Abortion- but for men.

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.

But the woman, if left by the man, can still choose not to have it. They don't HAVE to bear the sole responsibility, it's a choice.

That's still not fair to the woman when it's a choice made by both people. By taking this path you're leaving the woman to either have to kill or suffer with the consequences of a mutual decision for the rest of her life. If a man doesn't want to be a father and be a part of a child's life, that's his decision, but he should be equally responsible for all financial "losses" if the woman decides to keep it. A man who decides to leave suffers virtually no consequences through this idea when no matter what a woman suffers for the rest of her life. Whether it's an accident or not, that's not fair.

It's unfortunate that you feel like men lose all control when they become parents but that's entirely a decision on their part. There are plenty of happy fathers in the world and being walked on by a woman isn't an obligation, since you can leave and get joint custody or, if you're better off, sole custody if you love your child. My father raised me and my siblings alone, so it's not unheard of impossible for a father to take that path.

So what if the guy doesn't want it. The girl decides to go with it anyways, but after giving birth she decides she doesn't want the baby anymore. Does she just pass it off to the father? And if she does, she wouldn't have to pay as much child support as the father would have had to in a normal situation.

My friend had a situation like this recently, he has been with his gf for about 2 years I think. His opinion meant nothing to her. I think it is fair to say that in the end it IS up to the woman and it really is their choice, some just don't realize how hard it is to actually take care of a child.

That's still not fair to the woman when it's a choice made by both people. By taking this path you're leaving the woman to either have to kill or suffer with the consequences of a mutual decision for the rest of her life. If a man doesn't want to be a father and be a part of a child's life, that's his decision, but he should be equally responsible for all financial "losses" if the woman decides to keep it. A man who decides to leave suffers virtually no consequences through this idea when no matter what a woman suffers for the rest of her life. Whether it's an accident or not, that's not fair.

Well that's the main problem, the decision to keep or abort a child is NOT one made by both people. Each person can have an input, yes, but when it comes down to it the decision legally lies with the woman. And abortion / 'killing' isn't the ONLY other option, there is also adoption. As for a man not wanting to be a part of his child's life, in some scenarios that is not the case. Some women leave the man, gain custody because the courts heavily favour women, and then they deny visitation rights while sucking up the child support. Don't deny it, it happens more than it should. And it shouldn't happen.

It's unfortunate that you feel like men lose all control when they become parents but that's entirely a decision on their part. There are plenty of happy fathers in the world and being walked on by a woman isn't an obligation, since you can leave and get joint custody or, if you're better off, sole custody if you love your child. My father raised me and my siblings alone, so it's not unheard of impossible for a father to take that path.

I MUST have misunderstood you, but it sounds like you are saying men ASK to have no legal rights. As for fathers raising children alone, it does happen but not often, because again, courts are heavily in favour of women. I know when my parents split, my mother got myself and both my brothers (not that I am complaining, she is an awesome woman, but my father was an awesome man).

Well that's the main problem, the decision to keep or abort a child is NOT one made by both people. Each person can have an input, yes, but when it comes down to it the decision legally lies with the woman. And abortion / 'killing' isn't the ONLY other option, there is also adoption.

That's what I meant by suffer for the rest of their lives. It's not easy to give up a child after giving birth to it and many women spend the rest of their lives thinking about that child because it was a part of them. That's scarring. Every possible option for a woman is difficult without the support of someone else. I'm not saying it's not difficult for men, because I'm sure even cowards feel bad for a while but there's no physical toll and judging by experience (deadbeat family members) very little remorse after a while. I feel for men not getting a choice, and honestly I think if I were in that position and didn't want a child and the father did, I would go through with it because any other option is probably worse mentally. But, as has been said many times, regardless of which decision is made, the choice will take a toll on a woman and that's why they get that power.

As for a man not wanting to be a part of his child's life, in some scenarios that is not the case. Some women leave the man, gain custody because the courts heavily favour women, and then they deny visitation rights while sucking up the child support. Don't deny it, it happens more than it should. And it shouldn't happen.

Of course it shouldn't but that's not the fault of women as a whole and shouldn't be cause for consideration of a "get-out-of-jail-free card." That's a legal issue. But even then, the men who really want to be a part of that child's life will fight it with every ounce of their strength. It happens, but not as often as it should.

Just recently there was a case about a young boy who's mother took him to australia or new zealand and then died and the boy went into custody of his step father when his real dad should've had custody and wanted custody. His mother didn't want him to have custody when she died. But that father spent five years fighting and on December 24th got his son back. If more men were as passionate as that man then I think there would be more consideration for them in the courts, but as it stands there's an overwhelming number of deadbeats and that is why such judgments are made. It's not fair but there are ways to fight it.

