TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

HeavenlyPossum Archive

View 3 posts and 956 comments by HeavenlyPossum on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

“No we would not call anything an obligation that you can walk away from 100% consequence free.“ These are your own words. I’m not going to keep doing this if you can’t even stand by your own words.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 07:01 PM
1

“No we would not call anything an obligation that you can walk away from 100% consequence free.” We’ve been over this. If a man can choose whether to provide care to his child or not, he is not obligated to care for his child. If he is not obligated to care for his child, where would rights to that child come from?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 06:48 PM
1

Yes, medical care is the sole purview of people who have the body parts in question. A double-amputee who has lost both feet cannot access podiatry care, but still possess a right to that care. That aside, you have the same right as any woman to evict an unwanted person from your body.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 05:17 PM
1

So we agree that something you can choose to do, or choose not to do, without consequence is not obligatory. On what grounds, then, would someone have rights to a child for whom they have no obligation of care?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 04:52 PM
1

Can you answer the question or no
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 03:33 PM
6

Amazing. What an unbelievable piece of trash you are. Reddit was a mistake.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 03:19 PM
10

Sorry, are you claiming that women choose to be subject to violence by their partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 03:11 PM
1

If you could choose whether to pay your taxes or not, and face no repercussions either way, would we call taxes obligatory if you decide to pay them?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 02:34 PM
1

I explained my critique pretty clearly in my original post, but I’m happy to do it yet again: Rights over other people are difficult to justify. The only real justification to have rights over another person is an obligation to care for that person. People in this subreddit argue that men should be able to unilaterally renounce their obligations to care for their children, to balance a woman’s control over reproduction through abortion. Someone who can unilaterally renounce their obligation was …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 01:12 PM
1

So you'd be okay with men walking away while it's still just a clump of cells? If men possessed no obligation to care for their children, then they would possess no rights to their children, as I’ve consistently noted from the start. In the sense that people in this subreddit are demanding?? It is. You are just dodging the obvious inconsistencies in your position. Ok Women can already unilaterally renounce their obligations to their children. Presumably you think they have no rights to their chi…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 12:08 PM
1

Why should he have rights to children to whom he owes no obligation of care?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 10:53 AM
1

One such obligation is to care for one’s children, or really any person one has caused to exist in a state of helplessness. But this entire discussion has not been about my opinion. This discussion has been about the logical implications of an argument put forward in this subreddit. If you’ve been laboring under the misapprehension that I’ve been arguing my “opinion,” then I’m afraid you’ve been mistaken.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 10:53 AM
0

So it doesn't count as avoiding your parental obligations provided you are able to dump the kid on someone else? They would not constitute the sort of unilateral renunciation of one’s parental obligations that people in this subreddit are demanding. If you don't have an abortion, you have a child. Abortion is absolutely severing your obligations to that child (by terminating it). If there is no child, there can be no obligations to that child. Going into a fire station and unilaterally dropping …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 10:51 AM
1

I don’t understand what you’re asking of me here.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 10:48 AM
1

According to the line of argument I am critiquing, mothers are exclusively responsible for their children, by virtue of their access to abortion care.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 08:27 AM
1

Notice that you still haven't answered my question. If you can opt-in or out-of of your workplace obligations, does it mean that you definitionally don't have any obligations towards your workplace? Seems like you have an issue with the word obligations then. What would you call your responsibilities at work? Aren't they obligations? That would not follow, no. How so? By your own logic, if they have obligations to their children, by choosing to abort them, they are rendering those obligations vo…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 05:06 AM
1

If you can opt-in or out-of of your workplace obligations, does it mean that you definitionally don't have any obligations towards your workplace? Seems like you are trying to play semantics here. Some obligations arise only if you willingly decide to take them. I don't see why it would be wrong to apply this to humans. Just because there has never been a precedent for that, doesn't mean it can't be implemented. Since you cannot unilaterally opt into employment, but rather require the consent of…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 04:03 AM
1

Rights to make decisions for other people are difficult to justify and tend to revolve around obligations to care. Parents accrue rights to make decisions on behalf of their children because they are obligated to care for those children. A man who can opt into or out of care for a child is definitionally not obligated to care for that child, and thus has no rights to make decisions for that child. The sort of life-or-death decisions that parents have to make, often on a daily basis for especiall…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 03:53 AM
1

Yes, I suspect that you’re correct and that the law would assign legal rights over children to men who cannot justify those rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 03:41 AM
1

Changing the law to allow men to unilaterally renounce any obligations to their child would remove any grounds men have to claim rights over their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 03:36 AM
1

According to the people who make this argument, men should possess the capacity and legal authority to make this purely unilateral decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 02:53 AM
1

Then I’m not debating you. I’m arguing with those people who believe men bear no obligations to their children but can instead renounce their obligations (and thus their rights).
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 02:51 AM
0

Abortion does not constitute the severing of obligations to a child, because no child yet exists. Adoption and safe havens do not entail the unilateral severing of obligations to care, because they involve agreements between consenting adults. The unilateral equivalent to a man simply renouncing his obligation to care would be leaving a baby in a dumpster and declaring it “adopted.”
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 02:51 AM
2

I’m not commenting on actually existing family law, but rather critiquing the argument made by men on this subreddit that abortion access gives women more rights than men. They seek to remedy this alleged inequality by accruing additional rights to abandon their children at will without repercussion. Logically, possessing the power to abandon their children at will without consequence would eliminate any right men have to their children, because they would have rendered themselves uninvolved thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 07:57 PM
1

I don’t get the sense that you’re following what I’ve said. If a man can opt into or out of caring for his children unilaterally, then he does not bear any obligations to them. If he does not bear any obligations, he has no rights to his children. If he has no rights, he cannot simply announce “I want rights and thus I have rights.” He could ask for rights from the child’s guardian, but there’s no reason he could simply assert them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 07:54 PM
1

Why should someone with no obligations to care be free to assert rights over a child?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 07:21 PM
1

So men have obligations to children they father from birth?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 07:00 PM
1

I don’t know why you’re so invested in the idea that therapy is something wives should be providing their husbands.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:51 PM
1

I’m looking at the fact that he sought professional help, which is a good sign that he judged that he needed professional help.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:46 PM
1

If you can waive your obligations, they’re not actually obligations. Rights over a child stem from obligations to care for that child. If a man does not possess obligations to care for a child, he does not have rights to that child. You cannot unilaterally “opt into” rights over a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:45 PM
2

Why would those not be components of mental health for which someone might seek professional care?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:42 PM
1

Is English your first language?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:39 PM
3

Your own comment reveals that you understand the difference between needing a care from a professional and specialist versus needing care from an amateur peer, and yet you still can’t make the connection.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:35 PM
1

I’m sorry for thinking you could keep up, but I’m realizing that most of what I’m saying is going over your head. It’s probably best to put this to rest here.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:33 PM
1

If he has guardianship by default, then he has obligations by default. If he has no obligations, but can unilaterally choose whether to care for his child, then he has no rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:15 PM
1

He has no rights to the child if he has no obligation of care.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:14 PM
1

If he has a claim solely by virtue of “his seed,” he has an obligation solely by virtue of “his seed.” If he can opt out despite “his seed,” then “his seed” plays no role in this at all and cannot confer rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:14 PM
1

The man isn’t transferring guardianship to the mother, because he never possessed guardianship.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:06 PM
1

You can’t unilaterally consent your way into rights over a child that you have no claim over.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:04 PM
1

What
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:02 PM
1

Yes the law that makes it so she doesn't have an obligation that she can't relinquish, that's the point The law which allows the custodial guardian to suspend that guardianship only through a consensual transfer of guardianship to another consenting adult, in contrast to your claim that men can simply renounce their obligations or assert their rights as they please. No, I'm saying that unless he renounces his obligations (like women are also capable of) that he is one of the guardians just like …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:54 PM
1

