I can’t, of course, speak for all of us, but all of the feminist-leaning groups I associate with do just that. I think it’s a damned shame there aren’t more birth control options for men.
Anyway, I read not that long ago about something they do in Europe for men. The inject something into one of your tubes and it blocks sperm from getting out pretty effectively for a number of years. At any point, this can be reversed with another shot. I think this is going through trials in the US presently.
There’s simply no comparison between taking a pill that can make you “pretty goddamned ill” and spending a quarter of your life supporting a child you never wanted.
You are factually correct. There aren’t many serial killers out there either, or rapists, or muggers, or fraudsters. That’s irrelevant. What matters is that if someone chooses to kill you they can be chased down by the police, whereas if someone “spermjacks” you, you can be chased down by the police. This is an injustice in need of remedy.
I disagree. You could get yourself pregnant by stealing sperm, by committing rape, and so on. Not likely, but that it is possible is unjust.
As for the other, I also disagree. Choosing to ejaculate inside a vagina is risking causing a pregnancy. A pregnancy is not, legally speaking, a human baby. That can only be created by a woman consciously deciding not to abort.
None of those are foolproof, and the most reliable requires surgery and is unreliable on the matter of being reversible, to be sliced and diced and risk the possibility of having children should you choose to do so, just so you can’t be forced to support someone else’s choice.
I’m not a one-night stand man, but whether you truth your partner isn’t what matters: it’s that you have to. Would you support legalising wife-beating, because women ought to only marry men they trust not to beat them?
She never did so. She said in advance that she wanted him to withdraw, not while the act was in progress. I mean, there is no way to no that a man having sex with you isn’t going to withdraw until he has climaxed without doing so, and then the act is over anyway. Normally. She decided it was rape afterwards, and a judge later agreed, but there was no rape in the sense of her telling him to stop and him continuing anyway.
No, the one thing is conditional consent. I consent to have sex with you if you are Jewish. I was raped because you’re an Arab. I consent to have sex with you because you are my husband. I was raped because you are not my husband. I consent to have sex with you because you will withdraw before climaxing. I was raped because you climaxed inside me. I consent to have sex with you because I don’t want a child and you claim to be on the pill. I was raped because you lied. I consent to have sex because I am wearing a condom to prevent pregnancy. I was raped because you sabotaged it, or stole it’s contents.
It’s rape, people just like to pretend it’s not when a man’s the victim so a woman can take what she want. Don’t get all Todd Akin on me.
Excellent post pravnik, just one nit-pick:
One of the major reasons that the child was returned to the father in the Achane case (after a 22 month legal battle) was because he was married to the mother at the time of conception and birth. Other unwed fathers have not been so lucky.
Vasectomies can grow back. My DH and I found out about that the unpleasant way. Thank Whatever controls the universe for Roe vs. Wade.
It’s the commonplace way for a spermjacker to operate, that is to say. Stealing your sperm from a third party is a rarity. I’ve only heard of one other case in which it happened.
Do you think women are just living the high life off of your child support payments? Of course not, she’s spending money supporting a child she probably never wanted either. Point is, two people made a baby. Two people should raise it.
And what about the men who slip condoms off mid-coitus and ejaculate in their female partner with out her prior consent (quite the opposite, actually)? Actually, I’m willing to wager this scenario happens far more commonly than “spermjacking” since it’s happened to me a few times in my life and I know countless other women who have faced it. So, what of that man? Again, I’m all for equality, so let’s make sure your new law is equally laid out.
Nonsense. This is like when I ask my friends if they are trying for a baby and they say no, but then go on to say that they aren’t NOT trying. Look, the biological default is that semen + egg = baby. So, if you aren’t actively working to make that not happen, you most certainly are trying for a baby. Ejaculating in a vagina is trying for a baby, whether you mean it to be or not.
Yeah, obviously that’s what I’m arguing here. Absolutely.
Sorry, she told him no and he did it anyway. He’s at best a selfish prick and at worst what it seems the legal system has deemed him: a rapist. I can’t believe you could even half heartedly defend him.
Again: you understand that even under perfect usage, birth control fails. Surely you see why it would be at best illogical to try a woman for rape because the efficacy of her oral contraceptive is equivalent to that stated on the package. If a condom breaks, should I be able to go after a man for rape, too? It’s conditional, after all.
Cite? I’d like statistics regarding incidences of “spermjacking.”
I am curious why you would only be BLIND WITH RAGE over the men who may wrap their junk all the time, but still have problems with broken condoms, while not condemning the women who have the ultimate choice in whether or not a baby is produced from a sexual encounter.
That’s rather more than my income for a week, so if your purpose is to show what a pittance it is, you have failed to do so. But the benefit is that she wants to have children. Maybe, as in some of the cases of sperm theft I cited, she wants to have a man’s children, but he’s not interested in her anymore. Maybe she wants children in general, and just takes an opportunity. Maybe she wants to keep a man with her, but fails and opts for extracting money instead. Doesn’t really matter, does it?
Probably because it’s much easier to prevent a pregnancy via condom than it is to go through with the process of terminating a pregnancy via abortion. I mean, you said up thread you had one yourself (I think that’s great you’re willing to talk about it- seriously! More women should), but I can’t imagine that you’d argue it was easier than wearing a condom, right?
