djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 13:01:27 GMT -5
So what is everybody's definition of feminism?
Is the to try and promote economic and social equality among men and women? Is it to focus on promoting the causes of women only, without any real regard to men's issues? Or is it something else?
It seems for many posters here, it's more the latter....the "I don't care about the gap between men and women growing more and more in colleges as long as it is women who are the ones growing" or "I don't care if men are making less at the start of their careers, I'm only worried about women and men should worry about men; unless it hurts women, then they are just sexist." i believe that any "ism" is the belief in the innate superiority of the thing the "ism" is attached to. examples: elitism, racism, sexism.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 13:02:33 GMT -5
PI if you see a problem for boys work on it. Don't point your finger at me and tell me to drop everything and deal with it. Ain't gonna happen. With all due respect, isn't that kind of what feminism has turned into? Isn't it basically to the point of pointing fingers and telling society they need to drop everything and deal with it?
When women aren't doing as well as men in areas, there is a complaint...when men aren't doing as well as women, all of a sudden there doesn't seem to be an issue. Why is that if it's really all about equality?
let me know when you want to be a stripper, and we will talk some more about this.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 13:05:48 GMT -5
How do women have the right to opt out of parenthood? I do not understand that part. They have the option to abort (ETA: a right I FULLY support, by the way). If you don't understand how that would allow them to "opt out of parenthood" I can't help you. i am thinking that a hysterectomy or tube tying would also qualify.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 8, 2015 13:19:42 GMT -5
They have the option to abort (ETA: a right I FULLY support, by the way). If you don't understand how that would allow them to "opt out of parenthood" I can't help you. i am thinking that a hysterectomy or tube tying would also qualify. But that is a right that men also have, (i.e., vasectomy.) The original question is not a fair one since it presumes a pregnancy and thus the responsibility for it.
When it comes to deciding beforehand (before a pregnancy exists) whether to be part of one or not, both sides can opt out equally, and it is then up to any potential partner to deal with that, or not. After one exists, the scale is decidedly unbalanced.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 13:47:21 GMT -5
i am thinking that a hysterectomy or tube tying would also qualify. But that is a right that men also have, (i.e., vasectomy.) The original question is not a fair one since it presumes a pregnancy and thus the responsibility for it.
When it comes to deciding beforehand (before a pregnancy exists) whether to be part of one or not, both sides can opt out equally, and it is then up to any potential partner to deal with that, or not. After one exists, the scale is decidedly unbalanced.
i think it depends on how you interpret the question, tallguy. how i interpreted it is: if a man decides to walk away because a woman refuses to abort, is that his right? and i think the answer is yes to that. if a woman carries a pregnancy to term knowing that she will NOT have a husband/boyfriend/lover/companion to help her, it is on her.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 8, 2015 14:51:34 GMT -5
But that is a right that men also have, (i.e., vasectomy.) The original question is not a fair one since it presumes a pregnancy and thus the responsibility for it.
When it comes to deciding beforehand (before a pregnancy exists) whether to be part of one or not, both sides can opt out equally, and it is then up to any potential partner to deal with that, or not. After one exists, the scale is decidedly unbalanced.
i think it depends on how you interpret the question, tallguy. how i interpreted it is: if a man decides to walk away because a woman refuses to abort, is that his right? and i think the answer is yes to that. if a woman carries a pregnancy to term knowing that she will NOT have a husband/boyfriend/lover/companion to help her, it is on her. And I would say no to that. He has options if he wishes to avoid pregnancy, but he should utilize them beforehand. Use a condom, withdraw, abstain. Once he has helped create a pregnancy, simply walking away should be off the table. He took his risk, and he lost. Deal with it.
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, Yeah, don't do it.
Hey, whaddaya know! We CAN disagree after all. Virgil will be thrilled to hear it!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 14:59:20 GMT -5
i think it depends on how you interpret the question, tallguy. how i interpreted it is: if a man decides to walk away because a woman refuses to abort, is that his right? and i think the answer is yes to that. if a woman carries a pregnancy to term knowing that she will NOT have a husband/boyfriend/lover/companion to help her, it is on her. And I would say no to that. He has options if he wishes to avoid pregnancy, but he should utilize them beforehand. Use a condom, withdraw, abstain. Once he has helped create a pregnancy, simply walking away should be off the table. He took his risk, and he lost. Deal with it.
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, Yeah, don't do it.
Hey, whaddaya know! We CAN disagree after all. Virgil will be thrilled to hear it!