It doesn’t matter if he agrees at the start or not. The logical consequence of men having no obligations to their children is that men have no rights to their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:52 PM
1

If “his seed” confers rights, then it also confers obligations of care. If he has no obligations of care, and can opt in or out of care as he desires, then “his seed” confers no rights. You can’t have it both ways. Either “his seed” creates bonds of obligation that warrant rights or it doesn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:42 PM
1

This isn't true, if the man renounced his obligations there is nothing forcing the woman to keep her obligation Well there’s usually the law, which requires her to either provide care or to transfer care to a willing and consensual guardian. The third option is to be prosecuted for neglect, abuse, or murder. There’s no fourth option for “a third party with no obligations swoops in and asserts rights over the child without gaining permission from the child’s guardian.” so it would either be conse…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:41 PM
1

Why should anyone care what he agrees to? He’s a disinterested third party. He cannot unilaterally assert rights over a child to whom he owes no obligations, anymore than you could just assert rights over your neighbor’s kid by “agreeing” to provide care.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:36 PM
1

Because neither adoptions nor safe havens entail a unilateral renunciation of care, but rather a consensual transfer of care. You’re arguing for a father to have the unilateral right to assert rights or renounce obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:31 PM
2

If “his seed” does not confer obligations, then it does not confer rights. Parental rights are not property rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:24 PM
–

All of this is wrong, of course, but honestly I don’t really care. OP misconstrued the critique of age gap relations, I corrected OP and explained what the critique was, and that’s pretty much all there is to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:23 PM
1

Setting aside the fact that men currently also have recourse to these options, no, the existence of adoption or safe havens do not change anything about my argument, as I have explained to you repeatedly and consistently. A man asserting rights over a child to whom he owes no obligations would be like the state simply seizing a child. If a man sought to acquire rights over a child from a custodial guardian, he’d have to first acquire the consent of that child’s guardian, in the same way that an …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:21 PM
2

Why should he have any rights to any children? Do you gain rights to your neighbor’s children if you unilaterally opt in to caring for them?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:18 PM
1

Are you referring to aborting a pregnancy when you talk about “getting rid of a kid”?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:17 PM
2

Why should he have any rights to his children if he does not face any obligations to care for them?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:16 PM
1

How is a safe haven a consenting adult? Lol it's just giving them to the state. The state consists of people. Those people are adults. Safe Havens consist of the transfer of custody of a child from a parent or guardian to a new guardian, who is an employee of the state. Why would this be confusing? You were just saying that the ability to opt out makes you ineligible for rights? And I bet you will switch up the logic again after this, Why do you move the goalpost anytime your logic is shown to b…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:14 PM
1

Adoption and safe havens consist of transfers of custodial responsibilities from one consenting adult to another. You’re claiming for men a unilateral right to assert parental rights or renounce their obligations of care.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 05:07 PM
1

If a man faces no obligation to care for his children, and can renounce his care of them, why would he have rights to them, any more than he would have rights to a stranger’s child?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:57 PM
2

No man is arguing for that, and I challenge you to find one. I heard this repeatedly from multiple people in response to another post I made about children’s rights to parental care. The financial abortion argument is about allowing men to have the same ability to opt out of fatherhood that women have to opt out of motherhood. Yes, I’m familiar with the argument. If a father can opt out of caring for his children, why should he have rights to his children? He is, at best, a disinterested third p…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:46 PM
2

My contention, as I’ve consistently argued from my original post, is that a logical corollary to the right to abandon your children is an absence of rights to your children. So yes—in the event that men could unilaterally opt out of caring for their children, they would only have parental rights insofar as the child’s custodial guardian agreed to grant those rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:43 PM
2

If you can walk away from a child without repercussions, why would you have rights to access and make decisions for that child? Are there any other children you think you should have rights over?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:41 PM
1

Thank you for admitting that I was correct all along.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:40 PM
2

That 10 week timeframe doesn’t somehow change anything I’ve said.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:38 PM
1

Women who bear children cannot opt out of caring for them, or they will be prosecuted for neglect, abuse, or even murder.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:35 PM
2

They’re not obligations if you can opt out of them on a whim.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:35 PM
1

Except that it’s not; you’re describing precisely the crux of the issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:33 PM
1

Ok
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:32 PM
2

If you bear no obligations to care for a child, where would your rights to access and make decisions for that child come from
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:32 PM
1

If you can choose whether to volunteer to care for a child or not, you carry no obligations to that child, and thus can claim no rights to that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:31 PM
0

If you possess the option to renounce any obligations to your child, they were not obligations. In the absence of obligations, you bear no more rights to access or make decisions for your child than would a stranger.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:30 PM
2

If abortion were murder, then men would have no grounds to claim rights to abandon their children on the grounds that abortion care is available to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:29 PM
1

Planned Parenthood is not murdering children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:26 PM
1

What about it is confusing you?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:25 PM
2

Same responsibilities/rights should come with same opportunities. This is why men who possess no responsibilities possess no rights to those children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:25 PM
1

I’m sorry you couldn’t understand it lol
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:23 PM
1

If they do they’re prosecuted for murder 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:22 PM
1

That’s precisely the implication of “financial abortions.”
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:21 PM
2

I've answered it plenty of times.... either from the same place as a woman's Then men would bear the same responsibilities to any children they fathered as women do. or with the DNA pick whichever you prefer Parental rights are not property rights. No it doesn't. You suggested obligation was what gave women rights but they aren't forced with obligation either. Women are obligated by law and ethically to care for any children they bear. You are purposely trying to be as selective as possible to g…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:15 PM
0

I don’t care whether you think most men would or wouldn’t. That’s irrelevant to my post. I’m done engaging with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 04:13 PM
2

Women do not have the option to kill their children; that is generally considered everywhere to be murder. A man who bore no responsibilities to the children he fathered would logically have no more rights to them than I have to, say, make decisions for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:56 PM
2

Yes but none of that changes the fact that the ability to opt out doesnt keep someone from having rights. Yes, it does. Are you just trying to get as specific as possible so you can say "see it's different from women so that means you either are obligated or have no rights" lol. It's obvious that you are trying to find paths to your conclusion instead actually following a logical conclusion Where do a man’s rights to his children emerge from? You’ve struggled to answer this, probably because you…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:54 PM
-1

If a man had the option to unilaterally renounce his obligations to his child, they were never obligations, and he is merely a disinterested third party with no rights to any children he fathered.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:52 PM
1

My post is not about my beliefs about rights. My post is about the logical consequences of arguing that men have no responsibility to their children, which is that men have no rights to their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:51 PM
1

Try reading it again, because that was the entire point of my post. I’m not interested in debating that fact with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:50 PM
1

Since a fetus has no independent existence from its mother’s body, it does not exist as a separate rights-bearing individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:50 PM
0

It’s not sufficient for the rights-seeker to unilaterally agree. Both parties must agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:45 PM
2

My post is not about my beliefs about rights. My post is about the logical consequences of arguing that men have no responsibility to their children, which is that men have no rights to their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:38 PM
-1

Except that it’s not.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:36 PM
1

I explained exactly why in the post you are commenting under.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:35 PM
2

A woman cannot unilaterally opt out of caring for a child born to her by referencing a renunciation of her obligations before the child is born.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:17 PM
2

Then men would have no rights to any children they father.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 03:16 PM
1

If you were somehow challenging my “worldview,” I wouldn’t be able to tell, because I cannot make sense of whatever it is you’re trying to say.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 02:22 PM
1

Yeah whatever it is you’re trying to do here, I’m gonna pass
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 02:12 PM
2

A woman has no unilateral choice to opt out of caring for a child born to her. The people making the argument I am critiquing argue that men possess or should possess the unilateral right to opt out of caring for a child they have fathered.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 02:08 PM
3

You mean rape is bad and outlawed? Yeah, agree. Still no idea what this has to do with my post.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 02:07 PM
2