I MUST have misunderstood you, but it sounds like you are saying men ASK to have no legal rights. As for fathers raising children alone, it does happen but not often, because again, courts are heavily in favour of women. I know when my parents split, my mother got myself and both my brothers (not that I am complaining, she is an awesome woman, but my father was an awesome man).

Refer to above comments. Both of my parents were equally capable of caring for us as children but my dad wanted us more. If more men were like that then court judgments would be much different (since rulings are generally based on precedent in the end. If most dads are deadbeats then it follows that the woman should typically get the child.)

That's what I meant by suffer for the rest of their lives. It's not easy to give up a child after giving birth to it and many women spend the rest of their lives thinking about that child because it was a part of them. That's scarring. Every possible option for a woman is difficult without the support of someone else. I'm not saying it's not difficult for men, because I'm sure even cowards feel bad for a while but there's no physical toll and judging by experience (deadbeat family members) very little remorse after a while. I feel for men not getting a choice, and honestly I think if I were in that position and didn't want a child and the father did, I would go through with it because any other option is probably worse mentally. But, as has been said many times, regardless of which decision is made, the choice will take a toll on a woman and that's why they get that power.

That's not fair, calling everyone who would use the male abortion a coward. They have their careers, futures and finances to think about. It's not a simple "ew a baby". It's them saying they are not ready for this. I'm also glad that you would go through with the baby had you been a situation like that, but you are just one woman. As for taking a toll on the woman, I think you are still downplaying the effect it would have on a man. If your girlfriend is pregnant, and she terminates against your will, you're going to spend the rest of your life lamenting about it. Thinking about what could have been, the family you could have spent your life with.

Of course it shouldn't but that's not the fault of women as a whole and shouldn't be cause for consideration of a "get-out-of-jail-free card." That's a legal issue. But even then, the men who really want to be a part of that child's life will fight it with every ounce of their strength. It happens, but not as often as it should.

I'm sorry, but you can't use this argument unless you are going to accept the argument "some men abusing it is not the fault of men as a whole, and shouldn't be cause for not allowing the male abortion".

Just recently there was a case about a young boy who's mother took him to australia or new zealand and then died and the boy went into custody of his step father when his real dad should've had custody and wanted custody. His mother didn't want him to have custody when she died. But that father spent five years fighting and on December 24th got his son back. If more men were as passionate as that man then I think there would be more consideration for them in the courts, but as it stands there's an overwhelming number of deadbeats and that is why such judgments are made. It's not fair but there are ways to fight it.

The sheer fact he had to fight is an indication of how screwed over fathers are.

Off-topic: I'm quite enjoying this thread. It has been too long since I last had a good debate.

That's not fair, calling everyone who would use the male abortion a coward. They have their careers, futures and finances to think about. It's not a simple "ew a baby". It's them saying they are not ready for this. I'm also glad that you would go through with the baby had you been a situation like that, but you are just one woman. As for taking a toll on the woman, I think you are still downplaying the effect it would have on a man. If your girlfriend is pregnant, and she terminates against your will, you're going to spend the rest of your life lamenting about it. Thinking about what could have been, the family you could have spent your life with.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to male abortionists when I used the term coward. I meant the guys who just take off without saying anything. If you can't handle it there are still more tactful ways to deal with it then running away like so many men do.

And no, I understand that some men would definitely be hurt by it and it would stick with them for a long time, and that's why I said what I said. But it's the woman's body and carrying children is actually risky for some women. As selfish as it is for a woman to remove something you want, it's just as selfish to ask her to carry something she doesn't want for nine months. Requesting support for a child you both had a hand in creating, however, is not selfish. Well... some women are gross about it and expect men to carry them completely but the logic behind child support is not flawed.

The bright side of this is that if a man is able to get a woman pregnant and due to her decision ends up losing it, at least he can be sure he's fertile and could start a family with a woman who wants to carry a baby if that's truly what he desires. Hopefully those men would be able to get past the bitterness of the experience to get to that point.

I'm sorry, but you can't use this argument unless you are going to accept the argument "some men abusing it is not the fault of men as a whole, and shouldn't be cause for not allowing the male abortion".

Except that there's a huge precedent of men already abusing it. It's not the fault of men as a whole but it's the fault of the majority of jerkbags that stuff sucks for nice guys.

The sheer fact he had to fight is an indication of how screwed over fathers are.

Actually a lot of it was international court issues. The supreme court in whichever country actually supported the birth father but the step-family kept appealing and they had to go through a bunch of bullshit formalities. So the mother's wishes were disregarded because the father both was blood and actually wanted his son.

Rick, you seem to not understand that for a female to get an abortion isn't just "whatever". Many people are against the idea for religious reasons or personal beliefs.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to male abortionists when I used the term coward. I meant the guys who just take off without saying anything. If you can't handle it there are still more tactful ways to deal with it then running away like so many men do.

