Abortion- but for men.

So the woman has to take the pill the rest of her life? Whilst the male gets to sit back and not shove a rubber tube over his thing, that happens to be disposable.. Pills.. I'm sorry I don't trust them. You never know whats truly in them. I'd trust the rubber tube more then a tiny pill. and have you seen female condoms? Have you tried shoving something the width of a freaking apple up there. I sure as hell wouldn't like to >_> I'm pretty sure its less painful for a male to stick rubber over there prick, then a girl having to stick some weird flat round disc thing up there and then hope it works, and then hoping that a pill works...

Pills.. I'm sorry I don't trust them. You never know whats truly in them. I'd trust the rubber tube more then a tiny pill.

The pill is actually more effective than a condom.

The pill is actually more effective than a condom.

yes the pill is more effective than a condom, if used properly. If you take some antibiotics or forget to take it at the same time everyday, it can fail. In these situations you have 72hrs postcopulation to take plan B. Plan B will prevent a pregnancy but will not eliminate a pregnancy. This is why every, i mean every, woman who is or plans to be sexually active should have a non expired dosage of Plan B in their possetion. Especially seeing as its over the counter, free or nearly free to all women, and carries less health concerns than a condom (latex allergies)...

I agree it takes two to tango, but the woman has pretty much all say or stupidity if she gets pregnant. she has the right to demand a man to wear a condom, has the choice to wear a condom herself, has the right to use other controceptives, has the right to say ooppsie need to take plan b, has the right to an abortion, and has the right to decide what happens to the child post birth. that being said i think guys should have options but i don't think this proposed law is the right option as its been stated, too many loopholes/abuses.

this is not saying a man is not stupid for not wraping up his junk, and following up to make sure that something hes not ready for happens.

TLDR: women hold the power, they should use plan b before it becomes an issue, men don't have options, this shouldn't be their option, wrap your junk/take preventative measures if your not ready!

This would greatly decrease the number of forced (and therefore fragile) marriages due to pregnacies, and encourage more responsible sex habits on the half of women. Approved. Maybe not entirely, both members played an equal part (in most cases) in creating the child, and both should be responsible. Difference is, if the female has an abortion, the male doesn't have to do a thing. If the male opts to abandon responsibility for the child, it simply doubles up responsibility on the female, which is problematic. I don't see a way around this other than child support, and the only way to make it "fair" is to make women pay support money to men when they have an abortion the male does not want to happen.

I think you missed the part where the decision HAD to be made during the window of opportunity for an abortion. The having the baby is still the female's choice.

I know this is like a thread to be taken from the guy's point of view but I just feel the need to mention that a guy does not have to carry the baby, get prenatal care, then go through the rigors of delivering the baby. If they did, then perhaps the issue could be a bit more equal.

There should be something done about the cows who reproduce to trap guys into paying child support. And something done about the manwhores who decide to squirt their juice into chicks without the proper protection and something done about the chicks who let them do so.

Also, I don't trust American Drug Companies, birth control alters the body chemically and there are side effects. I'd rather take the route of not having sex at all and doing BDSM type things (getting completely off topic) instead of recreational sex. Sex isn't that great anyways. I suppose for some it's the best 10 minutes of their lives and for others it's their whole paycheck lol.

All in all....if babies could be put into guys, perhaps the issue would be a bit more even. Not to many guys say they will take the baby after it's born and become a single father. And abortion is just as dangerous. But I do know of cases in which the mother pays child support to the father
.

While I agree with this, I'd like to ask something.

Since it is only an option during the ~3 months that abortion is available... What would happen if the girl just didn't tell the guy till past then?

I would assume, since it was her doing, that the male abortion option would continue to be open.

Since it is only an option during the ~3 months that abortion is available... What would happen if the girl just didn't tell the guy till past then?

Not a biology expert, but how well can you hide pregnancy for 3 months?

I'd say, if the guy wants to stay committed, go ahead. If he doesn't want to help raise a child that was kept from him for a quarter of a year, he should have the option to just leave. Issue would be low long he's allowed to do that.... You'd need a perfect balance of power between the man and the woman at this point to avoid abuses rising.
Too soon and women could use shock tactics. Too long and men could play dumb.

Sorry if digressing, but

THIS

In the (not)rare cases of young boys getting raped, there have been some who ended up being sued and being forced to pay child support. In a case like this, I would definitely support it

""The duty to support one's child is one of the oldest provisions of California Law .... California assigns to both the father and the mother of any child an equal and continuing responsiblity to support their child." (County of Shasta v. Caruthers (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1838, 1849).

In the Nathaniel J. case, supra, 50 Cal.App.4th 842, the appellate court held that a minor was obligated to pay child support for his child, despite the fact that he was "statutorily raped" by a thirty-four year old woman. Renowned family law commentator Stephen Adams analyzes this judicial conclusion in 1997 CFLR 7363: "The only totally innocent party in this whole scenario is the child that was conceived from this union. She is entitled to be supported by both of her parents, no matter what the circumstances of her conception." (Emp. added)." - http://www.surrogacy.com/legals/minors.html

There can be measures put in place to make sure that these laws aren't widely abused, and all those were stated in Eos's post.

