Who Here Are Old Enough to Remember Back Alley Abortions?

Nope, male abortion can be instituted to fix this inequality. Genders should have equal rights and duties.

If the male opts out, and the woman still keeps the child despite it (thats why it should be some time before abortion limit has passed, so she has a time to react in such case), then its clear its only her who wants it, so only her should pay for it (+ welfare assistance of course). Otherwise its nothing short of slavery.

I dont see any problem with this. Whats wrong with equality?

 

For crying out loud. How can be a male be given the right to have an abortion?

Do you really not understand how stupid that sounds?

Opts out of what, exactly?

how can a man take action to prevent his child being born?

The problem is a man cannot terminate a pregnancy.

That's a big problem.

 

I think men and other family members are responsible for abortions much more than is recognised. Many women are coerced into having abortions because it is the logical thing to do in an unplanned pregnancy - and they can come about by genuine mistakes, being sick after taking the pill or even mistakenly taking other tablets for a few days which came in extremely similar packaging as I know one women did.

Legal abortion gives women the same rights as men and to stop her having to have a back street abortion which might kill her. But as Germaine Greer says it is a double edged sword

http://afterabortion.org/2004/germaine-greer-on-abortion-and-choice/

 

Neither men nor women should have procreational sex until there is a mutual, loving commitment to each other and any human life that may result. Marriage would be the best way.

Unless a woman consents to the type of sex that can result in a pregnancy (procreational sex) there is no way a man will make her pregnant outside of rape which is a horrendous, criminal assault.

Another way to put it...Men are only going to impregnate a woman with her consent. IMO Women have dropped the ball. It used to more or less understood that a man had to prove to a woman he was worthy of having sex with her. Today, it is more or less understood that women aren't near as demanding. I guess that is what they mean by 'progressive.'

Legal abortion took what little rights men had completely away. Women are now 100% responsible for sexual reproduction.

 

Well Darling, I do not know what world you live in but you must be aware that this is your personal views and morality which you wish to impose on other people. This has nothing to do with what I was speaking about.

You appear for instance to be unaware that married women and people in long tern relationships also have unplanned pregnancies which one partner may want to abort. I was discussing that it really is something of a myth that abortion is always the woman's choice and that although it certainly is good that abortion is there in order that women may avoid the danger of back street abortions, it has also resulted on pressure being put on women to abort the child if it was not planned, by partners, society in general and when the woman is alone and particularly when young her family. Much more needs to be done to allow all women to make a free choice and not feel that it is, to use Germaine's words, her 'duty' to abort.

No that quite simply is not true. It is not impossible you may have had a situation where a woman you were with chose to have an abortion of your child and it is true that a woman may choose to do so. Abortion does give women freedom and rights.

However it is not as clear cut as that. In many instances it is the pressure of the man or of her family which actually makes the women feel she has no choice but to abort. Abortion has to some extent made what used to be a desperate choice become an expected decision when circumstances are not right and the baby was unplanned.

 

A pro life website. How surprising (!)


If a woman chooses to undergo an abortion to please other people then it's still a choice she has made for herself.

 

By "male abortion" I mean the male having a chance to opt out of unwanted parenthood (child support) some time after conception (just like the woman has with abortion), not actually terminating a pregnancy. Its a metaphoric term. Only the woman can abort the pregnancy of course.

 

Women have to pay child support. They can't opt out of it.

 

They can opt out of all duties of parenthood in the period between conception and abortion limit if they want (with abortion). They can react to unwanted pregnancy as they want, in both ways.
Men cannot. If they conceive a baby with a woman, they are completely without choice, and can be forced by woman into parenthood duties without any way to completely opt out. Thats not fair.

Of course noone should be able to opt out of child support after birth, or after abortion is no longer possible (legal abortion limit).

 

Darling? I realize that even my posts are irresistible to women, it's a burden I live with.

Where have I posted that I 'wish to impose' my views on others? This is a FORUM and, as such, I am expressing my POV. Why don't you try addressing what I posted instead of lying about what I wrote?

Yes however, the ONLY 'partner' that has the personal right to abort is the female side of the relationship...Men have 0 rights per the SCOTUS 1973 decision. In any case I don't really care I'm just offering some logical advice.

You have put your finger on the problem, the degradation of moral values in girls and women to the point they have to rely on abortion for contraception. It's pretty sad when you think about it.

You have been sold a false bill of goods in the first place. The number of 'back-alley' abortions can never be quantified for obvious reasons...It WAS illegal. Women who died from botched abortions does not come close to the claims made. However, be that as it may, abortion is LEGAL I am not here to discuss making it ILLEGAL.

Why do women feel it is their 'duty' to abort? What is the matter with women anyway? They wanted abortion, the got it, now they feel pressured to get an abortion....Geesh.

Women have 100% responsibility for all human sexual reproduction (outside of criminal rape) in the U.S. I counsel men to get and make a commitment BEFORE having PROCREATIONAL sex with any woman. She can STILL abort the progeny however, his chances of her not killing the fetus are a lot better.

