Why is pro choice only a women decision?

Originally posted by Helious
Too everyone else that has responded, there are just too many to reply too I want to state one thing, that one thing is the base and the truth of my argument.

Understanding this simple fact will set you free and realize what type of freedom we have because if you side with moral majority over our constitution, you are in fact, a socialist.

You can not claim to have an exclusive right over your body, when somebody else is 50% responsible for the situation at hand. You can not say, it does not matter what the father wants because it is my body and then say, well, he is the father and I want child support.

If the father has no say weather the child ever lives or dies, if the father has no say in anything, the father can not be liable for anything the mother chooses to do with her body.

When a women denies the state and the father of any choice in her body, that choice becomes her responsibility outright and her's alone. You can not have the state involved only when it becomes convenient to do so, that is the definition of abuse of power.

You remind me of a young child. But it was her fault... It was none of my doing. She was crazy. Etc... Grow up! Just like a woman can choose what to do with her body, so can you. You can choose not to have sex with a crazy lady. You can wear a condom. You can have a vasectomy.

And because of your poor decisions, you wanted an innocent baby murdered. A murder that provides an easy solution to a "problem" created partly by your poor decisions. Without you, there would have been no baby. Sex is for procreation. So if it results in a baby, well surprise, surprise.... Abortion dances on a delicate line. Myself I am against it. For me... But what others decide to do with their bodies is their own decision.

Now about financial responsability. You made a poor financial decision. You did, and no one else. You helped create a living, breathing human being that is dependant on adult care for 18 years. Not a sofa that can be discarded or given away. You can't just shove financial responsability for a human being out on a curb. Which it sounds like you want to do. You want no adult responsability for your actions. So I must ask, how old are you?

Having sex can create a major life changing event. And I bet your last car purchase got more forethought and planning.... Why?

The more I think about it, this all points to someone with some serious immaturity issues. Are you certain she was the crazy one?

reply to post by Helious


This may be how you would LIKE it to be or how you think it should be, but that's not how it IS. It sounds like you may be in denial. The things you said definitely aren't "facts" as you state. Calling people "socialists" isn't going to make any difference. That's not factual either.

Let me ask you this: If a woman gave you AIDS, would she have a choice in what you do about it? Just because you got it from her? NO! That's YOUR body and YOU have exclusive rights over it. The FACT is a woman DOES have exclusive right over her body, no matter the circumstance. Just because you've had your penis in her doesn't mean you have any right to her or her body for gestation purposes.

And IF a child results, now we have a PERSON, who is your responsibility. You took the chance, took a risk and lost.

Originally posted by Helious
If the father has no say weather the child ever lives or dies, if the father has no say in anything, the father can not be liable for anything the mother chooses to do with her body.

You seem to want to appear as an innocent victim in all this. You had no say in anything? Were you forcefully raped? Because unless you were raped, you HAD your say. You chose to engage in sex, knowing that she may get pregnant. You CHOSE to disregard your own responsibility as regards birth control.

YOU GAVE UP YOUR SAY. You gave all the choices to her and now you're complaining about what she did with it.

Birth control is EVERYONE'S responsibility! You shirked your responsibility and don't like paying the price. I SO wish guys would realize that they have a responsibility to prevent pregnancy.

Originally posted by The Sword
First of all: Why did this thread get flagged?

Second of all: Bitter much?

You don't even stick to the title, instead going off on a rant about "manipulative" women.

I'm female and the OP has every right to be bitter and talk about manipulative women, he is RIGHT. I know women like this and it's sad. They think they can keep a guy by doing this crap. It IS manipulation. Should he have worn a condom, maybe but he was in a relationship with someone he trusted to be on the pill and she lied and knew it. That is so wrong.

Men should have a choice as well. Yes it is my body but it took two people to make that child imo they both should have a say.

I agree with you, mblahnikluver. The OP has every right to talk about manipulative women. There are plenty of them out there. Just as many as there are manipulative men, I'm sure. All the more reason for guys to be on their toes and take responsibility for their own birth control.

I would like to hear the practical solution to this issue. Yeahright asks a critical question. What's the answer?

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
Yes it is my body but it took two people to make that child imo they both should have a say.

"...a say". I'm curious as to what that means. There are two people. A decision is going to be made. Who breaks the tie, and how is it broken?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
Yes it is my body but it took two people to make that child imo they both should have a say.

"...a say". I'm curious as to what that means. There are two people. A decision is going to be made. Who breaks the tie, and how is it broken?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

I say that the tie is broken by the person who is most concerned with what happens when the act of "lovemaking" has consequences, and what that might bring. Whether it be it a disease, or a child. You can not hold someone who isn't concerned about a concern that may be your own.