Say a high school couple decides that they finally want to do it. They make sure that they're ready to have safe sex, and they do. The week before the two leave for college, the girl gets pregnant. Now the boy doesn't want the kid and to go to college to get a higher education, but the girl decides she'd rather be a mother; she wants to keep it. Well, the boy either has a much harder time in college or has to drop out to pay child support. How is it fair that the girl has the decision whether or not to keep the boy from college and an educated future? He should forfeit a higher education because of that?

There can be measures put in place to make sure that these laws aren't widely abused, and all those were stated in Eos's post.

Maybe it depends on where one lives then. I hear/read more stories about male minors in California who have to pay child suppport after being raped. Link

As for the idea, it really depends on the circumstances.

In the (not)rare cases of young boys getting raped

This is wrong on so many levels...

Abortion doesn't work that way. A man should NOT have the choice to "cut all ties" with the child, not paying child support and such.

A woman that has the child IS stuck with that child. I know two women who are both intelligent, capable and kind people, but deadbeats knocked them up and fled. By the definitions of this thread, they did the "male abortion," because neither of them pays child support or is in the life of the woman or the child. They are out there, fuucking lots and lots of women, while my friends are stuck with their bastard children, and both of these women's lives have been fuucked up by this. One of them got accepted to Northwestern university, (a very good school,) but now she works a lowly job, struggling to make ends meet, while the police can't even locate the deadbeat. The other woman, one of my best friends DID allow the dead beat to get off child support because that revoked his visitation and custody rights, and now she doesn't have to deal with the scumbag. In other words, this male abortion crap IS currently available, but only if the woman chooses it. Your "male abortion" is basically an easy way out for the deadbeat dad, so he doesn't have to pay for what he did. If you were to legalize this bull$hit, you would completely absolve every man from his parental responsibilities. Rick, to be honest, I am kinda surprised to see you advocating such an argument. If a lawmaker proposed what you're sayign in Congress, he would be laughed out of the building, and then laughed out of office by the voters.

If you have sex, you are taking a risk. If a pregnancy occurs, that is a possible outcome of the risk you took for the sexual pleasure with the woman. A lot of men want to have sex without a condom, and I suspect a lot of unwanted pregnancies result that way. If you give the option that the OP proposes, you are 100% allowing the deadbeat to get away with being a deadbeat. You will have tons more scummy men sugar-talking women into having sex, and then walking away from the responsibility it entails.

I'd rather take the route of not having sex at all and doing BDSM type things (getting completely off topic) instead of recreational sex. Sex isn't that great anyways. I suppose for some it's the best 10 minutes of their lives and for others it's their whole paycheck lol.

I can't believe I just read that. Is that for real?

Pardon my rudeness, but that idea caught me off guard.

Abortion doesn't work that way. A man should NOT have the choice to "cut all ties" with the child, not paying child support and such.

A woman that has the child IS stuck with that child. I know two women who are both intelligent, capable and kind people, but deadbeats knocked them up and fled. By the definitions of this thread, they did the "male abortion," because neither of them pays child support or is in the life of the woman or the child. They are out there, fuucking lots and lots of women, while my friends are stuck with their bastard children, and both of these women's lives have been fuucked up by this. One of them got accepted to Northwestern university, (a very good school,) but now she works a lowly job, struggling to make ends meet, while the police can't even locate the deadbeat. The other woman, one of my best friends DID allow the dead beat to get off child support because that revoked his visitation and custody rights, and now she doesn't have to deal with the scumbag. In other words, this male abortion crap IS currently available, but only if the woman chooses it. Your "male abortion" is basically an easy way out for the deadbeat dad, so he doesn't have to pay for what he did. If you were to legalize this bull$hit, you would completely absolve every man from his parental responsibilities. Rick, to be honest, I am kinda surprised to see you advocating such an argument. If a lawmaker proposed what you're sayign in Congress, he would be laughed out of the building, and then laughed out of office by the voters.

If you have sex, you are taking a risk. If a pregnancy occurs, that is a possible outcome of the risk you took for the sexual pleasure with the woman. A lot of men want to have sex without a condom, and I suspect a lot of unwanted pregnancies result that way. If you give the option that the OP proposes, you are 100% allowing the deadbeat to get away with being a deadbeat. You will have tons more scummy men sugar-talking women into having sex, and then walking away from the responsibility it entails.

This has already been discussed. This law would not be so men can knock up and run, it's so the men don't end up in a situation that ruins their lives. An easy way to prevent dead beats from just running off is to determine whether safe sex was used, whether either party lied about it, and if it wasn't safe and/or it was the man's fault then he would have to pay child support.