The child has rights that the woman cannot give up. A child has an inherent right to support from the parents that conceived him. I am not sure what moral principle supports that, but I think it is right.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 15:13:27 GMT -5
By that logic women shouldn't have the right to get an abortion. They have options to avoid pregnancy and they should utilize them beforehand. Take the pill, get the implant, abstain. Once they help create a pregnancy simply aborting should be off the table. She took her risk, and she lost. Deal with it. she has the option to abort he doesn't. It is just how things work.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 15:22:04 GMT -5
i think it depends on how you interpret the question, tallguy. how i interpreted it is: if a man decides to walk away because a woman refuses to abort, is that his right? and i think the answer is yes to that. if a woman carries a pregnancy to term knowing that she will NOT have a husband/boyfriend/lover/companion to help her, it is on her. And I would say no to that. He has options if he wishes to avoid pregnancy, but he should utilize them beforehand. Use a condom, withdraw, abstain. Once he has helped create a pregnancy, simply walking away should be off the table. He took his risk, and he lost. Deal with it.
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, Yeah, don't do it.
Hey, whaddaya know! We CAN disagree after all. Virgil will be thrilled to hear it!
yeah, we might disagree here. my thinking is that a woman bears at least some responsibility in pregnancy prevention, as well. for example, if a woman says she is on the pill, and everything is great, then sure- a man might be naiive, but he is not really actively flirting with disaster.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 15:22:23 GMT -5
Which is why I'm totally fine with him having the option to give up all parental responsibility, including child support, if she chooses not to abort. It evens the playing field. Put some provisions on it, like he has to do it before delivery, if he's been notified of the pregnancy, or within a specific time frame if he's not notified until after. If we're going to give the women 100% of the decision making once a pregnancy occurs she should also get 100% of the responsibility of raising the child if the father disagrees with her decision to keep the pregnancy. Could you explain what inherent rights you think a child has when he is born into the world?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 15:22:44 GMT -5
And I would say no to that. He has options if he wishes to avoid pregnancy, but he should utilize them beforehand. Use a condom, withdraw, abstain. Once he has helped create a pregnancy, simply walking away should be off the table. He took his risk, and he lost. Deal with it.
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, Yeah, don't do it.
Hey, whaddaya know! We CAN disagree after all. Virgil will be thrilled to hear it!
The child has rights that the woman cannot give up. A child has an inherent right to support from the parents that conceived him. I am not sure what moral principle supports that, but I think it is right. in our country, the child has no rights whatsoever during gestation. if you want to do something about that, do what gays did, and change the system.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 15:23:28 GMT -5
By that logic women shouldn't have the right to get an abortion. They have options to avoid pregnancy and they should utilize them beforehand. Take the pill, get the implant, abstain. Once they help create a pregnancy simply aborting should be off the table. She took her risk, and she lost. Deal with it. this is precisely what i think.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 8, 2015 16:54:59 GMT -5
By that logic women shouldn't have the right to get an abortion. They have options to avoid pregnancy and they should utilize them beforehand. Take the pill, get the implant, abstain. Once they help create a pregnancy simply aborting should be off the table. She took her risk, and she lost. Deal with it. this is precisely what i think. True, and she should do those things. But she can do everything correctly and still have a "failure." If he also does those things the chance of a failure is dramatically reduced. It comes down to assumption of risk. She can never avoid it. Under your belief, he can. It is fundamentally inequitable.
It is true that abortion is far too often used to compensate for a failure to use birth control. The solution to that is not to make birth control more difficult or expensive to obtain. I would in fact wish it mandatory in order to receive public benefits.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 17:46:14 GMT -5
this is precisely what i think. True, and she should do those things. But she can do everything correctly and still have a "failure." If he also does those things the chance of a failure is dramatically reduced. It comes down to assumption of risk. She can never avoid it. Under your belief, he can. It is fundamentally inequitable. we were only talking about women. men can also take precautions, but their choices are far more limited. didn't want to bring up the A word, so i left your second half out of my reply.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 19:16:47 GMT -5
They have the option to abort (ETA: a right I FULLY support, by the way). If you don't understand how that would allow them to "opt out of parenthood" I can't help you. i am thinking that a hysterectomy or tube tying would also qualify. They would. But I think he was confused as to how abortion "opts out" AFTER the pregnancy has begun.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 19:21:02 GMT -5
i think it depends on how you interpret the question, tallguy. how i interpreted it is: if a man decides to walk away because a woman refuses to abort, is that his right? and i think the answer is yes to that. if a woman carries a pregnancy to term knowing that she will NOT have a husband/boyfriend/lover/companion to help her, it is on her. And I would say no to that. He has options if he wishes to avoid pregnancy, but he should utilize them beforehand. Use a condom, withdraw, abstain. Once he has helped create a pregnancy, simply walking away should be off the table. He took his risk, and he lost. Deal with it.