That’s what a “paper abortion” would entail: the unilateral renunciation of obligations on the sole discretion of the man, with no reference to the care of the resulting child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:59 PM
2

If men can walk away from their children on a whim, they have no rights to those children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:55 PM
1

I don’t understand what you think the phrase “responsibility for sex” means. Who would be responsible for sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:55 PM
1

No clue what you’re trying to say here.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:50 PM
2

Wasn't talking about abandoning. There's abortion for example The power to abort a pregnancy is the entire premise of the argument I’m critiquing. The argument goes: a woman can abort, while a man cannot, so a woman possesses unilateral control over the birth of a child. Because of this, men have no obligations to care for children they could not consent to fathering. The people making this argument then go on to demand additional rights by men to unilaterally assert rights over those children, …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:49 PM
2

Obviously it doesn't since they have the choice not to take on the responsibility..... that's not obligation. Mothers who abandon their children are typically prosecuted for neglect, abuse, or murder. It's both of their kids, they both inherently have rights, but only 1 has the majority of choice currently to accept the responsibility or not. If a father inherently has rights to his children, he inherently has obligations to those children, and cannot unilaterally walk away from his children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:38 PM
2

Same place as women's Their rights to access and make decisions about their children stem from their obligation to care for their children, which people on this subreddit say does not accrue to me. So, men’s rights to their children cannot come from the same place, otherwise men would also have obligations to their children. So where do those rights come from?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:30 PM
2

Yes, that’s already their argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:28 PM
2

You seem to be mischaracterizing what they Are saying, they are asking for a choice like women have.... and again, the same place women's comes from, why should it be different? They’ve argued, explicitly, that a woman who chooses to bring a pregnancy to term and birth a child bears sole responsibility for that child, and that men bear no responsibilities for their children, because they lacked a meaningful choice in that decision. The logical consequence of that argument is not “men can unilate…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 01:15 PM
2

But you continually ignore that women can opt out (so it's not obligatory)..... The transfer of custodial care to another willing guardian does not create rights for an uninvolved third party. that's all they are asking for. It seems like those men (and some women) in this subreddit that I’m discussing are asking for rights to children to whom they have no obligations. So, again, where do those rights come from? It's really that simple. Stop trying to twist things around, it's just asking for th…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:58 PM
1

I am not proposing that all rights and responsibilities be transferred to women. I am observing that this is implicitly what people are arguing when they claim men have no obligation to care for their children because women can access abortion care.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:54 PM
2

I am following this argument to its logical conclusion. If women exclusively bear obligatory care because they possess unilateral decisionmaking via abortion, then women exclusively possess rights to those children in their care. If men possess no obligations, then they possess no rights, except for those that women consensually delegate to them. This is really simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:51 PM
2

Of course I am including “paper abortions.” I otherwise have no idea what you’re trying to say here.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:44 PM
1

Adoption entails the consent of both the custodial guardian and the adoptive guardian. A person seeking adoptive guardianship cannot unilaterally assert rights over a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:43 PM
2

At their core, proponents of financial abortion advocate for full choice and for children to be the shared choice and responsibility of both parents. They don't advocate for negligent fathers or for children to be abandoned, but rather for both women and men to have a choice, and for both to decide to start a family. They are arguing for men to have no rights to any children they father.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:33 PM
3

I am addressing the logical consequence of an argument that I have seen repeatedly and explicitly in this subreddit: that men bear no responsibilities to their children if women can access abortion care. If men bear no responsibilities, they bear no rights, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:27 PM
4

Thats’s a logical argument
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:18 PM
2

The woman’s rights to the child arise from her obligation to care, which—so this argument goes—men do not possess. So again: where do a man’s rights to a child arise from?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:12 PM
2

On the contrary, I am. Where would a father’s rights to a child, to which he has no obligations of care, arise from?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:10 PM
-1

The argument I am analyzing assigns all responsibility to the woman, because (allegedly) she possesses the final and most decisively critical decision to continue or abort her pregnancy. Thus, she consequently possesses all of the rights to make decisions about that child, including whether to transfer custodial guardianship to another competent and willing adult. Men, consequently, possess no rights to those children, because—as this argument goes—they are uninvolved and disinterested third par…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:08 PM
–

It’s the same subject, which is the subject of my original post.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:03 PM
1

Voting is not a unilateral assertion of rights over another person.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:02 PM
2

I’m just explaining the logical consequence of this argument. If men have no obligations to their children, they have no rights to their children. Can’t have your cake and eat it too, etc etc
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:02 PM
1

Can you stay on topic or nah?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:00 PM
2

And there’s that tangent I just said I didn’t want to get dragged down. If men possess no obligations to care for their children, you should not be upset that they commensurately bear no rights to those children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:53 AM
1

If you can choose whether to care for a child, you are definitionally not obligated to care for that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:49 AM
2

Yes, a custodial guardian can transfer custodial care to another guardian. That is not a unilateral assumption of rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:47 AM
2

I disagree. There are plenty of examples where you willingly choose to take certain obligations and get certain rights associated with those obligations. Employment is an example of that. All of these are two-party processes. You volunteer for the role, and the other party volunteers to accept you. You cannot unilaterally opt into rights over another person. This is absurd. You are basically saying "if you don't think you have an obligation to vote, then you don't have a right to vote". Voting i…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:47 AM
1

If you can consent to an obligation, it’s not an obligation, and thus any rights that accrue from that obligation are moot.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:41 AM
1

The claim to which I am responding is that women possess decisionmaking power via abortion and thus possess all obligatory responsibility to any resulting child. If that’s true, then logically men possess no rights to any children they father.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:40 AM
2

No, a father who decides that he has no obligations before the child is born has no rights to them after they are born. That's the argument. A person who can choose whether to opt into or out of an obligation on a whim does not actually possess that obligation, and thus does not accrue any rights that stem from thar obligation. If before the child is born, you do not waive your rights to children, it is assumed that you are bearing the responsibility, and you cannot do financial abortion after c…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:37 AM
2

Men can also do this, but regardless: this is orthogonal to my post and I’m not interested in being dragged into this tangent.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:31 AM
2

All I have done is explain the logical consequence of the “men bear no obligations to their children” school of thought. If men possess no obligations, they are uninvolved parties and can claim no rights to those children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:30 AM
1

No, they don’t. Custodial parents who simply leave their child alone will be prosecuted for neglect and other crimes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:29 AM
2

Employment is, at least in the capitalist fiction, a mutual agreement between worker and employer. You cannot simply show up to a workplace and declare yourself employed there, and that you have a right to wages from that employer because you unilaterally decided to start providing labor. Likewise, a father who has no obligations to their child is an uninvolved party. You cannot just show up in a child’s life and unilaterally declare that you possess rights to that child because you decided to s…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:28 AM
3

Women can opt out of being pregnant, not of being responsible for any children they create. If men possess no obligations to the children they father, then they possess no rights to those children. Rights over other people accrue from responsibility. Someday, when you are elderly, you might require care. I, a random stranger, cannot simply pop into your life and announce that I am asserting rights to control you because I have decided to opt into your care—I am an uninvolved party and possess no…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:25 AM
1

I explained it in the post above.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:23 AM
1

Because claiming the power to walk away from your child is to define oneself as an uninvolved party.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:22 AM
1

A right to a “financial abortion” implies you never had any rights to any child you might father, at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:22 AM
2

What I’m trying to explain is that this argument—that men can “make their decision early on” and simply opt out of care unilaterally—necessarily implies that no men have rights to their own children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:21 AM
2

This only makes sense if abortion is illegal (and even then you would have to ignore adoption) The argument that people often make in this subreddit, to which I am responding, is that abortion places sole decisionmaking power with women, and thus men have no obligations to their children, because they are not involved decisionmakers. But your premise is faulty, it's not just her rights Just saying “ur wrong” is not an argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:20 AM
3

