• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Male Post-Conception Opt Out

I have stated that "the only reason for abortion should be rape, incest, risk of death or serious malformation", but I have evolved since then. I don't believe that any longer, I believe a woman should have access to a safe legal abortion.

Let me rephrase my question. If a woman chooses to have an abortion the man has no right to question it. So, the woman has the right to choose if she becomes a parent or not. My question is, if the woman decides to have the baby and the man doesn't want it, why can't he choose not to be involved?

Did you evolve on the same day you read about the exciting possibility of walking away from a pregnancy you caused?
 
Deep down, women despise a sucker.

Sad that you believe the respect and courtesy gentlemen show a woman means they are suckers.

We dont think that, it seems it is your own misconception.
 
Sad that you believe the respect and courtesy gentlemen show a woman means they are suckers.

We dont think that, it seems it is your own misconception.

Sorry, that's total bull****. Chivalry is dead and women killed it.

We used to let you live rent free at home with the kids without having to work, as long as you chipped in with the cooking and cleaning - nowadays even suggesting that is a crime.

We used to stick up for you - you accused us of "mansplaining".

We used to hold the door open for you and punched other men who tried to steal you from us - you called it toxic masculinity.

We used to work hard to bring home enough money so we can support you - now it's called the gender pay gap.

We used to give you flattering compliments about your appearance - now it's called "unwanted sexual attention" or "mini-rape".

We used to fight and die in wars so you didn't have to - then you complained that there aren't enough women in the military.

We invented abortion, the pill, tampons, and other essentials to let you live independently - you used it to attack us and force us into paying for child support.

We invented things like due process, the right to a fair trial, and innocence until proven guilty to protect women from injustice and mob rule - you complained that it is "rape culture" to ask women for proof that they were raped.

We came up with the greatest, most fitting, and sexually liberating nickname for your vagina - you bashed the president who dared utter it.

At this stage I don't know what more men could possibly do for you, but I'm sure you'll find a reason to complain about it.
 
Sorry, that's total bull****. Chivalry is dead and women killed it.

We used to let you live rent free at home with the kids without having to work, as long as you chipped in with the cooking and cleaning - nowadays even suggesting that is a crime.

We used to stick up for you - you accused us of "mansplaining".

We used to hold the door open for you and punched other men who tried to steal you from us - you called it toxic masculinity.

We used to work hard to bring home enough money so we can support you - now it's called the gender pay gap.

We used to give you flattering compliments about your appearance - now it's called "unwanted sexual attention" or "mini-rape".

We used to fight and die in wars so you didn't have to - then you complained that there aren't enough women in the military.

We invented abortion, the pill, tampons, and other essentials to let you live independently - you used it to attack us and force us into paying for child support.

We invented things like due process, the right to a fair trial, and innocence until proven guilty to protect women from injustice and mob rule - you complained that it is "rape culture" to ask women for proof that they were raped.

We came up with the greatest, most fitting, and sexually liberating nickname for your vagina - you bashed the president who dared utter it.

At this stage I don't know what more men could possibly do for you, but I'm sure you'll find a reason to complain about it.

There is so much wrong with each and every one of you "points" but I will address the bolded.

Why do you disrespect the work that a stay at home parent does with such ease?
 
Totally antidotal story that i heard last night but relevant to this thread. I met a male freind of mine at the bar for drinks yesterday. He went to a dating agency the day before. They tried to hard sell him into signing up for the service so he got up and left. The saleswoman chased him down at his car. She offered him 1 free date as a trial. Apparently when he went back in to fill out the paperwork she explained that they have more women than men members. Maybe this is a sales trick to make him think he has a good chance of sucess or maybe its because men are not as interested in forming relationships qith women as women are interested in with men.

I dont know where to look but i would like to get some data on who ises dating services

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Did you evolve on the same day you read about the exciting possibility of walking away from a pregnancy you caused?

No, why would you even think that? Sounds like you're very bitter...

I didn't walk away from a pregnancy I caused; my girlfriend aborted my first potential child! Hence the very strong feelings concerning this subject.

So, I'll state my questions again, with more details. Granted this is a hypothetical question, but it could happen.

If a couple agrees to have sex and if a pregnancy happens, she will abort it. When the pregnancy happens, she changes her mind, not uncommon for humans to do.
So, what happens then? Is the agreement null and void, just because the woman changed her mind? Should the man have to pay 18 years of child support for a child they both agreed wouldn't happen?
 
Sorry, that's total bull****. Chivalry is dead and women killed it.