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, Yeah, don't do it.
Hey, whaddaya know! We CAN disagree after all. Virgil will be thrilled to hear it!
If he can't "Walk away" then she shouldn't be able to either... and that's a position I refuse to take (because I refuse to take a stand against the rights of a person to their own body). That's why I say as long as she can, he should be able to also. She took the risk too... didn't she?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Aug 8, 2015 19:38:54 GMT -5
Yes, and she would have to deal with it. Some deal with it by having the child, some by giving it up for adoption, and some by having an abortion. (Not to mention those who miscarry or have other problems.) She does NOT get to deal with it by simply saying, "Nah, I don't think so."
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 19:43:57 GMT -5
You are making a bad comparison. When she gets an abortion a woman is choosing not to be pregnant. The man can't be pregnant so on that level they are equal. Choice is about a woman's choice to have her body act as an incubator or not. It is a separate issue from whether or not to be a parent. That is when giving it up for adoption comes into play.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 20:10:01 GMT -5
You are making a bad comparison. When she gets an abortion a woman is choosing not to be pregnant. The man can't be pregnant so on that level they are equal. Choice is about a woman's choice to have her body act as an incubator or not. It is a separate issue from whether or not to be a parent. That is when giving it up for adoption comes into play.Bolded: Something the man also has no "say so" in. Unbolded: It's not a bad comparison. You just don't like it because it would give SOME measure of equality to men. No one is suggesting she be REQUIRED to be an incubator. What's being suggested is that as long as she has the right to not be a parent, he should have that same right. If she wants to continue the pregnancy knowing full well that he WON'T be supporting the child, then that's HER choice. See how that works? she still has choice. There's also a likelihood that it would actually reduce pregnancies if women knew they couldn't "trap" men this way. It likely wouldn't do anything about "oops" pregnancies... but it would probably eliminate every single one of the intentional "I'll just get pregnant then he'll HAVE to support/marry me!" ones.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 20:19:38 GMT -5
You are making a bad comparison. When she gets an abortion a woman is choosing not to be pregnant. The man can't be pregnant so on that level they are equal. Choice is about a woman's choice to have her body act as an incubator or not. It is a separate issue from whether or not to be a parent. That is when giving it up for adoption comes into play.Bolded: Something the man also has no "say so" in. Unbolded: It's not a bad comparison. You just don't like it because it would give SOME measure of equality to men. No one is suggesting she be REQUIRED to be an incubator. What's being suggested is that as long as she has the right to not be a parent, he should have that same right. If she wants to continue the pregnancy knowing full well that he WON'T be supporting the child, then that's HER choice. See how that works? she still has choice. There's also a likelihood that it would actually reduce pregnancies if women knew they couldn't "trap" men this way. It likely wouldn't do anything about "oops" pregnancies... but it would probably eliminate every single one of the intentional "I'll just get pregnant then he'll HAVE to support/marry me!" ones. It is a terrible comparison.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 20:40:14 GMT -5
You are making a bad comparison. When she gets an abortion a woman is choosing not to be pregnant. The man can't be pregnant so on that level they are equal. Choice is about a woman's choice to have her body act as an incubator or not. It is a separate issue from whether or not to be a parent. That is when giving it up for adoption comes into play.Bolded: Something the man also has no "say so" in. Unbolded: It's not a bad comparison. You just don't like it because it would give SOME measure of equality to men. No one is suggesting she be REQUIRED to be an incubator. What's being suggested is that as long as she has the right to not be a parent, he should have that same right. If she wants to continue the pregnancy knowing full well that he WON'T be supporting the child, then that's HER choice. See how that works? she still has choice. There's also a likelihood that it would actually reduce pregnancies if women knew they couldn't "trap" men this way. It likely wouldn't do anything about "oops" pregnancies... but it would probably eliminate every single one of the intentional "I'll just get pregnant then he'll HAVE to support/marry me!" ones. Sigh, it is a bad comparison. And your whole post is stupidity. If you want a man to be able to get out of parental responsibility argue for that. Abortion is irrelevant to what you are talking about. A man does have a say about giving a baby up for adoption. Both parents signatures are required. If the man does not want the baby to be given up he can choose to raise the child himself. That is what my father did with his son.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,448
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 8, 2015 20:50:22 GMT -5
And I would say no to that. He has options if he wishes to avoid pregnancy, but he should utilize them beforehand. Use a condom, withdraw, abstain. Once he has helped create a pregnancy, simply walking away should be off the table. He took his risk, and he lost. Deal with it.
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, Yeah, don't do it.
Hey, whaddaya know! We CAN disagree after all. Virgil will be thrilled to hear it!