A parent who opts out of care for their child, such as by giving them up for adoption, does lose rights to their child. The people who claim that men never have any obligations to their children, because women retain the final decision about whether to birth a child, have placed men outside of the set of people who have any rights to those children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:15 AM
1

It does not. It also does not mean that you accrue rights to or over your workplace.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:12 AM
2

You cannot unilaterally opt into someone else’s rights. If men possess no obligations to their children, and can choose whether they provide care or not, then they are an unrelated party and cannot simply opt into rights. If you had sex with a man and later adopted a child, why would that man have the power to opt into rights over that child?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:10 AM
4

If the responsibility accrues solely with a woman, then the rights accrue solely to women as well. You cannot opt into someone else’s rights unilaterally.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:08 AM
3

I am not talking merely about men who desire the power to walk away from their children. I’m observing that a logical implication of their claim is that no men would have any rights to their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:07 AM
5

That makes no sense, unless you similarly believe that men accrue obligations to any resulting children when they have sex with a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:02 AM
3

Seems like you are arguing against a strawman. This subreddit is replete with people who make this argument explicitly, so no. The proponents of financial abortion do not claim that you retain the right to future children after you have committed a financial abortion. Once you make a decision that you are not interested in taking care of future children, you cannot have any authority over them. The point is that a right to “financial abortion” necessarily implies that no men possess any rights t…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:02 AM
5

Are you asking whether this woman consented to the father possessing rights over a resulting child when she had intercourse with him? If so, no, according to the “men lack obligations to their children” argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 11:00 AM
9

“You as his wife should be able to effectively perform the labor for a professional with an education in this specific field and relevant work experience” as if expertise and division of labor don’t exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 09:58 AM
2

Yeah, that was already your position. The logical corollary is that men have no rights to their children. None.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:05 AM
1

If they have no responsibility to those children, they have no rights to make decisions for those children.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 12:00 AM
4

No, you said they have no responsibility to their children. The logical corollary to that is that men have no rights to their children, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 11:24 PM
5

I guess men have no rights to any children they father.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 10:30 PM
3

So dont try to bring a child into this I invited you to consider an analogy, to better help you understand why someone in the weaker position in a power dynamic could not be said to be exploiting the more powerful. I see that didn’t really work.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 07:31 PM
1

It’s ok, I understood you just fine the first time.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 07:18 PM
2

Cool story brah
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 06:20 PM
4

Because they encompass the same dynamics, which I articulated above, which you seem to have not read.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 05:58 PM
5

“False equivalency” isn’t even a critique that makes sense in response to what I wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 05:54 PM
1

No, you didn’t. None of those constitute supremacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 05:53 PM
1

Maybe read it again
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 05:37 PM
6

If we were discussing a homeless and starving child recruited into a sexual relationship by an adult pedophile by the promise of food and shelter, would you still be unsure of how structural power might operate in an age-unbalanced relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 05:07 PM
1

So because you cannot figure out how to improve safe haven laws without sex-bias—because they’re already sex-neutral—you propose taking away rights from men and women at the expense of children who would now die without recourse to this option, and this is somehow supposed to be an improvement.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 04:57 PM
6

Did you read what I wrote or nah
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 04:45 PM
6

No. That’s not what “power” means in the context of the age-gap critique OP is discussing. You’re describing personal preferences about how people associate with each other. Since personal preferences are individually subjective, they cannot serve as the basis for power by some people over others. Since no one owes anyone their association, disassociation cannot serve as the basis for power by some people over others.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 04:44 PM
23

That’s not what “power imbalance” means. Power in a social context is a measure of one’s ability to effect outcomes, not something as trivial as their “sex appeal” or whatever you’re identifying here. An older person is, on average, more likely than a younger person to have more money, to have an established career, to have a professional network, to own assets, and to have knowledge about how systems, processes, and institutions work. The critique of these imbalances is that an older person, be…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:43 PM
24

I agree that your post was worthless, yeah
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:16 PM
2

Cool
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:00 PM
–

Ok
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 11:53 AM
2

Do you really not understand how a “women are to blame” post is intended that way, or are you being obtuse?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 11:36 AM
36

This is a standard “women are terrible and to blame for everything, including my problems and choices” post.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 11:19 AM
–

This is a standard “women are terrible and to blame for everything, including my problems and choices” post.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 11:19 AM
1

No. How would you fix it in a sex-neutral manner?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 11:18 AM
1

So you’re not sure
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 10:01 AM
1

This is how it works in reality. Mothers have sole custody by default What is your sex-neutral proposal to remedy this legally to ensure equal rights?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 09:01 AM
1

Something tells me you don’t talk to a lot of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 08:27 AM
0

So parents could just watch their child die?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:34 AM
1

Ok
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:33 AM
1

So the mother did it without his permission, he went to the courts, and a court ruled in favor of his parental rights?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:23 AM
2

She would be committing a felony, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:11 AM
2

I am not an expert in that area. In the event that either parent is the sole custodial parent, the sole custodial parent can make these choices unilaterally. Otherwise, both parents have to cooperate or else one would be committing a felony. Where’s the sex-based inequality in these laws?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:03 AM
1

Funding a child’s care is an example of providing care for that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:55 PM
2

If a man is the sole custodial parent, he can resort to these options by himself, just as a mother who is sole custodial parent can. Safe haven laws in particular are designed to ensure anonymity of the parent, man or woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:51 PM
2

A man can also do this.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:46 PM
0

What a fucked up thing to say that had nothing to do with my post.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:24 PM
7

Cool. At least you’re consistently psychopathic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:44 PM
1

No you the one was, maybe read your evidence before presenting it, lol. Are you drunk? That is not the situation I am speaking of and texas is a terrible place to go for that, since they don't support abortions at all. The situation was “do all women have legal access to abortion in the US via travel?” and the answer is plainly and factually: no. Also, there are women who live in Texas. This is a unique situation unlike any other. So unique for men to demand more rights than women. Yeah but havi…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:41 PM
2

But if I did, would I have no obligation to help you back out?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:37 PM
1

This is about a woman trying to get one against her partners wishes, without him knowing. Im talking about situations where the man knows and disagrees with having a child, so likely wouldn’t mind her taking a trip. Best to go to states that fully support it, which is not the case with texas. So you were wrong, and not all women in the US enjoy the legal freedom to travel to receive abortion care. Well since we cant control her body then that is the only reason I say that. Women can’t control yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:30 PM
2

So I could push you into a pit and leave you there, with no ability to get out on your own, with no obligation to help you back out, because that obligation would threaten my “bodily autonomy”?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:21 PM
2

Yeah in your head but women defiantly travel to get abortions, look it up. https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4659427-texass-handmaids-tale-gives-everyone-but-women-reproductive-control/ Well I never said she had to make the choice based on the man not being their to support. So she still gets her right and he gets to walk. You’re explicitly describing an extra right for men and then pretending like that’s not what you’re doing. Yes but if the mother decides to have the child, then she needs …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:16 PM
5

Then they could passively let the child starve to death?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:00 PM
3

Naw that is untrue, they might just have to travel. This is a lie. Well, I mean any type of right to not have to do anything for the child, since we don’t get an option on whether to be a father or not. Right—you keep describing a desire for extra rights to compensate you for a woman’s right to bodily autonomy which, because of your different physiologies, can produce different outcomes with regards to conception and pregnancy. You can demand equal rights, not equal outcomes. This is all I mean …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:00 PM
2

Ok but I told you my focus is on u.s. since this is where I reside. So if you are speaking of other places I’m not sure. Over here this is true for sure. Many women lack this right in the US. No I'm speaking of the option to not take care of a kid that the woman had from that man. You said that women can obtain an abortion but that men lack this right. The right encoded in abortion access is bodily autonomy. You possess this right. Neither you nor a woman possesses the legal right to refuse to t…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:41 PM
0

“I see no legal evidence” what is that supposed to mean. What did you think that would accomplish.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:32 PM
-1