There are many states that will not allow many women to have procedures such as sterilization due to either age or lack of children, but a man can have a vasectomy (if he is really concerned), and there is also procedures such as "Depo" which is a shot that is given every three months, and is birth control, or Norplant which is birth control implanted in the arm, and last years. No pills, No worries. Of course nothing is 100%, but it does cut it down significantly.

You will now be a parent of another, and have better and more concerns then money, and or any possibly manipulations suffered. Many unwanted children can be prevented for just that things mentioned above, a little forethought, and a lot of common sense.

Peace, NRE.

what I would like to see is an honest inquiry into why all these single moms, and the daddy's those children can't manage to find a way to stay together as a family. I am sure that there are many who do have some very good reasons.
But well....
it's funny, two people dug each other enough to move in with each other, produce a baby, and then opps....we just can't get along, time for me to move on.
Like I said, for some, there are are good reason....
but, for others, how many are there where the main problem had it's roots into financial problems. our economy, not to mention gov't policies have put a great deal of stress onto families. with that stress growing daily it seems. the idea that mom should be the main one holding custody of the children and dad paying child support and having visitation rights (which sometimes, after the support is paid, well, there's barely enough left for him to have a one bedroom apartment in the crappiest part of town), well, I think it's time we started rethinking the policies. maybe the children should never have to leave their home, and it's the parents that should be shifting from nice home to crappy apartment instead??? with dad getting more visitation, more responsibility for the children??

but, the op seems to think that he should have the ability to coerce the women into having an abortion and for many women, withdrawing the father's support, would be more than enough coercion, if it wasn't for all those gov't programs, And, more than likely the sames one complaining, probably are the ones screaming to end them!!
so what do they really want???
they want women, being the main ones bearing the responsibility of birth control.....wonder how many of them would accept abstinance as a good method of birth control...
they seem inclined to accuse the women lying about using birth control...where's the faith in one's partner....ya do know sometimes, people use the birth control, and still end up pregnant, right?? are you positively sure she lied??
and well, women being characterized as being nutty is historical!!
and they want a "say" as to what happens to the unborn baby....
you guys do know, if the first thing out of your mouths when you hear about the new joy to come is oh no, it's not mine, or blast it you said your were using the pill, or oh, I'd love to help you our here, but......
well, in most women's eyes, that is kind of your "say" in the decision, right???

no, you cannot have the right to force or coerce any women into having or killing her baby!!!
sorry....
those days are gone!!!

Originally posted by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver
I say that the tie is broken by the person who is most concerned with what happens when the act of "lovemaking" has consequences, and what that might bring. Whether it be it a disease, or a child. You can not hold someone who isn't concerned about a concern that may be your own.

I'm not sure I understand. I'm saying the tie is broken by the one who bears the overwhelming bulk of the burden, and 100% of the risk for the pregnancy.

If that's not what you're saying, how do you determine "who is most concerned"?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

What I mean is the bulk, and burden does eventually fall on the mother, as if the man leaves, and or decides not to pay and help financially, or even not to help raise the child, the child becomes the sole responsibility for the mother involved.

By breaking the tie, which men do have the ability to walk away as the women cannot, at least not for 9 months, then the tie and responsibility is the man's to prevent the pregnancy in the first place. I thought that the most important part of this concept is "prevention" as opposed to making and regretting a mistake that cannot be reversed.

No one wants to discuss the issue, when the lights and clothes are off, but as soon as responsibility comes into play, then both parties have something to discuss. The tie has to be broken by the man, as he is the one who has the least to lose. That is why I posted ways to prevent it in the first place for both parties.

Peace, NRE.

No birth control method is 100% except not having sex. So everytime you have sex you are willingly taking the risk of creating a child. If you aren't ready to father a child than you should take it upon yourself to wear a condom and reduce the risk, trust or no trust...long term relationship or not. Yes women do this intentionally but it is certainly no secret this happens so no man should be considered unaware, and until a man can get pregnant and carry a child then they have no say in what a woman decides to do with her own pregnant body. I also see nothing wrong with child support being based on a percentage, regardless of how much it costs to raise a child, as it is not the childs fault you didn't want it. You had sex, you impregnated a woman, your child should not suffer for that.

Why is pro choice only a woman's decision?

Because giving birth isn't a man's choice.

Your mind has been blown.

Ten years ago, a woman and I planned to get married and have a child. She got pregnant, ran off to another state and when I tracked her down she was living with another man and had aborted the child.

I was devastated, to say the least. To top it off, she said she made a "mistake" and wished she kept the baby and stayed with me.

Of course, I wanted nothing to do with her relationship wise at that point, but I would have gladly taken sole custody of our child and raised it on my own if she had carried it to term.