If he can't "Walk away" then she shouldn't be able to either... and that's a position I refuse to take (because I refuse to take a stand against the rights of a person to their own body). That's why I say as long as she can, he should be able to also. She took the risk too... didn't she? that didn't really tell me if i was reading the question right. was i?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 21:16:10 GMT -5
Bolded: Something the man also has no "say so" in. Unbolded: It's not a bad comparison. You just don't like it because it would give SOME measure of equality to men. No one is suggesting she be REQUIRED to be an incubator. What's being suggested is that as long as she has the right to not be a parent, he should have that same right. If she wants to continue the pregnancy knowing full well that he WON'T be supporting the child, then that's HER choice. See how that works? she still has choice. There's also a likelihood that it would actually reduce pregnancies if women knew they couldn't "trap" men this way. It likely wouldn't do anything about "oops" pregnancies... but it would probably eliminate every single one of the intentional "I'll just get pregnant then he'll HAVE to support/marry me!" ones. Sigh, it is a bad comparison. And your whole post is stupidity. If you want a man to be able to get out of parental responsibility argue for that. Abortion is irrelevant to what you are talking about. A man does have a say about giving a baby up for adoption. Both parents signatures are required. If the man does not want the baby to be given up he can choose to raise the child himself. That is what my father did with his son. You should do some research, before you post such obvious fantasies as the bolded. From FindLaw.comNote the bolded. The father's consent is NOT required... and even if he does challenge the adoption he may or may NOT be able to stop it. The mother has no such constraints. I'm glad your father got the chance... but just because it worked out for him doesn't mean it works out for every father. And it's not a bad comparison. Can the woman choose to be or not be a parent up until the legal deadline for abortions... Yes or No? Can the man choose to be or not be a parent up until the legal deadline for abortions... Yes or No?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 21:17:10 GMT -5
BTW if the man walks away from responsibility for a children, very often the rest of society picks up the cost in welfare etc. A woman does not get to just walk away, she needs to make other arrangements for the child either by giving the child up for adoption or turning the child over to the father's custody.
Are you really pushing for men's right to be dead beat dads as your men's rights issue? This is something that is really important to you?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 21:19:59 GMT -5
A man can have sex without ever having to worry about becoming pregnant. A woman gets to decide whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term. If you want equality on this shouldn't you be fighting for science to come up with a way for men to be able to carry a baby to term?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Aug 8, 2015 21:46:16 GMT -5
Just a question to ponder: To which person's body does permanent change occur (change that can only recently be corrected by surgery) at the time the sex act takes place? Does any equivalent change take place in the other person's body anywhere along the line, from the sex act through pregnancy and birth? Is that relevant?
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Aug 8, 2015 21:54:34 GMT -5
And what if the woman becomes pregnant and doesn't want to be a parent - but the man does?
Are you suggesting the woman should be able to terminate the pregnancy without his consent even if he wants to keep/raise HIS child?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 22:42:35 GMT -5
BTW if the man walks away from responsibility for a children, very often the rest of society picks up the cost in welfare etc. A woman does not get to just walk away, she needs to make other arrangements for the child either by giving the child up for adoption or turning the child over to the father's custody. Are you really pushing for men's right to be dead beat dads as your men's rights issue? This is something that is really important to you? LOL... I figured you'd go that route once the BS of the other posts was pointed out. No I'm not pushing for "deadbeat dads". They are only "deadbeat" because the law does not give them the same opportunity of an "out" that women get. IF (and that's a BIG, HUGE "if") men were to have the equal right to opt out of parenthood that women currently have, the woman would be 100% responsible for the expenses of the child, if she chose to keep it. Best scenario if she couldn't or wouldn't abort or adopt out AND couldn't afford to raise the child on her own, then the state should terminate her rights, and put the child up for adoption... and I'd be willing to bet that if women KNEW there would be no financial aid coming from an unwilling father AND no extra aid coming from the state, that likely three things would happen: - There would be less (if any) "gotcha!" pregnancies... because there would be no more "gotcha!"
- There would be less single mothers with multiple baby daddies
- There would be less women willing to have "one night stands"/flings.
All three of those would result in fewer pregnancies to even need to worry about in the first place. The first two are great. The last one, men might hate it, but, equality sometimes does come at a cost.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 23:07:47 GMT -5
And what if the woman becomes pregnant and doesn't want to be a parent - but the man does?
Are you suggesting the woman should be able to terminate the pregnancy without his consent even if he wants to keep/raise HIS child?
Because it's her body, I would say that's an absolute right that is beyond his opinion or "say-so".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 30, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2015 23:23:44 GMT -5
@richardintn the depths of your misogyny continuously amazes me. Bye again
|
|