And no, I understand that some men would definitely be hurt by it and it would stick with them for a long time, and that's why I said what I said. But it's the woman's body and carrying children is actually risky for some women. As selfish as it is for a woman to remove something you want, it's just as selfish to ask her to carry something she doesn't want for nine months. Requesting support for a child you both had a hand in creating, however, is not selfish. Well... some women are gross about it and expect men to carry them completely but the logic behind child support is not flawed.

Well, yes, they ARE cowards.

Requesting help for a child you both had a hand in creating is not selfish, but with all the things that go around it, it IS selfish. A woman has the legal right to demand help from a man who gets absolutely no say in the outcome, and even has the abilities to deny the man part in what he is supporting. Equal part in creation, but not equal rights. It's not fair. The fact that it's risky for some women to carry children really doesn't have a place in the male abortion argument. You're saying that to ask a woman to carry something she doesn't want for 9 months isn't right, but that has no relevance to this argument. The male abortion is about the man not wanting the child, so what reason would the woman have to keep it for if neither wanted it anyway? If you're going to say it is because I said "the woman can even terminate against the man's wishes" that is not saying she shouldn't be able to, it is just an illustration of how men have no rights.

The bright side of this is that if a man is able to get a woman pregnant and due to her decision ends up losing it, at least he can be sure he's fertile and could start a family with a woman who wants to carry a baby if that's truly what he desires. Hopefully those men would be able to get past the bitterness of the experience to get to that point.

Oh Sarah, you can do better than this XD

Except that there's a huge precedent of men already abusing it. It's not the fault of men as a whole but it's the fault of the majority of jerkbags that stuff sucks for nice guys.

This door swings both ways. There was a study done on separated parents where the mother had custody, and roughly three quarters of fathers were unhappy with their visitation and even felt as if they were being kept from their child.

Rick, you seem to not understand that for a female to get an abortion isn't just "whatever". Many people are against the idea for religious reasons or personal beliefs.

That is, again, ultimately her decision. And then there is adoption.

I got off topic there so I'm not going to further that but will say this in response to your "men have no rights" comment and it's not wrong but the basis for that argument is that both people should have equal rights but in order to have equal rights they'd both have to be in the same position. Primarily they are, but beyond "oh pomegranate, we're pregnant!" the woman has so much more invested than the man. Your equal rights involve signing a piece of paper saying "nope, I don't want to be a father" where ours involve a medical procedure, intense scrutiny from the general public, and possible feelings of guilt or in some cases even PTSD from the thought of having killed a living being. The situations are far too different to even be comparable and that is why men shouldn't get off so easy just because they don't want to "ruin their lives." Perhaps if your suggestion included a vasectomy upon signing that you didn't wish to have the children it would be a fair solution.

I got off topic there so I'm not going to further that but will say this in response to your "men have no rights" comment and it's not wrong but the basis for that argument is that both people should have equal rights but in order to have equal rights they'd both have to be in the same position. Primarily they are, but beyond "oh pomegranate, we're pregnant!" the woman has so much more invested than the man. Your equal rights involve signing a piece of paper saying "nope, I don't want to be a father" where ours involve a medical procedure, intense scrutiny from the general public, and possible feelings of guilt or in some cases even PTSD from the thought of having killed a living being. The situations are far too different to even be comparable and that is why men shouldn't get off so easy just because they don't want to "ruin their lives." Perhaps if your suggestion included a vasectomy upon signing that you didn't wish to have the children it would be a fair solution.

Sorry, but what about adoption or Safe Havens? Those require about as much "signing a paper" as this option (ignoring going through the whole pregnancy thing which I'll admit is kind of a big deal)

But the woman, if left by the man, can still choose not to have it. They don't HAVE to bear the sole responsibility, it's a choice.

Which is all completely irrelevant to the nature of custody and child support. Custody and child support apply to a child that IS born, not one that was aborted. For a man to claim "male abortion" as you suggest does not make the child unborn in any way, it simply absolves him of responsibility for that child. As Heidi said, there are many women that are either morally or ideologically opposed to abortion, you can't just say that's bull$hit because you don't believe in it. They're having the kid, not you.

Sorry, but what about adoption or Safe Havens? Those require about as much "signing a paper" as this option (ignoring going through the whole pregnancy thing which I'll admit is kind of a big deal)

Pregnancy (which has tons of bullet-points itself), labour, the permanent effects of labour, separation anxiety, feelings of guilt and abandonment. That's hardly just "signing a paper." For most women none of these choices are easy (abortion or surrendering the child) and often come with long term effects. Assuming the father were a part of the relationship up to the time of surrender - for a typical male - the most he would feel would be some guilt and sadness. It just doesn't seem comparable. (Also keep in mind that the male in this scenario wouldn't want parental rights since they're giving up the child)

But rick wanted us to stay on abortions so again I'm diverting from the tracks.