Although I've dated plenty of women since, I will always be upset that I didn't have a say in my ex terminating her pregnancy. We planned it-it was all we both wanted, and then after she had the abortion, she'd rub salt in the wound by wishing that she had carried it to term.

I think men should have a say in determining whether a child should be aborted. OP, if you don't want more kids, get a vasectomy or wear a condom (your own, not hers) every time you have sex. Make sure you personally dispose of the condom after sex too. Never trust the "It's ok, I'm on birth control" line. I know lots of guys who have fallen for that.

However, once a child is born, its best to let go of the bitterness towards the mother and focus on being a loving and supportive father. If the mother is unstable, try to get sole custody. But no matter what, never bad mouth your child's mother in front of your child.

reply to post by Helious


For starters throw out everything you think you know about the "gender war"(which has been over before it began) and throw out what women, mangina's and white knights say.

Start with this pretense: Some women want to drive(Gynocracy) and some women want to be driven(Matriarchy).

In the beginning due to the sheer struggle of life, women who wanted a gynocracy where SOL. So the Matriarchy expanded with the help of "little men" like Henry Ford aka white knights/slaves of the Matriarchy(Ford was big into the Matriarchy).

In the classical American "Matriarchy"(You really have to research the "Mothers of the Republic" or you have zero credible with modern gender issue's), single men> then single women to be sure. But Mothers> all the above. They view it as their Divine right to have children and lord over their families. The modern equivalent would be Palin's Mama bears or whatever they call themselves.

Make no mistake about it those kind of women aren't any mans friend or ally. They view us as sub-human and only seek to boost our ego for their direct benefit, as in their perfect world we are to be good little wage slaves and defenders of the home.

Well to move along, the 1940's happened. Because of propaganda during wartime and the sheer level of male conscription leading to a true brotherhood among American males, the American Patriarchy truly emerged for less then a decade. Before that time period and after men had to put up with women(remember before the 1920's radical groups like the KKK acted as alimony and child support enforcers) or risk severe consequences.

It was only during the 1950's that men really where Kings of the castle. Unfortunately our greatest attributes where our undoing. The male propensity for gregariousness led directly to the rise of feminism and the current gynocracy. Feminism only out-flanked the old matriarchy because of patronage from the new patriarchy.

In most of American history the patriarchy was nothing more then a lap dog that occasionally freed itself from the leash of the Matriarchy.

Well now that the feminist's got into social power they began to transform our society into a gynocracy. It is where women themselves become viewed as being "divine" because they are women alone(while the matriarchy requires motherhood as the main ingredient of power). In this new paradigm women only truly want consorts, not husbands. Hence the high divorce rate and out of wedlock rates. And in a gynocracy women still view men as "sub-human", same as in the old matriarchy. But the main difference is that in order for the gynocracy to last they need to lower the male ego and destroy any chance of male bonding(hence why fathers get shafted and why male only organizations and schools are all but extinct while female only is the new rage).

Add in the Pathocracy effect and it becomes obvious if your a male in Western Civilization your SOL.

Because you have to break society into three portions. The Political Sphere, Economic Sphere and the Social/Family Sphere. The Matriarchy was content with just the Social/Family Sphere and with a minor presence in the Political Sphere, the Gynocracy wants control over all three Spheres leaving men to become slaves(if we are lucky).

Listen to the way the average woman talks like "since men ruled the last 10k years maybe it is time for women", and other bigoted nonsense that just isn't backed by the facts of reality. If we value our freedoms and our human identity we have no choice but to allow this society to fall and ensure that both the older matriarchy and the newer gynocracy are destroyed by foreign invaders.

Look at how brainwashed "little men" are here, how quickly they become Cain Jr, ready to kill Abel Jr or sell Abel Jr off to slavery to appease the women here who feel they are entitled to another persons labor, like that person is a slave they own rights to.

There is no hope for Justice in Western Civilization so Western Civilization must fall.

You can look further into this, but all you will find is despair. Please I invite everyone to do a rational study of the concept's I bring up, but beware the truth. Because once something is learned it can't be unlearned.

reply to post by ShadesofGrey78


Ultimately men cannot have final say without making women their property.. but (assuming it happened the way you said it did) what that chick did to you was just really low. If she was the type to just change her mind on a whim and take off and abort a planned pregnancy you were both emotionally investing in then it doesn't say much for her overall charactor or the potential of the relationship itself. What kind of mother would she have made? I can understand your loss but the woman doesn't sound like she was very stable anyway.

Originally posted by Kali74
No birth control method is 100% except not having sex. So everytime you have sex you are willingly taking the risk of creating a child. If you aren't ready to father a child than you should take it upon yourself to wear a condom and reduce the risk, trust or no trust...long term relationship or not. Yes women do this intentionally but it is certainly no secret this happens so no man should be considered unaware, and until a man can get pregnant and carry a child then they have no say in what a woman decides to do with her own pregnant body. I also see nothing wrong with child support being based on a percentage, regardless of how much it costs to raise a child, as it is not the childs fault you didn't want it. You had sex, you impregnated a woman, your child should not suffer for that.

