I don’t. With respect, I think you misunderstood my post.
ETA, to clarify:
[QUOTE=Roland Orzabal]
And finally, as a topically relevant example, if a woman is pregnant and does not elect to undergo abortion, the moral ramifications* are the same as if the option had never existed in the first place.
If conception required an action on the woman’s part separate from the sex act itself, then the “it’s her choice” argument would hold. But the bottom line in my view is that women, like anyone else, aren’t responsible for the choices they don’t make — only the ones they do.
[/QUOTE]
I wasn’t talking about the the choice to have sex, or any choices prior; only about the argument that the existence of abortion constitutes a choice on the woman’s part to have a baby after conception.
There’s been a lot of focus on the actions of women in this thread. The guys who don’t want children now, can you state what steps you are taking to prevent pregnancy (condoms, vasectomy etc)?
Well, obviously. Only women can get pregnant, and abortions would be quite redundant on men, wouldn’t they? But if men could also become pregnant, would that in any way change whether or not the reluctant party could shirk responsibility or force a medical procedure on the body of another?
In fairness, the focus on the actions of women is due to the fact that women have actions available to them that can absolve them of certain consequences for their prior choice, whereas men don’t. The steps men take to prevent pregnancy are relevant only insofar as they do or don’t accomplish that. Do you believe that there are any preventive action(s) men might take that should relieve them of legal responsibility for an unplanned pregnancy? (Not saying that I do, just pointing out that the question isn’t really relevant unless you do.)
Of course not. What did I post that made you think I believe otherwise?
No, I’m thinking that’s enough personal questions for now.
See how he gave up any chance of ever becoming a parent for you? See how you weren’t ever requested to do the same thing?
I’m happy for you that you’re happy for your former lover that he’s living in a child-free relationship. Although that seems like it was always kind of inevitable after you’d encouraged him to have a vasectomy…
I’m also happy for you that you “remained fertile” and went on to have a child with a later partner. You go, girl!
He’s a lurker here, and I hope he’ll post. I did not encourage him to have that procedure, as I wanted children and would like to have raised a child with him. He was very clear about remaining childfree for the rest of his life. See how that works? He made a decision to seek permanent sterilization that made me sad, but his body, his choice.
Roland, people are accountable for acts or ommissions. Make no change is absolutely a choice.
Troppus, one can hardly be said to have chosen to put semen into someone if contraception fails.
I notice that pro choicers are careful to avoid stating the real issue, which I believe to be reproductive self determination (when we test pregnant women for drugs or HIV no one complains about their privacy)
A woman with an unplanned pregnancy has options, a man is shit out of luck, there may not be a truly equitable solution, certainly it won’t be identical, but it’s silly to claim the problem doesn’t exist
“Choice” by the dictionary definition and “accountable” by the social one, yes. Morally speaking, no. If you’re morally culpable for everything you could do but don’t, you’ve got a lot of blood on your hands, literally and figuratively.
I’m not getting the same reading from the thread. I’d think that both partners, if they wanted to avoid pregnancy, would take responsibility for birth control. I see women saying that they take birth control but the men have been oddly silent. I’m getting the impression that some of the guys are saying that male birth control options are limited (which they are but they are for women as well) and then arguing that it’s not their problem. I’m not seeing a lot of men in this thread state that they always use condoms or have had that talk with their partner. IOW, several of the guys don’t seem focused on the preventative measures that they could take but on post-conception methods that they want women to take. I’m not sure if that reading is correct or not so I’m asking the question.
Of course he has. He has the right to sue the maker or user of said contraception, but as most failures can be attributed to user error he’d be laughed right out of court. Sex with a fertile partner is an assumed risk. Every. Single. Time.
It isn’t a problem with analogus legal rights and responsibilities.
You plow into a crowd after purchasing a car with bad breaks, you are held responsible for the damage. Your loaded, unsecured gun causes harm, you are held responsible. Attractive nuisance in your hard causes harm: you are responsible. Victims of those accidents are free to sue, to allow the legal system to exact punishment, or may forgive and seek no reparations whatsover. No negligent driver, gun owner, or home owner expresses surprise if they are sued for damages they are responsible for.
Likewise, there is no question that we are legally, morally, and ethically responsible for children we willingly or accidently create, and that responsibility begins with sex. Except in cases of rape, we cannot claim ignorance. We can take someone’s word that they are sterile or using protection, but that would be foolish, wouldn’t it? We take more care to inspect a used car before we purchase. What is it specifically about sex that is causing some men to cry foul when each admits to being fully responsible for negligence in all other cases of personal responsibility?
The reason it’s such a big issue for men is that there are very limited protections for us in the law.
If I willingly have unprotected sex with my SO, have sex using my own protection and it fails, she knowingly and purposefully sabotages my protection (or lies about her own), a woman rapes me, or even in some states if my SO has unprotected sex with another man and gets pregnant; I am completely at the mercy of her choice with the force of the state to back it up.
There is no option short of complete sterilization that will protect me and I shouldn’t have to forever destroy my ability to procreate in order to have some sort of protection.