So they each possess some obligation of care, and cannot simply sever those obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:30 PM
2

Find a study detailing how many men have done so. I doubt you will find any because its so very rare. So? What would this prove about the fairness of the law? The truth is men have very limited reproductive rights. At any time a mother can walk away mostly judgement free with no obligations but men are judged for it Possessing an equal right does not somehow indemnify you from criticism or judgment from others for your exercise of that right. and considering paternity fraud is over 30% of cases …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:30 PM
6

Women have access to abortion though, even if they have to travel so it is always an option. Many women around the world lack this right. For a man it isn't an option in any way. You have the legal right pretty much anywhere to evict an unwanted person from your body. No that is the only right a man gets, if its even possible, since the law will likely try to prevent that. Oh so you want a special men’s-only right to compensate you for some women achieving equal rights to control their own bodie…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:19 PM
2

cease to support or look after (someone); desert. leave (a place or vehicle) empty or uninhabited, without intending to return. give up completely (a practice or a course of action).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:16 PM
0

You're also speaking to two different moral obligations. One is a moral obligation to save a dying infant, the other is whether or not he has an obligation to take care of a child for 18 years that he may not have even wanted. If you agree that a father has an obligation to save his own child from dying, then you agree a child possesses some right to parental care from its father, and we’re just bargaining over margins.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:02 PM
1

If a woman can unilaterally decide that she is having a kid She can’t. Women do not reproduce via parthenogenesis. And again, is your post not about how kids apparently have an obligation to parental care? Yet you agree the law allows them to be abandoned by their parents, no? So how does that not debunk your claim then? You spent this whole time agreeing with me that the parents can do this. Transferring custody to a competent adult who will provide care is an act of care and not of abandonment…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:01 PM
1

Ok byeee
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:55 PM
1

Women should have rights to make decisions about their bodies, just like men. If a child is born as a consequence of rape, both men and women are legally required to care for that child. There is no unfairness. You see (some) women obtain the same right to bodily autonomy that you have and conclude that it’s an unfairly extra right and demand additional rights for yourself to compensate for this perceived unfairness.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:51 PM
0

... wtf, obviously since she gave birth to the child. This literally applies to every woman in existence. So you understand that this is a function of different people having different bodies and not somehow an unfairness of law, good. If benefiting from a law requires an extremely rare circumstance that's almost never happens, then it's not a fair law that equally benefits both parties. How would you rewrite the law in a sex-neutral manner? No, men want a fair say. You have one. They don't want…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:46 PM
3

Men also have legal access to safe havens where they are available
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:42 PM
6

If they believe its murder that still shouldn’t tie a man in because of her own personal beliefs. Since her beliefs should just affect her and not someone else that views it differently. She can’t access abortion but does not want to care for their child. In what sense is she different from a man who can’t access abortion but does not want to care for the child? Why should she be forced to care for a child to which she did not consent? I don’t believe they should abandon because they are the one…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:40 PM
1

Women who were raped are still required to care for their children as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:35 PM
2

Otherwise, she would be on the birth certificate, meaning she has to approve giving up the child. Because she’s present at the birth. However, a woman who gives birth to a child doesn't have to put the father on the birth certificate. Yes, you cannot compel speech. Again, only would work if the father had full sole custody at birth, which is extremely rare. Rare ≠ legally unbalanced or unfair While on the other hand, all women can do this easily by simply not naming a father which gives them aut…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:32 PM
5

Some women, in some places, can access abortion care to terminate a pregnancy. Once a child actually exists, those rights to bodily autonomy are moot and don’t apply at all, even tangentially, to that child. But some women can’t get abortions at all, because abortion is, to them, murder. Why don’t they possess the same right to abandon their child that you desire for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:08 PM
4

They don't believe just because they conceived the child, that it has the right to live or be carried to term? A person’s choice about the contents and operations about their own body are separate from an actually existing child’s rights to care. Women can choose to not name a father and unilaterally give the child up for adoption. This is something a sole custodial father could do as well. Women can choose to not name the father and abandon the kid at a safe haven. This is legally available to …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:06 PM
7

it makes no sense to force that on anyone that told the woman prior, that they didn't agree with having a kid. In this scenario, the woman didn’t agree with having a kid either. In that case, can they both let the child die, since “it makes no sense to force that on anyone” who declined their obligation in advance?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:53 PM
1

Which rights do you imagine you lack?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:52 PM
1

Men have the same reproductive rights as women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:50 PM
1

Or I’m absolutely correct and you’re upset that women made progress towards attaining actually equal rights and that feels like a threat?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:48 PM
1

So men who do not desire children would at least be obligated to transfer their child into adoptive care?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:47 PM
5

I see. So men would be at least obligated to transfer care of their own child to the state or adoptive care.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:46 PM
1

Well, we’ve so far just been over adoption, which seems like it’s pretty sex-neutral. I’m not aware of any additional legal rights that women possess that men do not.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:45 PM
16

Did you try to learn for yourself, or were you content with your impression from Reddit that a lot of people in their 20s and 30s are being ordered by courts to pay lifetime alimony?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:43 PM
2

So there are legal protections to ensure that random people cannot claim decisionmaking rights for children that aren’t theirs, and this is uniquely unfair for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:39 PM
1

So either a) both parents are custodial parents and have to agree together, or b) either parent is the sole custodial parent and can make the decision unilaterally?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:35 PM
19

Very few divorces involve alimony, and those that do usually only involve temporary alimony to restore a person leaving a marriage in which they eschewed the opportunity to earn income for themselves or acquire personal assets.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:32 PM
-1

Men also have this option, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:29 PM
3

The “men should be free to renounce their obligations to care for their own children if women possess a right to abortion” types.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:21 PM
1

“Women are destroying civilization because of the cock carousel” is an insane thing to say and you can’t even explain the mechanism by which your alleged plot by women to destroy civilization by making choices for themselves might work.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:02 PM
1

You hate women so you concocted a slanderous story about how women are destroying civilization by selfishly pursuing sexual gratification rather than serving as broodmares while they’re still effectively children themselves. There’s so much fucked up Freudian shit going on with your “cock carousel” and your birth rates and your child brides.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 06:51 PM
1

What you’re saying is gibberish driven by irrational hatred of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 06:43 PM
1

You don’t even understand how your own “theory” works. 🎵full of shit 🎶
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 06:36 PM
1

How old do women have to marry before they ruin civilization?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 06:07 PM
2

No, you did not
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:50 PM
1

Thank you for confessing that you are full of shit
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:49 PM
1

When did people get married fresh out of high school and when did it stop? Have birth rates changed anywhere else? If you’re claiming both a) a correlation and b) causation, and you can’t even demonstrate correlation, then you have to admit you’re full of shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:08 PM
2

No, we haven’t. If you’re claiming there was some point in the past at which we had a) birth rates that satisfy you and b) young marriages that cause those birth rates that c) women ruined by demanding liberation from compulsory young marriages, leading to d) societal collapse, you need to identify when you think all this happened. You cannot simply accuse women of destroying civilization on the basis of some alleged sexual selfishness without backing that up.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:04 PM
1

Sure. When did this golden age of marrying young and having children exist?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 04:59 PM
3

It does not surprise me that many people believe or at least repeat these myths, because they’re useful for perpetuating particular modern hierarchies, but it’s not true at all. Women were big game hunters in the Paleolithic: https://www.science.org/content/article/woman-hunter-ancient-andean-remains-challenge-old-ideas-who-speared-big-game Women likely fought as warriors: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/woman-warrior-hungary-sex-gender-roles-archaeology Virtually any adult hu…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 04:58 PM
1

Did you have children young too?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 04:53 PM
10

For most of human history, men had power in relationships because the world demanded it. Life was violent and physical. Survival required strength, protection, and production. Men hunted, fought, built, enforced. Women depended on men not because men were better, but because the environment was brutal. Authority followed necessity. There is no evidence that any of this is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 02:07 PM
0