TL:dr

Pretty sure only losers believe that. Women love it...respect given is respect returned.

If you choose to bestow your affections on someone with surface attractiveness or other shallow character attributes and then blame her for sticking with her? That=loser.

THere are good and bad men and women. Plenty of good ones out there. If you only attract or are attracted to the bad kind...it's you, not the gender in general.
 
We used to let you live rent free at home with the kids without having to work, as long as you chipped in with the cooking and cleaning - nowadays even suggesting that is a crime.
.
The male attitude that you did all the work and women contributed nothing to the family is untrue and it's what earned all you 'chivalrous' males the the sobriquet of chauvinist.

We used to work hard to bring home enough money so we can support you - now it's called the gender pay gap.
.
You are right; men did work hard and they did provide for families and women did stay home raise children, support them, make the home a refuge and the family a strong unit. They also made the community a vital entity with hours of volunteer work in churches, granges, schools, charity groups, hospitals etc. But along about 1970 men decided unions were bad, quit, and let wages, pensions, health insurance, etc be set by management. Not surprisingly women had to work in order to maintain the family so they stayed in the middle class. Also not surprising since there were no unions to fight for fairness corporations got away with paying women less than men for the same work.

We used to give you flattering compliments about your appearance - now it's called "unwanted sexual attention" or "mini-rape".
Be honest; "compliments about appearance" is not what women are now bringing forward.

We invented abortion, the pill, tampons, and other essentials to let you live independently - you used it to attack us and force us into paying for child support.
Men did not invent abortion. Women have known which herbs and plants act as abortificient since the dawn of time. The same is true of tampons; women have always known how to make them. Hieroglyphics in pyramids tell of women making tampons out of papyrus. The pill was the idea of Margaret Sanger. The research was was done by Gregory Pincus, an endocrinologist, and but was funded by Katherine McCormick — biologist, women’s rights activist and heiress to the McCormick fortune.


We invented things like due process, the right to a fair trial, and innocence until proven guilty to protect women from injustice and mob rule - you complained that it is "rape culture" to ask women for proof that they were raped.
Pfft Men invented those things for themselves while women were still their chattel. Women had to fight Congress, attitudes, men, and culture in order to get them and damn few men approved of the fight

I don't know what more men could possibly do for you, but I'm sure you'll find a reason to complain about it.
How about treating women as partners instead of acting like they are all cheats, thieves, liars and skanks.
 
Men to should be able to opt out of Child Support if they do not want to be a father (legally). The woman can use her legal Constitutional right to birth control if she does not want to or can not support the child on her own. (Of course there are some exceptions).

This would give men the same rights as women... having a post-conception Opt Out of being a parent and not caring for the child.

She informs him of pregnancy. He makes hos choice. She retains 100% bodily autonomy and then makes her choice to abort or not.

There will be some exceptions obviously...

This argument is about POST CONCEPTION OPTIONS.

AFTER CONCEPTION.

Please don't be one of the many that will show up and say... "golly darnit he had his choice when he came... or... he has no choice"

The woman legally has a choice post-conception.
The man legally has not choice post-conception...

THE LAW forces his monetary contribution on the man for the woman's choice. This is a legal argument, not a biological one. Laws can change.

Without the law he could just walk away. This is about Potentially Changing Child Support Laws to attain EQUAL RIGHTS.

I am pro choice. I have equal care of my kids. This is a hypothetical argument about creating fairness of post conception choices for men.

Yes. Practice safe sex and use birth control...

Thoughts?

So, you don't believe men who conceive a child should have any responsibility of helping to take care of it? Interesting...:roll:
 
So, you don't believe men who conceive a child should have any responsibility of helping to take care of it? Interesting...:roll:

Most of the men buying into the opt-out of support for the child they helped create believe women get abortions only for their selfish convenience and ought to be given the option of an abortion in only about 3% of pregnancies ie rape, incest, risk of death or serious fetal deformity; putting women back into the 19th century when men could divorce or impregnate and simply walk away from any responsibility to support.
 
Why do you disrespect the work that a stay at home parent does with such ease?

Where did I do that?? My wife is a stay-at-home mother and back a few years ago when I was ill, she was the sole income earner while I stayed at home. I have never disrespected the vital role of a stay-home partner. Most households would fall apart without it.

All I'm saying is that women had a good deal throughout history when this was the norm. Most men were loving, faithful, and fair providers who worked all day to make sure there was food on the table. This was before the job market was as legislated and safe as it is today; back in the day jobs were very hard and workers had little to no rights. Men took this on so women didn't have to. In return, women did the housework and looked after the kids. It was a fair deal made out of economic and practical reasons - it had nothing at all to do with sexism or keeping women down, like the feminists today claim.
 