If I responded to everything people said, I would again be repeating myself. You guys have to admit that a lot of these arguments for and against are just recycled. Unless someone brings something new, let's just save both of us the effort. Unless you DON'T think it's recycled, in which I'll respond to points of your choosing.

Perhaps if your suggestion included a vasectomy upon signing that you didn't wish to have the children it would be a fair solution.

Except I'm just gonna respond to Sarah's thing, because it hadn't been mentioned. The male abortion is primarily targeted at guys who are not ready for children, not guys who flat out don't want children.

I don't think it's recycled because all of the points FOR this are unacceptably selfish. Getting pregnant unexpectedly is one of the hardest things a woman has to go through and giving men the right to take off just because they had other plans in life is ridiculous.

Yet a woman has the options open to her if SHE has other plans in life, and has the power to completely change a man's future while she holds control on her own. The selfish thing to do is keep (notice I didn't say HAVE) a child when the father feels so strongly against it that he even has to think about this option. You're also downplaying the effects this has on the man, again. And now we're back to this argument.

This seems relevant. Pardon typos, direct copypasta:

Judith I do feel, Reg, that any anti-imperialist group like ours must
reflect such a divergence of interests within its power base.
Reg Agreed. Francis?
Francis Yeah. I think Judith's point of view is very valid, Reg, provided the
movement never forgets that it is the inaliable right of every man...
Stan Or woman.
Francis ...or woman. To rid himself...
Stan Or herself.
Francis ...or herself.
Reg Agreed.
Francis Thank you brother.
Stan Or sister.
Francis ...or sister. Where was I?
Reg I think you'd finished.
Francis Oh, right.
Reg Furthermore, it is the birthright of every man...
Stan Or woman.
Reg Why don't you shut up about women, Stan. You're putting us off.
Stan Women have a perfect right to play a part in our movement, Reg.
Francis Why are you always on about women, Stan?
Stan I want to be one.
Reg What?
Stan I want to be a woman... from now on I want you all to call me
Loretta.
Reg What???
Loretta It's my right as a man.
Judith Well why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?
Loretta I want to have babies.
Reg You want to have babies?
Loretta It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them.
Reg But you can't have babies.
Loretta Don't you oppress me.
Reg I'm not oppressing you, Stan. You haven't got a womb. Where's the
fetus going to gestate? You going to keep it in a box?
--------[Loretta starts crying.]
Judith Here. I've got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can't actually have
babies, not having a womb, which is nobody's fault... not even the
Roman's, but that he can have the right to have babies.
--------[This seems to satisfy him.]
Francis Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to
have babies, brother. Sister, sorry.
Reg What's the point?
Francis What?
Reg What's the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he
can't have babies?
Francis It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.
Reg Symbolic of his struggle against reality.

While we may have the right to do something, or it may be due to us in fairness, it may be physically impossible to actually use said right. In this case, though men should have the right to an abortion, we cannot physically have one. I do agree that men get the short end of the stick when it comes to choices and responsibilities with a pregnancy, while women carry most of the physical and emotional complications.

Except I'm just gonna respond to Sarah's thing, because it hadn't been mentioned. The male abortion is primarily targeted at guys who are not ready for children, not guys who flat out don't want children.

Similarly, when a girl gets an abortion, she doesn't get her tubes tied.

I don't think it's recycled because all of the points FOR this are unacceptably selfish. Getting pregnant unexpectedly is one of the hardest things a woman has to go through and giving men the right to take off just because they had other plans in life is ridiculous.

Obviously, you are correct. Pregnancy is much harder for the woman than for the man. However, despite those diffuclties, the woman still has the option to abort the child if she wishes. And yes, if they suffer guilt or worse over it, it would be worse than that of a man using the male abortion law, but... don't you think some guys would also feel regret? It's not like only scumbags get their girlfriends pregnant before they're ready.

I actually think it's the woman who gets screwed over. When a woman gets pregnant, the man can leave and is free to do whatever he wants. She's left deciding whether to keep the baby or abort (which is very expensive either way). It's very very easy to neglect child support these days. I think if you're dumb enough to get someone pregnant, you should at least man up.

I think if you're dumb enough to get someone pregnant, you should at least man up.

I don't get it. You're one of many people who have been saying something similar to this in the past few pages, but I don't get why you say it as though the woman has absolutely no control over whether she gets pregnant. The woman can take the pill, force her partner to use a condom, or even take Plan B if both fail. I don't think all three of those things failing is common enough to warrant arguing as though the woman is a victim of her pregnancy.