I am not willing to go all Der Trihs and treat all women like they are untrustworthy to the point where I videotape everything, keep my own protection under lock and key, and immediately dispose of it afterwards in a secure area in order to provide myself some measure of safety in consensual sexual encounters. Even if I did, that still wouldn’t protect me from rape with a side of institutional injustice, or in case of being married, from being legally on the hook for any children born during the marriage (only applicable in some states).
It’s crazy to me that other people don’t approach sex this way. I always figure I am actively working against my biology, where the default is MAKE BABY.
Well, that’s a problem that we share. Women must also choose sterilization for a foolproof birth control method. It sounds like your complaint is about the lack of birth control options for men, because you seem aware that once an unplanned pregnancy has occurred, it is too late to demand action that favors your wants and needs over that of the potential child and mother.
With regards to typical, non-coerced sex, the problem is that some of you want to secure a legally binding hold harmless clause. You can certainly try it, not sure how many willing partners you’ll get or how it will stand in a court of law, but the fact remains that sex is an assumed risk and you know this going in. And some of you continue to derail what could be a productive discussion by offering up rare occurences of rape or sabotage, each of which can and will be addressed in a court of law. Any person can sue another for fraud, negligence, or rape. You can practice recreational outrage all you like over stolen sperm and hijacked condoms, but until or unless you are in a position to write law, it’s just bluster and a distraction from typical custody/child support scenarios.
That was my earlier point exactly. It makes no difference that some of us older, educated, cautious and sophistocated adults pursue sex for all its terrific benefits sans pregnancy, but the same cannot be said for teenagers, the willfully or woefully ignorant, couples under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol… the fact is that the urge to rub heated up genitals together is there in order to facilitate fertilization. We know what sex is *for *before we are old enough to seek it out, and with the exception of rape, there isn’t a single excuse that absolves either willing party of responsibility if (gasp) pregnancy occurs because sperm and egg were introduced.
The same birth control options, yes. But I have to say, I wouldn’t trust another person to take oral contraceptives properly and I’d take measures to protect myself even if my male partner swore he took the pill as directed.
But abortion isn’t birth control. It’s often a painful, unpleasant, expensive surgical end to an unwanted pregnancy that can come with complications and many, many people who get a kick out of sex still have heavy moral and religious objections to abortion. That’s no secret. It’s not a quick fix, and you are doing a disservice to this discussion by implying that abortion is equal to birth control options.
I don’t think anyone is disputing the biology behind the formation of zygotes, but I suggest you examine your own understanding of biology before you condescend to other people about theirs. I’d rather not use the ‘biological imperative’ as the foundation of social policy (which is really what child support is - social policy), unless you are advocating rolling back society thousands of years or want to live in a culture akin to the tribal societies of Sub-Saharan Africa. I’m glad I don’t live in a society where my survival depends on securing a man to protect me from being raped by other men, who are just seeking to fulfill their biological imperative, after all :rolleyes:
Um yeah, I don’t think you are qualified to be providing any biology lessons.
This type of rhetoric is just as off-putting and alienating as when it comes from the anti-choice crowd. It’s pretty much the misandrist version of ‘just keep your legs closed!’ You can frame the argument for child support without going there.
And here we go again, please speak for yourself. You are not qualified to speak for the ‘we’ and what other’s ‘know what sex is for’. No one is disputing where babies come from, so yammering on like a fundy about how ‘sex can’t be separated from procreation’ is not very compelling. In case you haven’t been paying attention lately, the ‘primary procreative purpose of sex’ nonsense you insistently keep touting has been behind the numerous legislative attempts seeking to exclude contraceptives from health insurance coverage, because health insurance shouldn’t cover recreational sex or sex without intending to procreate is somehow immoral. It’s a bad argument, stop it. Or are the rad-fems really partnering with social conservatives now?
Troppus, your rad-fem rhetoric is just as damaging to gender equity as the rhetoric spewed by the MRAs. I consider myself a (sex-positive) feminist because I advocate for gender equity in society, not because I want to denigrate and blame men for issues caused by a patriarchal society that harms both men and women.
Men and women’s reproductive capabilities are different and this can be unfair, acknowledging that doesn’t mean 100% absolving men of child support obligations.
Seriously, I think women having to undergo pregnancy and childbirth is unfair even for intended/wanted children.
This is pretty much my take. I wish there were more options, but child support is the imperfect solution and lesser evil of what is available.
Also, if you care to read the full piece on feministe that I quoted above (and the excellent commentary, IMO), at the very bottom of the article there’s a link to On Baby Emma (excellent commentary following, as well), which discusses the horrible state of the adoption system in Utah.
I find it ironic (and depressing, quite frankly) that the discussion and commentary about child support and fathers’ rights is more open and honest on feministe than it is here on the SDMB.
Well, I’ve certainly been around long enough to remember when women started clammoring for reproductive self determination and were told ‘you already have it, keep your knees together.’
BTW, a quick scan of the covers of the magazines in the women’s interest section at Barnes and Noble will certainly give the impression that good sex *is *something you’re entitled to.