All I'm saying is that women had a good deal throughout history when this was the norm. Most men were loving, faithful, and fair providers who worked all day to make sure there was food on the table. This was before the job market was as legislated and safe as it is today; back in the day jobs were very hard and workers had little to no rights. Men took this on so women didn't have to. In return, women did the housework and looked after the kids. It was a fair deal made out of economic and practical reasons - it had nothing at all to do with sexism or keeping women down, like the feminists today claim.

I asked you once if you would choose to take the same role as women throughout history instead: basically as slaves or chattel, legally forced to have sex with (raped by) your spouse, legally beaten and institutionalized by your spouse, all or most of your property going to her on marriage or remaining with sister or mother, restricted from travelling as one desired, restricted from following chosen career paths, left home to be raped or killed by enemy forces when females went off to war, not allowed to get a higher education, left completely unskilled and unable to support the family when the "wife" ran off with another man, etc etc etc.

So...does that sound like a great, easy lot to you? Would you want that if roles were reversed? Yes or no?
 
Where did I do that?? My wife is a stay-at-home mother and back a few years ago when I was ill, she was the sole income earner while I stayed at home. I have never disrespected the vital role of a stay-home partner. Most households would fall apart without it.

All I'm saying is that women had a good deal throughout history when this was the norm. Most men were loving, faithful, and fair providers who worked all day to make sure there was food on the table. This was before the job market was as legislated and safe as it is today; back in the day jobs were very hard and workers had little to no rights. Men took this on so women didn't have to. In return, women did the housework and looked after the kids. It was a fair deal made out of economic and practical reasons - it had nothing at all to do with sexism or keeping women down, like the feminists today claim.

Good Lord! A good deal?

Exactly when do you think the good old days were?

In my lifetime women could suffer physical abuse and the husband's side would be believed. A women could be abused and not left with resources to leave. Worse yet, if she did find family to take her in, it was more than possible that she would be strongly encouraged to go back "because he was sorry". A woman could be raped by her husband and be told that by definition "that was not possible, you are his wife"

In my lifetime, women could try to go out in the workforce or back to school, but it was made difficult for them. My mom tried to go back to school and needed my father's permission. My mom worked after I turned 7 and still did all of the cooking and cleaning and anything child related. My father told her "you wanted to work, this is what you get"

And yes, you disrespect the person who is caring for the home and the children. It is hard work. No more or less valuable than the person who goes to work outside the home. You indicated this was more of a perk for them.

And men not having affairs? Seriously?

But please...give me some years that you think were the good old days.....
 
.The male attitude that you did all the work and women contributed nothing to the family is untrue and it's what earned all you 'chivalrous' males the the sobriquet of chauvinist.

I never said women contributed nothing. For as long as humans have existed, women have played vital roles in our species. Everyone knows this. Most women knew it too and were happy with it, then feminism came along and told them that every role they play in society is a hoax contrived by the evil man who wants to keep them oppressed. It's total and utter trash.

You are right; men did work hard and they did provide for families and women did stay home raise children, support them, make the home a refuge and the family a strong unit. They also made the community a vital entity with hours of volunteer work in churches, granges, schools, charity groups, hospitals etc. But along about 1970 men decided unions were bad, quit, and let wages, pensions, health insurance, etc be set by management. Not surprisingly women had to work in order to maintain the family so they stayed in the middle class. Also not surprising since there were no unions to fight for fairness corporations got away with paying women less than men for the same work.

I don't know much about workplace and union history but I'll take your word for it. If this is true, it sounds like men made some bad economic mistakes which ultimately hurt both men and women. So this wasn't some intentional strategy to screw women over. You admit yourself that men had their hearts and intentions in the right place. They simply made a wrong technical decision. That doesn't even remotely suggest that men disrespected women or wanted to keep them down.

Corporations paying women less was an economic exploit. It had nothing to do with sexism. Corporations are all about the bottom line and if they can pay someone less money - be it a man or a woman - they will do it.

Be honest; "compliments about appearance" is not what women are now bringing forward.

Bullcrap - how many campaigns are we seeing with women complaining because the strange man on the bus kept looking at them, or made an innocent cat-call. Gillette's famous toxic masculinity campaign basically convinced women that any man who approaches a good-looking woman is being oppressive. It's utter trash. Women have completely demonized the concept of flattery and compliments.

Men did not invent abortion. Women have known which herbs and plants act as abortificient since the dawn of time.