I’m an anarchist; I don’t support banning anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 02:06 PM
1

People can surely lobby the state to enforce the rights of minor children, yeah
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 02:02 PM
2

So you would have a responsibility to get the child to proper care?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 12:20 PM
3

Ok so you're basically using the puritan argument that you shouldn't have sex if you don't want to make a kid No, I’m making the argument that if you produce a child, that child has rights to your care. why should someone who doesn't want a kid, and the mother decides to have one against his wishes, have to pay If you father a child and don’t want to care for it, and the mother dies in childbirth, should you be free to watch that child die from neglect?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:57 AM
3

If you don’t want to care for a child, don’t produce a child. If you did produce a child, you owe it care.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:49 AM
1

The baby’s rights to one parent’s care do not hinge on the choices of the other parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 10:26 AM
0

Women do not coerce men to fund the children they have fathered.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 08:20 AM
1

I’ll take that as a “no.” You preferred to chase those genital tingles and ride the cock carousel rather than settling down to get married young in order to save civilization. Very selfish!
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:11 AM
1

When was the golden age? Did you get married young to save civilization or did you go chasing genital tingles? These seem like they should be easy to answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 11:41 PM
1

You’re telling me that civilization will collapse if we don’t return to some golden age of child brides and you won’t even tell me when that was? Did you get married young to save civilization or did you also go chasing genital tingles in your youth?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 11:29 PM
2

I’m trying to figure out when your imaginary golden age of marrying young was, so I can better understand how the cock carousel is destroying civilization.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 11:10 PM
6

When was that the norm for marriage?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 10:56 PM
1

I’m trying to figure out how else to interpret your rant
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 10:54 PM
6

Isn’t that your complaint? That women ended child marriage, thus destroying civilization?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 10:40 PM
9

If civilization falls because you can no longer force children to marry adult men, then civilization deserves to fall.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 10:14 PM
7

The tradition of men paying for meals during dates emerged from a context in which men controlled access to income and women were economically powerless.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 06:32 PM
9

Men are not subjugated by women. There is no female supremacy. These are delusions.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 06:17 PM
3

Patriarchy hurts most men in addition to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 06:16 PM
3

Why do you believe you’re owed an indication from other people about whether they’re likely to validate your feelings or not on any given interaction?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 12:29 PM
4

I mean, I get it. I’m somewhere on the autism spectrum too. I have to figure out social norms, cues, and processes like an anthropologist figuring out another culture through observation and experiment. It is really tough to not be able to learn these things intuitively. It can be immensely frustrating that things are ambiguous and that, sometimes, when you think you’ve got something figured out, you then discover that no, the rule isn’t a rule, and you have to start over from scratch. I get all…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 12:26 PM
6

There’s a handful of kinds of posts that get recycled endlessly on this subreddit. Yours is a classic “Different People Have Different Preferences And This Makes Me Mad” post.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 09:32 AM
1

Oh no, criticism
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 07:49 AM
3

No, I was right. Bingo card worked. You tried to gotcha me with that. Who could have guessed that your obviously shitty claim would provoke a predictable condemnation! Yes, it seems to be that women product. This is a psychotic level of hatred. Show me one solution: Stop killing people. 99 men know, 1 does not know. That’s a pretty fucking good success rate. What about that one guy, what's your plan with him, that's what I am asking. You cannot come up with one solution. Maybe arm women to kill …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 08:50 PM
2

I literally knew it, you would try to Gotcha me with that. “I knew my statement was shitty and that you’d call me out on my shit! I knew it!” Yes, men have been made this way by single mothers. Men’s violence is not the product of women. Or if you would explain to me: What are men supposed to do? Not commit murderous violence against other people. Never you can come up with one solution, expect brainwashing children: Lmao the solution is stop killing people. Act as if men have agency and can mak…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 08:43 PM
2

So men are protectors because they protect against men who are predators? Perhaps men contain multitudes and are not and should be just one thing. (Really digging the way you made men’s violence the fault of women somehow because men lack agency of their own, I suppose. Few people seem to hate men as much as you folks do.)
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 08:06 PM
3

Who are men protecting women from?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 06:51 PM
5

Who is saying this to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 06:42 PM
2

You tell me
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 07:30 AM
16

Seething with contempt and misplaced resentment towards women is definitely a way to attract women. Keep it up!
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 12:41 AM
1

I know that’s what you’re saying. It’s still wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:03 PM
1

“Some women would…” then don’t date these women. Don’t date them. Their behavior and attitudes annoy you, so avoid them. Your problem is solved. People are different from each other. You will not like or enjoy all of them. Women are people, so you will not like or enjoy all of them. So if you pursue one and discover that she annoys you, stop dating her. That’s it! Magic!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 10:55 PM
1

https://preview.redd.it/95daoqaf9n7g1.jpeg?width=915&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c98eebf9437df85aec0fc0328710e246f82979bb
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 10:41 PM
1

Oh well
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 10:28 PM
2

What
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 09:07 PM
6

Generally, what they’re looking for is a woman-shaped child who lacks the agency an actual adult woman might possess.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 09:00 PM
2

Half (51%) of all girls 13 to 18 received unwanted sexual comments directed at them in public, with 33% aged 13 and 14 Three in ten (29%) girls and young women revealed they first experienced sexual harassment when they were just 11 to 13 years old https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/about-us/press-releases/80-of-girls-dont-feel-safe-outside-alone-with-over-half-receiving-unwanted-sexual-comments-and-attention-reveals-girlguiding-research/ It took like half a second to find a source to corroborate wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 08:57 PM
2

The thing that makes an older man’s romantic or sexual pursuit of a person just out of childhood condemnable isn’t the unattractiveness of an older man. It’s that he has decided to eschew a partner who is his peer, with commensurate agency, and chosen to instead pursue a person just out of childhood.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 06:48 PM
1

What you mistake for a lack of capacity is actually contempt and disinterest
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 05:16 PM
1

You each have the same choice to engage in sexual intercourse. You each have the same choice to evict an unwanted person from your body. You each have the same choices. You do not have more rights than a person born sterile. A woman does not have more rights than you because she is born with ovaries and a womb. Different people possess different capacities and capabilities, and make different choices about the exercise of their rights that produce different outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:28 PM
1

Whose shoe are you suggesting fits here?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:12 PM
1

You have all the same choices because you have all the same rights. You’re demanding equality of outcomes, to which no one has a legitimate claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:10 PM
1

You already do have all the same choices as a woman who has access to legal abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:04 PM
1

Shouldn't have to, if I didn't agree with the decision. Rights don’t care about your feelings. Naw I'm good, they are made in the womb, don't need a book to know that. Ok
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:36 PM
–

It’s amazing how little effort you need these days to shit out endless, worthless LLM slop.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:34 PM
1

Yes but I'm saying the way it should work is the man gets the choice on whether to be a father or not. If he disagrees, then the parental care needs to be on the woman, since she should've factored that in. Then you can pay child support to the custodial parent. They are made by a woman in the woman's womb. In which she agreed to. The man didn't. I already told you beyond the bedroom a decision needs to be made. Are you under the impression that women produce children through parthenogenesis? No…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:22 PM
1

Yes she has the right to have the child, since it is her body. The right to take care of the child should be something that's agreed upon by both parents. My rights do not require your agreement. The child’s rights to parental care do not require the parents’ agreement. That’s not how rights work. Well the man disagreeing should put this responsibility on the woman, since she should factor this in on whether to have a kid or not. If all you cared about was a utilitarian maximization of the child…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:28 PM
–

On the contrary, not at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 08:45 PM
–

Your analogy fails because pregnancy is requiring two parties to consent This does not affect the validity of the analogy. Anyone who acts to cause a person to enter into a condition of helplessness owes an obligation of care to that person. With regards to a traffic collision, that is a sole driver; with regards to the creation of a child, that is two parents. additionally sex does not always lead to impregnation. And drunk driving does not always result in a collision, and collisions do not al…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 08:44 PM
2