This has already been discussed. This law would not be so men can knock up and run, it's so the men don't end up in a situation that ruins their lives. An easy way to prevent dead beats from just running off is to determine whether safe sex was used, whether either party lied about it, and if it wasn't safe and/or it was the man's fault then he would have to pay child support.

There is literally no way to prove any of the factors you're discussing. You cannot prove whether the couple was on the pill and/or condom, you cannot prove if anyone lied about any of the factors involved in sex. You can only prove who the father was, through a DNA test. Only in a Dave Chappelle skit does the couple sign a contract before having sex. The vast majority of the time, sex occurs behind closed doors, and a shower and a toilet flush gets rid of all the evidence. Without such proof -- which cannot be provided -- you cannot adjudicate this issue. That is, unless you want to be like Singapore, which I heard reserves the option to insall security cameras in bedrooms so government agents can watch the couple fuuck.

The proof of what I am saying is in AIDS. There are people out there that deliberately and knowingly transmit AIDS to other people. Legally and morally, the action of deliberately transmitting AIDS is similar to the action of committing murder. You are depriving the person of their reproductive rights, and cutting in half (or more) their lifespan. Yet, it is almost impossible to legally punish someone for transmitting AIDS to one or one hundred people because there is no conclusive way to prove that the AIDS was transmitted by that particular carrier, or another AIDS carrier that the infected person had sex with. To a lesser extent, but still relevant, is the matter of whether the AIDS carrier knew he was carrying AIDS -- kinda like a woman might screw up her pill schedule and get pregnant as a result of that.

I can't believe I just read that. Is that for real?

Pardon my rudeness, but that idea caught me off guard.

hmm, you're not being rude.
I was being slightly sarcastic but I do think that a bit of naughty play is slightly more enjoyable than the act of sex itself especially considering most guys have little stamina and little understand of the female body.
Sorry for being off topic lol.

A woman that has the child IS stuck with that child. I know two women who are both intelligent, capable and kind people, but deadbeats knocked them up and fled. By the definitions of this thread, they did the "male abortion," because neither of them pays child support or is in the life of the woman or the child. They are out there, fuucking lots and lots of women, while my friends are stuck with their bastard children, and both of these women's lives have been fuucked up by this. One of them got accepted to Northwestern university, (a very good school,) but now she works a lowly job, struggling to make ends meet, while the police can't even locate the deadbeat. The other woman, one of my best friends DID allow the dead beat to get off child support because that revoked his visitation and custody rights, and now she doesn't have to deal with the scumbag. In other words, this male abortion crap IS currently available, but only if the woman chooses it. Your "male abortion" is basically an easy way out for the deadbeat dad, so he doesn't have to pay for what he did. If you were to legalize this bull$hit, you would completely absolve every man from his parental responsibilities. Rick, to be honest, I am kinda surprised to see you advocating such an argument. If a lawmaker proposed what you're sayign in Congress, he would be laughed out of the building, and then laughed out of office by the voters.

If you have sex, you are taking a risk. If a pregnancy occurs, that is a possible outcome of the risk you took for the sexual pleasure with the woman. A lot of men want to have sex without a condom, and I suspect a lot of unwanted pregnancies result that way. If you give the option that the OP proposes, you are 100% allowing the deadbeat to get away with being a deadbeat. You will have tons more scummy men sugar-talking women into having sex, and then walking away from the responsibility it entails.

Well there are two things to say.
1) Did the men abandon them well in to pregnancy (well past the point of an abortion). If yes, then no, this does not fit the male abortion. Acting within that time frame is a requirement.
2) If they did abandon them during that time frame, the women still chose to keep the baby.

As for the having sex being a risk part, yes it is. But it is not fair to say "if you are a woman, you're allowed a back door. If you're a man, hope like hell the woman listens to you". And as for men wanting to have sex without a condom, you are assuming that pregnancy is therefore the man's fault, whereas women also have contraception open to them.

Well there are two things to say.
1) Did the men abandon them well in to pregnancy (well past the point of an abortion). If yes, then no, this does not fit the male abortion. Acting within that time frame is a requirement.
2) If they did abandon them during that time frame, the women still chose to keep the baby.

As for the having sex being a risk part, yes it is. But it is not fair to say "if you are a woman, you're allowed a back door. If you're a man, hope like hell the woman listens to you". And as for men wanting to have sex without a condom, you are assuming that pregnancy is therefore the man's fault, whereas women also have contraception open to them.

It doesn't matter whther they abandoned them or not. If they stay with the woman, they are providing for the child. If they don't stay with the woman they also must provide for the child. Why the fuuck should the woman bear the sole responsibility of raising the kid, while working, while the guy who knocked her up gets to not pay anything and be with different women? Of course the man will want this male abortion crap. It'll save him a fortune over the next 18 years. He can also go be with a woman he finds more desirable, all the while this woman is stuck with his kid.

Contraceptives are something both parties are responsible for. The woman typically must take the pill properly, and the man needs to carry condoms. If you're a guy and you have sex without a condom, that's really dumb.