Then go eat some plants next time you need to have an abortion. But the modern-day medical procedure of safely extracting a fetus from a woman's body was largely developed and legalized by men, for the sole purpose of liberating women. You're welcome.

The same is true of tampons; women have always known how to make them. Hieroglyphics in pyramids tell of women making tampons out of papyrus.

Yet I don't see any women doing this today. Instead, they're relying on mass-produced, safe, and comfortable tampons which men played a very large part in developing and commercializing for them. Again - you're welcome.

The pill was the idea of Margaret Sanger.

Not really. Sanger pushed for it but the medical research and testing of oral birth control was done mostly by men, and was underway even before Sanger. Brief research suggests Gregory Pincus and Carl Djerassi are responsible for most of the medical work in making it possible.

Even so, if you want to give all the credit to women, go ahead. The pill is infamous for destroying countless women's bodies and leading to many lawsuits of permanently affected women. It's almost as if women marched to their own detriment by pushing for the pill.
 
Pfft Men invented those things for themselves while women were still their chattel.

Men invented those things because they valued women as their property. They wanted to ensure that there were legal repercussions for anyone who harmed their wives. Yes, women had limited rights. Yes, they were seen as property. Was this an ideal system? No, but it was certainly better than nothing. You can't judge it by modern-day standards. Times were different back then. Work wasn't safe, enjoyable or liberating as it is today - it was closer to slave labour. It was very dangerous, dirty, and demanding. Most women didn't want to work or were physically incapable of doing so. Without men, they would be left on the streets to starve. Men worked hard to provide for their women and deemed it would be illegal for another man to come along and take advantage of them.

As for women fighting men to gain equal rights...another load of trash. According to feminism, men have always been at the helm of our political and economic system (ie, the patriarchy). In a way that's true, but keep in mind that it was the patriarchy that passed laws such as the equal rights act, Roe v Wade, and other legislation designed to help women. Drop the fairy-tale. Men gave you the rights you wanted. The patriarchy could've left you in the Depression era and still deemed you as property under the law but it didn't.
 
Men invented those things because they valued women as their property.

BS. They created them because it would optimize women's performance and efficiency. It further ensured they'd have women less tired and beaten down and less aged (prettier) for better sex. It made for a more pleasant environment *for men* not having to hear and see the struggles of women and deal with complaints.

And also because the sale of those products would make them $$.
 
In my lifetime women could suffer physical abuse and the husband's side would be believed.

And today, a man can be falsely accused of rape and the woman's side will be believed. What's your point?

A women could be abused and not left with resources to leave. Worse yet, if she did find family to take her in, it was more than possible that she would be strongly encouraged to go back "because he was sorry". A woman could be raped by her husband and be told that by definition "that was not possible, you are his wife"

I don't recall any laws which explicitly said men had permission to rape or beat their wives. Did this happen? Sure, but it was rare and still illegal.

My mom tried to go back to school and needed my father's permission. My mom worked after I turned 7 and still did all of the cooking and cleaning and anything child related. My father told her "you wanted to work, this is what you get"

Sounds like your dad was a jerk. How does that prove anything about the patriarchy or that all men are jerks? Bit stereotypical of you to assume that.

And yes, you disrespect the person who is caring for the home and the children.

No I didn't. Most men don't either. Most men encourage women to stay at home.

And men not having affairs? Seriously?

Affairs are not exclusive to men. Women have them too. Always have.
 
An Rx for melancholy

Originally Posted by weaver2
The pill was the idea of Margaret Sanger.

end quote/



Not really. Sanger pushed for it but the medical research and testing of oral birth control was done mostly by men, and was underway even before Sanger. Brief research suggests Gregory Pincus and Carl Djerassi are responsible for most of the medical work in making it possible.

Even so, if you want to give all the credit to women, go ahead. The pill is infamous for destroying countless women's bodies and leading to many lawsuits of permanently affected women. It's almost as if women marched to their own detriment by pushing for the pill.

Sanger had been looking for something simpler than pessaries, timing ovulations, diaphragms, etc. for a long time. Her crucial contribution to the development of the Pill was to help line up financial backing - angels, if you will - for the development & testing, field trials & so on through FDA's acceptance of the drug. & the reason there were hardly any women with the credentials nor the medical/research backgrounds to do the work was that women were not welcomed into the professions, nor in skilled labwork, @ the time. Women are doing better lately, in the last few years, as more & more women are entering college & focusing on medicine & lab work.

In fact, I think women recently now outnumber men (of US citizens) in colleges & universities in the US. Something further to look forward to.
 