Pay close attention to how "the Child" is glorified and shouldn't be made to suffer if women decide to glorify it; also pay attention to how the child only becomes the fathers when women stand to gain from it. Till then the Child is just a clump of flesh or is "hers".

If men were the ones to get pregnant and give birth abortion would be illegal(could you imagine women putting up with the situation of them not having a say in the birth of "their" children? They would be rioting on the streets). If you doubt me look at what happens when grown women rape little boy's, passed out men or those who are paralyzed. The end result is the same.

"Glory be to women who can do no wrong and perpetual enslavement of men to sate the divine woman" seems to be the guiding philosophy of the day.

Which is precisely why our society needs to be allowed to fall, as we lack the will to do it ourselves.

reply to post by korathin


Your posts aren't really on subject at all but seem to focus more on your own hatred of women collectively. Could you tone it down a bit please? Your posts are kind of creepy. Actual women post here and feminists are not all evil and not about enslaving men.

Originally posted by riley
reply to post by korathin

 

Your posts aren't really on subject at all but seem to focus more on your own hatred of women collectively. Could you tone it down a bit please? Your posts are kind of creepy. Actual women post here and feminists are not all evil and not about enslaving men.

edit on 9-5-2011 by riley because: (no reason given)

Women are human beings. Human beings are all of the above(from good to evil). All that matters is how society reacts and how social structures are structured. If a social structure allows for one group to be enslaved by another group then the group that is at risk for slavery must assume they will become a slave.

If the situation was reversed my post would be a reverse, if you find the facts of reality creepy that isn't my problem. If you disagree with me prove me wrong. Till then defame someone Else's character.

This is why there never really was a talk between men and women. Because when ever a man say's something disagreeable about women= misogynist; while if a similar reverse situation happens it is "yes dear, sorry dear".

Anyone who views themselves as should having superior rights because of gender or race is inherently evil. Actually I think I have been harsher towards the "white knights" and "mangina's" as they are brainwashed fools.
Because as I said before women are human beings too. If the situation was reversed it wouldn't surprise me if a large percentage of men abused the system. Because men are human beings too. Personally I think the OP should just save up and sue for custody or atleast aim to get half/joint custody.

But ignoring the arrogance and supremacist attitudes of others is just something I cannot do, something I will not do. So if I am wrong I implore you to prove me wrong.
----------
Actually my first post is on topic, as I am telling the op how things got the way they are and explaining the history of the current social/political and economic structures. The second is more so a sarcastic reply to someone I perceive as being chauvinistic.

Throwing a pity patty and excusing the OP's self loathing will do no good. Nor would demonization or belittlement do any good either. Only an explanation of why things are messed up will enable the OP see a reasonable and rational way forward. I have seen people I associated with vaguely or were friends with driven to suicide or near suicide because they had to pay an excessive amount for the "mothers child", that they where both denied a meaningful role in and prevented them from starting a family the right way.

The way I see it if the custodial parent can't afford to raise the child then they shouldn't have custody. And if the non-custodial parent(or non-custodial parents family) doesn't want to raise the child then and only then should the courts be allowed to garnish the non-custodial parents wages.

Make no mistake I am not endorsing mindless sex nor am I endorsing slavery or peonage. Eventually both parties(both male and female) should have some foresight when engaging in sex. Women shouldn't be sleeping with men that would abandon them or their offspring; and men shouldn't be sleeping with women that would enslave them or deny them a meaningful role in raising their child.

As per the larger social apathy I endorse, why should men be made to fight and defend a society that hates us? Heck if I said abortion should be outlawed, men should get defacto custody+ alimony/child support then everyone here would label me a misogynist in a heart beat. Yet everyone can demand those things of males and it is viewed as "normal" and "good"? That is a pill I can't swallow. + Add in other anti-male discrimination going on in society and it is clear from a uniquely male perspective that this society isn't worth defending.

reply to post by riley


Unfortunately it happened exactly the way I described it-like something out of a Jerry Springer show. I came to the same conclusion you did a long time ago-she would not have been a good mother anyway.

However, that does not lessen the pain of the abortion. I would have been a damn good father. When she expressed her regrets over having the abortion, she admitted she should have let me have sole custody because she knew the child would be better off with me.

As for her stability, she was the type of person that seemingly has their act together on the outside-highly educated, good career, lots of friends, personable, down to earth, etc.

However, she had sociopathic tendencies and was very skilled at hiding it. I found out too late. However, I learned a lot from that relationship (mainly what to avoid) and have moved on.