Well women right here on the Forum rail against being 'forced' to give birth too. Apparently women just can't seem to choose a decent man...of which there are plenty. Most men are decent, loving, caring individuals who would lay down their life for their family. Here is a clue for women, decent men are not vampires, bikers, drugged out musicians or 'bad boys' as the media and Hollywood would like you to believe.

 

They don't have any duties of parenthood then. Neither do men.

Well, that's because they don't become pregnant, isn't it?

Not for any other reason. Nothing to do with being fair.

I mean, you might as well say it's not fair that men can become a parent without enduring one second of pain or discomfort.

Which is the way it is.

 

Well you are certainly right that was a mistake. I have spent the past weeks helping a young woman to come to her decision about terminating or not an unplanned pregnancy. She is married and has two children already and has never intended on having a third. However, on finding she was her initial thought was well this will not be a bed or roses but that is what has happened so I will need to get on with it. Her husband however had other ideas. The logical thing to to do was have a termination. He wouldn't even discuss it. She feared life would be hell for everyone if she could not get him to agree. She never once could add things up and say that the balance was in favour of abortion. She had a large pile of very real reasons that would be more than enough for many people to have an abortion but she would always say at the end but that is not enough for abortion and yet she did not feel able to say she was keeping it without her husband's agreement and support. She would never say she was certain she did not want a termination. At one point she said 'it (abortion) is the right thing to do. I told her it was not about what was the correct thing to do, it was about what was right for her. Her husband just refused to talk about it and she was mostly too tired from the early pregnancy, working all day and then looking after the other kids as well as being sick so she would just come and go over it with me again.

It wasn't till the day she was going that she eventually managed to move him and the right choice has been made for her. They are keeping the baby. This process made me aware of how abortion has become almost expected and for someone who, for whatever reason it is not right, would be a dreadful mistake. I simply looked it up today and found Germaine Greer spoken about on this website trying to find a feminist position which takes in both views http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1845 (and if serentipity is also pro life, my apologies again)

I respected what Germaine Greer said and I respect her so I did a search and that is what I came up with and sometimes it is better to look at what people are saying rather than just the books cover. I believe if the woman I am talking about had had an abortion it would have been extremely destructive. Once her husband changed his mind she described herself as having loads more energy and being a million times happier.

I believe in the right to safely and legally terminate pregnancies but also think it has it's problems. I think it is too often expected and not always the choice a woman wants to make.

Yes, but not a free choice.

 

Not at all, as pregnancy is entirely irrelevant for this discussion. There is no reason why both men and women should not have the ability to opt out of parenthood before legal abortion limit, if only the other party wants the child.

So called "male abortion" is a gender-neutral concept that simply gives an additional right to both men and women.

Please google it so you understand the rationale before criticising.

 

It can happen the other way too

Basically the choice to abort is usually not taken lightly and is thought through very carefully and ofttimes by bother husband and wife. To mischaracterise women who have abortions as "not knowing what they are doing" or "just doing it for convenience" is simplistic to say the least

 

In a perfect world where there are no "baby Daddies" who spend most of their time getting into women's pants, getting them pregnant and then abandoning them then i would agree

But this "opt out" will never happen until we have a safe, effective male contraceptive

Even the fact that there is no male contraceptive, apart from condoms and sterilisation speaks volumes about the male dedication, in the overall societal sense, when it comes to conception

 

I did not miss-characterise anything. I gave one real example.

and where did I say all times this is the case but some times yes and in the particular instance I was speaking of it very definitely would have been.

I am one of the people who was alive when people had back street abortions. I rarely read abortion posts and when I do all I see are talk of women's choice and women's rights or people talking of murder of the unborn. I totally understand the current climate where there is on the one hand those who want the end of women's rights to legally terminate and on the other those who want to save a woman from emotional turmoil when going through abortion, so that she can not even think of the embryo as a baby and such like and I see the people who just call the woman who has an abortion a murderer or who wants to make her feel guilt or more guilt than she already feels. The two arguments are diametrically opposed. One would not allow a woman an abortion under any conditions and the other shuts it's eyes to the reality that abortion is often not the woman's choice.

I for instance said to this woman, if you are thinking of aborting, you must blank 'it' out. She said impossible. That was a pretty strong give away that for this woman abortion was not the right choice.

I told her that I had heard sometimes you need to wait 3 weeks to get an NHS abortion so she made an appointment to talk about it with her Doctor. She went there and was unable not to cry. Her doctor listened to her talk about how it was unplanned and how her husband would not consider it and suggested she go home and talk about it with him over the weekend....she told me and then said 'but she told me to book another appointment and she said she would book me in for an abortion when I came back.' and expressed some shock because although she had said it was the obvious thing she had not actually asked for one. Her husband was furious she had not booked the abortion and would not speak to her at all. When she went back the Dr booked her an abortion although I think she may have told them to take their time as it was slightly longer than our area usually is. I do think the Dr understood her position and was doing the best she could under present guidelines but I do not think we can ignore that in being careful not to make people feel guilty, which I believe is completely right, we also sometimes do not take care of people who are being coerced and both women are as important.

