all day) than she ever was her family, or the stay at home father who had cared for child since day one. The court deemed that the child should live with the mother.
    It's totally ok for a woman to talk about gender inequality, but when a man does it it's apparently unacceptable.

    Also, you're comparing the situation as it is (the fact that fathers are legally forced to pay maintenance costs even if it's the mother who ended the relationship knowing that she couldn't afford to support her child) to a situation that doesn't yet exist (while there are plenty of ideas of how to implement a male contraceptive pill, the ultimate goal of actually creating an effective one has eluded scientists since the '70s).

    There SHOULD be a male contraceptive pill, but you can't keep saying it over and over again and hope that it will happen. Scientists gonna science, and you can't rush that ****. But you can certainly complain about gender inequality when it concerns the above subject and hope that enough people will pay attention to it for something to change. Activists have been doing that over a wide array of subjects for decades.

    I'm not even going to touch the last sentence, you've probably gotten enough grief over it as it is
    Offline

    19
    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.
    You're right! Damn that pesky clap. Only way of getting around that is making sure that both of you are clean prior to engaging in sex. Adults are supposed to be responsible, and it's the responsible thing to do in that situation.

    Really? Interesting. My girlfriend's on the pill and I trust her completely to take it, why do you assume that men are more likely to forget taking a pill than women are?
    If a child is unwanted by both parties then a man is just as likely to take his responsibility seriously, quite possibly even more so than a woman (I'm just theorising here, but I'd imagine that the majority of "should we have kids?" conversations are initiated by women. I'm basing this on absolutely nothing factual and I could be completely and utterly wrong), for taking contraception as the woman is.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    If the mother would struggle to pay for the child, then perhaps she shouldn't have the child. Why should the guy be held to ransom for 18 years simply on the basis that the mother wanted a child she couldn't afford?
    I'm sure catholics would have something to say about abortion and if you mention the adoption route surely you must realise it can be extremely traumatic for a mother to give up their child for adoption/fostering.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    Thanks for your kind assessment of my gender.

    I might suggest that you don't speak for the entirety of womankind. I've spoken to my girlfriend about this at length and she would have no qualms about going to the abortion clinic if she got pregnant accidentally. From what I have read on here in threads on the matter, she is far from alone.
    Your girlfriend could get an abortion if she wanted to, and that would be her choice. That doesn't mean that anyone else wants to, or should have to.

    Also, I would suggest that your girlfriend may think differently if put in that situation. I'm not saying she wouldn't have an abortion, but I'm saying I'm certain she would realise there was more to it than just "right, I don't want a baby, get rid, back to normal".


    (Original post by DanB1991)
    Women has child, doesn't want to be the parent, no financial responsibility. Father has child, doesn't want to be the parent, has financial responsibility.
    Absolutely not true. If the mother decides that she doesn't want the child, and the father has full custody, the mother would have to pay maintenance just as the father would have if it were the other way round.

    It's random, unresearched comments like that that fuel the fire of the sexism brigade.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox)
    Absolutely not true. If the mother decides that she doesn't want the child, and the father has full custody, the mother would have to pay maintenance just as the father would have if it were the other way round.

    It's random, unresearched comments like that that fuel the fire of the sexism brigade.
    It's true in a legal sense, more of a cultural norm oppose it however, especially within the system itself which rarely chase payments. Courts are also less likely to demand the same level of child support due to internal sexism.

    Also I was more commenting on if a mother aborts or puts the child up for adoption there's no financial obligation at all.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanB1991)
    It's true in a legal sense, more of a cultural norm oppose it however, especially within the system itself which rarely chase payments. Courts are also less likely to demand the same level of child support due to internal sexism.
    Data to support this?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanB1991)
    It's true in a legal sense, more of a cultural norm oppose it however, especially within the system itself which rarely chase payments. Courts are also less likely to demand the same level of child support due to internal sexism.
    Where is your evidence to support this? (I'm not being sarcastic by the way, I'm genuinely interested).
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • 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.

  • 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.