You just described women desiring an adult and men desiring a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 08:27 PM
4

Men most of the times play a supporting role rather than a significant role in child rearing at the initial stage of the child's life. If men want to play more than a supporting role, they should do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 08:16 PM
1

Ok
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 08:12 PM
1

Go for it mate. Jerk yourself off real good tonight over this feeling of victory.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:59 PM
1

Believe whatever you want to believe, I don’t care
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:57 PM
–

Yea a woman might innocently and accidentally kill her child. No I do not think that she should be punished for doing so. Distinguishing between a natural and spontaneous stillbirth, an unintentional accident involving listeria, and a deliberate abortion requires an intrusive and coercive apparatus of surveillance of just women before you even get to the point of coercively punishing them for making choices about their own bodies. I’m not responding to most of your points because your advocacy f…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:43 PM
2

No, you just don't want to lose any of the privileges women have always enjoyed when the world becomes more equal. Can you not hear yourself? They have never always enjoyed these rights. They have never all enjoyed these rights. Even as the world becomes more equal. And as they gain additional rights to make decisions about their own bodies, you experience this as a personal loss of freedom. You are beclowning yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:12 PM
2

They don’t, just as you do not possess more rights than a person born sterile does. You have experienced slight and uneven progress towards equal rights by women as a loss of your own rights, when all you’ve potentially lost is an unfair and relative structural advantage. Faced with the threat of equality, you’ve decided you’re owned additional rights in compensation for your perceived loss.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:00 PM
2

Nothing is stopping you from refraining from participating in this conversation Good point
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:58 PM
–

Prior to birth your child exists and it is an independent human being. Therefore he or she has an independent existence. If this were true, a mother could evict the fetus from her body and the fetus would be fine and you would have no objection. I need you to really think through these forced-brother talking points to evaluate what an independent existence would mean for an organism that cannot survive outside of its mother’s body for, in most cases, any time at all. The reason why the woman "lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:58 PM
1

Do you lack a right to abort a pregnancy in your body? No. Do you lack a right to make medical decisions about your body? No. Do you lack a right to evict unwanted persons from your body? No. Of course I have those rights, Then you have no cause for complain about having fewer rights. I was just showing you how silly it sounds to take one part of the equation and say "equal rights lol". Yeah, the contract would be to MAKE men equal, of course a similar contract won't be made for women, they don'…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:51 PM
1

You know, I already told you that I had lost interest in engaging with you, and that has not changed.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:13 PM
1

Yeah a man shouldn’t have to do that, just like I already said a woman shouldn’t. All I said is that a man should be able to get a choice after sex. You should have the same right to make choices about your own body after sex that a woman has. Which is for the best anyway, since a man becoming a father should be a willing process, not one forced upon him. Best for the child and best for the mother. So, everyone wins by having childing by the man that is perfectly fine with it. If the argument is…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:12 PM
–

I already stated the reasons that this is true, the baby unique dna, is alive, and is human. It is an independent living being. Prior to birth, a fetus has no independent existence. If it did have an independent existence, the question of abortion would be moot, as the fetus could vacate the mother’s body without harm. Because it can’t, it lacks an independent existence until birth. During that period of dependency, the mother does not lose the right to make choices about her own body, regardles…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 05:53 PM
2

Women can abort and men can not. “Equal rights" lol Do you lack a right to abort a pregnancy in your body? No. Do you lack a right to make medical decisions about your body? No. Do you lack a right to evict unwanted persons from your body? No. You want a right to equal outcomes, not equal rights. Anywhere women cannot get an abortion men should not be able to get a paper abortion. Cool. Should men in those places also lose the right to evict unwanted persons from their bodies, to ensure equal ri…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 05:46 PM
1

The transfer of guardianship does not constitute a severance of the child’s rights to care.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 05:29 PM
1

Since you know that I have consistently asserted that children possess positive rights to care from their parents, you already know the answer, and thus are asking in bad faith.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 05:19 PM
–

I think what you fail to understand is that a fetus is a helpless human being. The fetus has no independent existence from its mother’s body. A mother does not lose autonomous control over her own body as a result of fetal dependence and you certainly accrue no right to control her body. “Bodily autonomy” doesn’t justify slaughtering another human. No, it justifies making choices about one’s own body. A financial obligation imposes a labor requirement on someone. The vast majority of people have…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 05:16 PM
1

Yes men can contract and women cannot. “Equal rights” lol Women can abort and men can not. In much of the world, women cannot access abortion care. Where they can, they enjoy an equal right to men to bodily autonomy—to evict any unwanted persons from their bodies. That this can result in the termination of a pregnancy for some people who enjoy this equal right and not others is a case of unequal outcomes stemming from equal rights, not unequal rights. The method isn't the issue, the right is. Wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 04:35 PM
–

The argument is that if women have the right to opt out of being a parent then men should as well. Men and women should have the same rights to bodily autonomy, though most women around the world lack equal rights to men in this regard. The fact that, where abortion is legal, women can exercise an equal right to bodily autonomy and end a pregnancy is a case of unequal outcomes stemming from equal rights. Women can kill their child and that is 100 percent their choice. Both men and women should p…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 04:24 PM
1

I lost interest in engaging you after that last comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 04:17 PM
3

So men can contract but women cannot, I gotcha. Are there any other contractual arrangements you’re aware of in which Person A can contractually agree with Person B to sever the rights of Person C without Person C’s involvement?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 04:12 PM
–

So you believe that both parents should be able to withhold their consent to care and watch their child die of starvation without violating and legal or moral principle?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:49 PM
2

My position is “don’t be a fucking fascist”
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:47 PM
1

From the person who gave birth to them, most certainly. Ah, there we go. Ok.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:47 PM
–

And you believe that right to care can be severed by contract?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:46 PM
3

Cool story brah I do not fucking care
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:19 PM
1

Do you believe that children have any rights to parental care?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:19 PM
–

Do children possess any rights to parental care?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:17 PM
–

Ah, the “My fingers were crossed behind my back so I’m not responsible for the consequences of my actions” approach
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:30 PM
1

Do you believe that a doctor who implants an embryo into a woman accrues responsibilities to the child that results from that implantation?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:16 PM
2

If your response to not getting a date is to embrace fascism, you were probably already a fascist, which might have something to do with you not getting a date.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:13 PM
3

That’s not how the ad hominem fallacy works. If I said “your argument is incorrect because of your identity,” I would be committing the ad hominem fallacy. Simply explaining to you that your assertion is incorrect is not a fallacy at all, much less the ad hominem fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:11 PM
1

Im not going to go through all of this bullshit again. But women should not have unilateral control over a fetus/child without the say of the father. Ever. Period. Idc what you think or say. It’s not fair. Women should have unilateral control over their own bodies, just like any other person. Period. You do not warrant a right to control other people’s bodies, any more than they warrant rights to control yours. Parents paying child support who are concerned about how funds are spent will need to…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:04 PM
2

So give up rather than embrace fucking fascism.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:51 PM
1

Nope! That’s not how it works.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:48 PM
1

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:37 PM
2

No, spell it out. Whose body do you analogize to a mechanical commodity?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:24 PM
1

Nope!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:23 PM
1

It's not really an option as love, for men at least, is a basic need. “I love these women who are so cruel and terrible and this demand that these women change their behavior to accommodate me.” If, over night, women had more empathy and kindness I reject your incredibly whiny premise you don't think these would be ameliorated even slightly? Come on. No. Come on. The problems of alienation and immiseration driven by capitalism affect everyone subject to it. This includes women. You live in a wor…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:23 PM
1

Nope!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:10 PM
1

“If you put gas in my car, and I intentionally crash into someone, are you ethically responsible for caring for the victim?” Absent any other context, probably not. Super curious about whose body gets to be the car in this analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:07 PM
1