I also concede that your situation was a special one, but I’m speaking generally here.
If you’re below the poverty line, your average payment is $125 a month. Again, not even enough to feed a child on, let alone live the high life off of.
Again though: show me some statistics about this supposed “spermjacking” being common place, please. Then we can talk.
Saying you are using a condom when you aren’t is pretty damn despicable and I would fully support trying them for sexual assault.
As long as the same burden of proof was used for “forgetting” to take your birth control pills and not informing your partner.
And the choice to go to work and earn the money to pay child support involves his fucking body, so the situation is more than even. If a woman doesn’t want to end up the sole support of child she should only have a child with a partner that wants to support one.
Biology also gave men the exclusive right to just walk away from pregnancy. But while men have no say over abortion, if a man tries to exercise his biological prerogative, and his legs, the fuzz will come along and throw him in clink. I don’t see feminists trying to do anything about that. Or about any other disadvantage men labour under, for that matter.
I agree and I think it would be helpful to perhaps mention or recognize the lack of adequate BC options for men in a thread about their reproductive issues. (Although, lack of adequate BC options does not negate the responsibility of child support and I wish more men would rant about that, than go on and on about the ‘injustice’ of child support.)
I haven’t been around as long so I may not be as burned out on the MRA crap spouted about on the board, but some of the rhetoric in this thread I find alienating and I consider myself as rabid feminist as they come.
The problem is condoms can break. I have had very few men sexually in my life, but I have sweated out enough broken condoms to know they are not a perfect birth control solution.
I haven’t once argued they are a perfect solution. They are certainly a better solution than going at it bareback and hoping she’s got a Planned Parenthood close by. Again, not that I’m suggesting you did this at all. For serious. I’m talking again back about the general thread.
The point is, wrapping it up with a condom is a whole lot less physiologically and psychologically taxing than getting an abortion. Cheaper, too. Hell, it’s also cheaper than virtually every form of female birth control, all of which also have less than perfect results.
Like you, I’ve definitely sweated a broken condom or two in my life time, but I’ve also had to sweat out a jerk who slipped the condom off intentionally and came inside of me. Do I think that jackass should get a free pass on responsibility? Hell no. Sure, it’s my choice to have the baby and in practice, I’m sure I would opt for abortion myself, but the reality is that he made the choice to ejaculate inside of her, so absolving him of all responsibility is silly. Hell, cross apply that to any form of birth control, actually. It’s my contention that these cases of “spermjacking” are so rare it’s not even worthy of discussion here. So, we’re left with the basic premise again that it takes two people to make a baby, men shouldn’t be able to just walk away from the whole thing because they want to.
I mean, seriously, we have someone in this thread who quite seriously said women get themselves pregnant. Seriously. C’mon.
She chose to have it. Two people make a foetus, one person makes a baby. Unless you want to go pro-life. That would at least be logically consistent. And no-one’s talking about raising a child. Just paying for it.
Fine by me. I’ve never known that to happen, but then I don’t have sex with a lot of men. It’s not quite as serious, as a woman can’t be made into a parent by Mr Condom-Fiddler, as a man can by a woman pretending to be on the pill, but still.
I’m not, I’m clarifying the facts: he was a rapist by the (new) legal definition because he didn’t withdraw, but you were painting a picture of her telling him to stop and him continuing, which is not what happened. He was certainly a cunt, but if she had intentionally deceived him to become pregnant, she would be even worse (as she could actually succeed in cause an unwanted child, which he can’t) but the courts would never in a million years call her a rapist. Equality is what I’m after. Complete equality, not the cherry picking feminists prefer.
If there’s no mens rea, there’s no crime. If there is, there is. If a condom breaks, that’s not the same as if it’s been sabotaged. If pills fail, they fail; if they aren’t taken, that’s deception and therefore rape. It’d be hard to prove, but then rape often is. That’s not a reason to pretend it’s okay.
Because it’s one of the wonderfull rights of living in an free society with our current level of technology. We have the technology through birth control and abortion to make sex relatively risk and repercussion free for the first time in human society and it’s an absolutely marvelous thing not to have to fear for your life to satisfy a basic biological urge. People who want to turn their back on this freedom should be regarded with the same contempt as faith healers or the Flat Earth Society.
Another risk which is the sole responsibility of the penis owner and/or his surgeon. Tied tubes also fail from time to time. Few birth control options beyond menopause are 100% effective 100% of the time.
Acknowledged and addressed. The awesome side effects and benefits which drive the biological imperative are divine, but the act of sex can never stand apart from its primary purpose, and anyone who assumes it exists solely for our recreational pleasure and enjoyment is foolish.
The moment a child enters this world which is a product of your sperm, it ceases to be about you. Child support isn’t a punishment; it serves to protect the child’s rights and needs.
Those of you arguing “it’s not fair that I can’t terminate my parental rights” look pretty foolish to those of us who manage to have sex without creating children we don’t want.
What the hell are you feeding children? You could bury a child in bread for that much.
Feel free to abstain.