And I hear all the time of it being the woman's choice to have an abortion. I am one of the people who is old enough to remember people who had back street abortions. I know without question they wanted them and would have them again and I fully support legal and safe abortion.

However I also had another friend who many years ago had an abortion because her long term partner absolutely refused to support her. She subsequently tried, thankfully unsuccessfully, suicide. I have also known two women who got through abortion more or less unscarred

I am simply suggesting that there is too much emphasis on being matter of fact with abortion. I think it would be quite simple for a doctor to have asked my friend if she wanted counselling, which was the very thing she was hoping someone would offered, rather than take abortion as being the choice when she had not even asked for it.

For some women abortion is the correct decision and they should be allowed have it legally, safely, with respect and dignity and as quickly as possible without anyone screaming at them that they are killing babies, but it needs to be that woman's choice. It is her body which is carrying the baby and care also needs to be taken that it is her own choice.

Also I probably live in a different country to you. We don't have nearly such heavy anti abortionists about in the UK. so things may be different but I don't think yet, we have got the abortion thing right. I would never be for ending legal abortion as women would always do back street abortions but I believe that if it is to be the woman's choice then I think we still have some work to do to get it right. I think the present system and arguments themselves are too simplistic. A more person centred approach is needed.

 

That's life, though, isn't it?

At least she had a choice, which some people would like to take away from her.

 

It isn't possible for a man to opt out of parenthood once a woman is pregnant by him.

Pregnancy cannot be left out of the matter.

There is no rationale. It's stupid.

A man will have a child whether he wants to acknowledge it or not.

A man cannot make his son or daughter disappear off the face of the earth just because he doesn't want him or her. They will exist, they will be alive and they will be people.

The whole idea is ridiculous.

 

But if the man or woman does not want them, then he/she should have the ability to disown them before abortion limit. The other willing party would then take care of them.

The idea makes sense, you just dont get it.

Imagine a situation when a woman gets pregnant and does not want the baby, but only the man does. Before abortion limit, instead of aborting the woman agrees to disown the child as to not be responsible for child support and other parental duties, and then when the child is born these duties fall only on the father who wanted the child. Both parties get what they want.

What is ridiculous about this situation? It makes sense and is fair.

 

A woman cannot disown a child any more than a man can.

What a woman can do is end a pregnancy so no child is born.

That is all.

It doesn't make any sense at all.

It's certainly not fair.

If a woman could be forced to hand over an embryo to a man to incubate, then your idea still wouldn't work, because a child will be born that has two parents. A mother and a father.

Women do not have the right to disown a child. That is a fallacy.

They have the ability to make sure a child isn't born after conception. To do that they must undergo an abortion. They cannot just disown it. That will not stop it being born and becoming a person.

Men don't have that ability except where an embryo is stored outside a woman's body, in which case it belongs to both of them equally and needs the consent of both the man and woman to be implanted.

Giving men the ability to disown their children would be an abuse the rights of those children.

It certainly wouldn't make anything fair.

 

Its not abuse of rights. Children do NOT have a right to a parent. Otherwise giving children up to foster homes would be illegal.

Not paying child support is bad primarily NOT because of the child.
Its bad because the receiving parent, who was defrauded - he was promised by the other parent he would contribute to bringing up the child during pregnancy, and these were the terms under which the pregnancy was agreed to continue, but he does not once the child is born.

If the other parent declares he wont contribute to the child from the beginning (conception), while the woman still has the chance to react to changed situation and abort, or agree with it, then there is no need to force child support. Noone is defrauded, the woman knows everything from the beginning, and can abort at any time if she does not agree with bringing up the child under such conditions.

 

Whenever possible they have the right to be brought up by their parents.

It's bad only because of the child. That's why it's called child support.

You've made that up. There is no such legal agreement.

It's nothing to do with what the woman knows or doesn't know during pregnancy. The pregnancy is hers, not his.

It's totally to do with the fact that if a man has child, then he has to help support it.

The child will not disappear because he doesn't want it.

Why can't you see that?

 

An unplanned pregnancy certainly would characterize a woman who is oblivious to the dangers of procreational sex.

 

That goes against the Roe decision of 1973 that a woman has the constitutional right to the privacy of her own body which includes the fetus.

Right now a man only has the right to his sperm when it resides in his own body, once he releases it into a woman it is hers. Men should take care to release their sperm where it won't make a baby otherwise, they better have a commitment from the woman in the form of a marriage contract.

Also, any good woman will know how to pleasure her man without procreational intercourse and will not put herself in jeopardy of an unwanted pregnancy. Apparently some women either don't want to do that, or are ignorant of the male genitalia. There is no hope for the former but if a woman really cares and loves a man, she will be willing to get educated.

 

and, unable to take all that responsibility by herself, instead of realizing and acknowledging the need of a father; she turns to the government to be the 'daddy' and the taxpayers to support the children she chooses.

or she starts bedhopping from man to man, opening her children up to a high probability of being abused sexually or physically by men that have no interest or stake in the children's wellbeing.