Spending money and or/labor then getting absolutely nothing for it is being a sucker. If a man is not a sucker for her, it indicates that he will also be able to competently protect her interests. It makes him a good catch.

Sad that you believe the respect and courtesy gentlemen show a woman means they are suckers.

We dont think that, it seems it is your own misconception.
 
BS. They created them because it would optimize women's performance and efficiency. It further ensured they'd have women less tired and beaten down and less aged (prettier) for better sex. It made for a more pleasant environment *for men* not having to hear and see the struggles of women and deal with complaints.

Wait, you're telling me women got to stay at home, look after their appearance (like they have always loved doing), and then came home to a night of steaming hot, potent sex with their husbands? OMG THE HORROR! Because we all know only men have orgasms...it's like women ever got any enjoyment out of sex, and clearly being forced to stay healthy and fit was a terrible thing to have to go through. I'm sure they would've loved the alternative...go to work with the men in the factory, covered in smoke and sweat all day, and get lung cancer or fall off the roof due to the unsafe conditions. Oh they missed out on so much fun!
 
In my lifetime, women could try to go out in the workforce or back to school, but it was made difficult for them. My mom tried to go back to school and needed my father's permission. My mom worked after I turned 7 and still did all of the cooking and cleaning and anything child related. My father told her "you wanted to work, this is what you get"

If she earned sufficient money, should could have hired those things done. What right did your mother have to attempt to drop those thing in your father's lap? What reasonable person would pressure a degreed professional to do minimum-wage tasks?
 
I asked you once if you would choose to take the same role as women throughout history instead: basically as slaves or chattel, legally forced to have sex with (raped by) your spouse, legally beaten and institutionalized by your spouse, all or most of your property going to her on marriage or remaining with sister or mother, restricted from travelling as one desired, restricted from following chosen career paths, left home to be raped or killed by enemy forces when females went off to war, not allowed to get a higher education, left completely unskilled and unable to support the family when the "wife" ran off with another man, etc etc etc.

So...does that sound like a great, easy lot to you? Would you want that if roles were reversed? Yes or no?

I'm sure it would be just around the same. Men and women have always suffered throughout history. That's how life goes. In some areas, it has always been better to be a man. It other areas, it has always been better to be a woman. Men and women have each had times throughout history where it sucked to be them. Most of this was due to economic, political, biological, and other forces. It had nothing to do with intentional acts of sexism to keep women oppressed.
 
It has for sure been like walking a tight rope having a wife unequipped to earn more than minimum wage and even then only in a city with a large Latino population. However, it has been worth it.

Where did I do that?? My wife is a stay-at-home mother and back a few years ago when I was ill, she was the sole income earner while I stayed at home. I have never disrespected the vital role of a stay-home partner. Most households would fall apart without it.

All I'm saying is that women had a good deal throughout history when this was the norm. Most men were loving, faithful, and fair providers who worked all day to make sure there was food on the table. This was before the job market was as legislated and safe as it is today; back in the day jobs were very hard and workers had little to no rights. Men took this on so women didn't have to. In return, women did the housework and looked after the kids. It was a fair deal made out of economic and practical reasons - it had nothing at all to do with sexism or keeping women down, like the feminists today claim.
 
If she earned sufficient money, should could have hired those things done. What right did your mother have to attempt to drop those thing in your father's lap? What reasonable person would pressure a degreed professional to do minimum-wage tasks?

My mother had a degree in social services and was working in the Department of Social Services. She wanted to get her Masters of Social Work and was required to get her husbands permission. They both brought in money to the household. My father brought in more because he did have an MSW. To sign the papers she needed his approval. He did not need hers for approval for financial issues. My guess is that he feared her bypassing him career wise. My mother was clearly not a "minimum wage worker".

My mother wanted to work because she wanted to help the family. SHe also wanted to excel careerwise so she could support herself and the kids (3) if the marriage dissolved.
 
Then why was your father refusing to do housework a problem if there was sufficient money for hired help? :confused:

My mother had a degree in social services and was working in the Department of Social Services. She wanted to get her Masters of Social Work and was required to get her husbands permission. They both brought in money to the household. My father brought in more because he did have an MSW. To sign the papers she needed his approval. He did not need hers for approval for financial issues. My guess is that he feared her bypassing him career wise. My mother was clearly not a "minimum wage worker".

My mother wanted to work because she wanted to help the family. SHe also wanted to excel careerwise so she could support herself and the kids (3) if the marriage dissolved.
 
Back
Top Bottom