How are women not free to choose to behave with more empathy? Do you also think that anyone who behaves unethically under capitalism is completely blameless and should never be expected to behave in a nicer way? If women are so cruel and terrible, you should steer clear of them. However, the question of whether women are, in general, cruel and uncaring has nothing to do with my comment. I should say they 'think like darwinian hyper-capitalists'. You will often see dating/romance talked about lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:04 PM
1

Then why did you belabor it for so long
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:01 PM
1

Ok chief. Whatever you say.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:59 PM
1

I didn't understand it... the capitalist elites didn't let me understand it. The problems OP described, which I quoted above, are distinctly and universally problems of capitalism. Economic decline and immiseration? Social atomization and alienation? Comrade, we’ve known about these problems and their cause for more than a century. The problems men face are a result of women freely choosing to cruelly treat them like objects and disregard men who don't live up to an exact demand. Worse, there's …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:58 PM
1

I’m sorry that you’re struggling with this so hard. Any person who causes another person to exist in a state of helplessness owes care to that helpless person. This includes every parent of a child, such as the mother and the father.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:54 PM
–

Popy cock
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:50 PM
–

I’m sorry you can’t follow my simple and straightforward scenario.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:49 PM
1

I did not say otherwise. I get the sense that you did not understand anything I wrote. Sad!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:49 PM
–

The scenario is: sex (your decision to drive drunk) birth (collision). care for the person who exists in a state of helplessness because of 1 followed by 2 In neither case do the rights of person at step 3 change or go away because you can imagine a counterfactual scenario in which steps 1 and 2 didn’t happen. A crazed killer could have murdered the mother of your child while she was pregnant, thus ending the pregnancy and foreclosing on the existence of your child, but didn’t. You are not relie…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:34 PM
1

Are there not people in this subreddit, where I posted my comment, who define “financial abortion” as the right to abandon actually-born children?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:20 PM
1

Until you crash your car into them while intoxicated, crippling them and creating for them a positive right for your care. This is equally true for men and women drivers who cause this crash, just as it is equally true that men and women owe parental support to any children they cause to exist in a helpless state. In neither case does a counterfactual scenario in which that helpless person’s mother could have aborted her pregnancy, but didn’t, affect those obligations to the person you caused to…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:19 PM
–

This is disingenuous and you know it. It is not. If you believe that those laws should be rewritten in a sex-neutral manner that guarantees equal outcomes by sex, please tell me how you would do that. A man can be forced into fatherhood against his will. Not through consensual sex, he can’t. A woman cannot be forced into motherhood against her will. This is untrue in much of the world, including in parts of the US. A woman can rape a man or boy and he will be forced to pay child support. This is…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:17 PM
1

So I was not distorting the arguments of the people I was addressing with my post. Thanks for clearing that up!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:10 PM
2

So it’s your understanding that mothers remain responsible for their adult children in a manner that overrides any action that another person could take against them, in perpetuity?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:05 PM
–

Bullshit men have no option to say well I don't wanna take care off it so set it up for adoption or take care of it your self so. Men and women can decide together to place a child for adoption when they share custody. Either parent can decide alone to place a child for adoption when they are the sole custodial parent. While women can kill Killing children is murder, which is a crime pretty much everywhere. and abandoning it without any guilt. Abandoning children to die is similarly a crime pret…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:04 PM
3

I don’t know if you understand how car collisions work, but if you are an adult and your victim is an adult, your victim’s mother is not in any legal or moral sense responsible for your reckless and illegal driving.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:56 AM
1

I’m sorry you weren’t able to successfully debate my objectively correct point.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:53 AM
1

In what sense is your crash victim’s mother responsible for your reckless and illegal driving?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:52 AM
1

How am I distorting by accurately conveying the actual demands of actual people with whom I am debating in this actual subreddit?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:51 AM
2

The mother of a child is also responsible for the care of that child. The mother of your crash victim would not be responsible for the care of her adult child you crippled and caused to require your care.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:47 AM
1

Right—so you want men to have additional (and thus unequal) rights to compensate for what you believe to be unfairly unequal outcomes. That is, you don’t desire equality of opportunities, but rather equality of outcomes. It’s sort of like being mad that some people are stronger and more athletic than you and demanding a legal right to play for the NFL.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:46 AM
–

In the scenario I present, the victim of your accident is analogous to a child: in both cases, you caused the existence of a person in a helpless state who then owns a positive right to your care. In the scenario I present, your child’s mother is analogous to your victim’s mother. In both cases, this mother could have hypothetically, but did not, aborted her pregnancy. If that had happened, neither your victim nor your child would exist. In neither case does this counterfactual scenario relieve …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:44 AM
–

These people mostly seem to experience progress towards equal rights through the lens of losing relative status, and thus demand compensation with additional rights for women achieving equal rights. That is, equality for them feels oppressive because they have internalized their prior unequal advantage as the self-evident status quo.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:41 AM
–

Men have the same legal access to safe havens where they are available.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:40 AM
1

op pushes a false narrative of men want to legally abandon already born children... This is an explicit demand made by actual people in this actual subreddit that you can actually read
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:39 AM
–

I meant, you are mistaken in your interpretation of the scenario.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:38 AM
–

This is just a bunch of non sequiturs
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 11:34 AM
1

Men dont have access to birth control. Only condoms. I like how you immediately contradict yourself and then still get it wrong. Men have access to birth control, including condoms and other options, including surgical interventions like vasectomies. If a women wants to abort, men dont have a say. Correct, men should not have a right to make decisions for another person’s body. Not controlling another person’s body ≠ not having access to birth control. If a women doesnt want to abort, men dont h…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:57 AM
–

No. I am arguing that men deserve the same rights. That right being the right to abandon their responsibility of parental care. Men and women have the same rights to access safe havens and adoption where they are available. What additional legal right should men have? We've already established that through abortion, and other mechanisms, that children really do not have a right to parental care. So invoking it when it's convenient to argue for women's benefits, is pretty meaningless to me. A chi…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:41 AM
–

Where abortion is legal, men and women have an equal right to evict an unwanted person from their own body. You similarly have the equal right to evict the erect penis of another person from your anus, if you choose. The parallel loss of bodily autonomy would include your loss of your right to evict an unwanted penis from your anus, or perhaps mouth.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:28 AM
–

Ah, so you want additional rights for men to compensate men for differential outcomes of equal rights. Which is to say, your complaint is about unequal outcomes rather than unequal rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:26 AM
1

What additional reproductive rights do women possess that men do not?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:25 AM
1

Naw shouldn't have to, the one who agreed to have the child should be responsible aka the woman. Because she had final choice so the obligation should be on her. We might equally say that you could have received a vasectomy prior to intercourse, and that your decision to decline an invasive medical procedure constitutes a choice that creates an “obligation,” but that would of course be equally silly. Again, the child’s rights to parental care are positive rights possessed by the child. They are …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:25 AM
–

You dont automatically consent to a child when you have sex. Idk why people keep saying this dumb shit. Once a child exists because of actions you performed, the question of consent is superseded by the child’s positive rights to parental care. This isnt about a child's right. This is about what rights women have and what rights men have when it comes to their reproduction. Men and women each should have equal rights to evict unwanted persons from their bodies, but many women currently lack that…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:14 AM
–

It's not unequal legal obstacles. In order to use Safe Haven laws you need to be in physical possession of the child within a relatively short period of time after birth -- in most states. How is that going to happen? He's not the one giving birth. That means that a woman would somehow have to turn over full legal custody of the child to the father within a few days of childbirth. And, then he would have to also choose to surrender the child. So you want additional legal rights for men to compen…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:12 AM
1

Sure
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:00 AM
–

If women are not responsible for mens bodily functions why should men be responsible for womens bodily functions? Men are not responsible for women’s bodily functions. Parents of both sexes are responsible for any children they cause to exist in a helpless state. Women can kill a baby Women can evict unwanted persons from their body (where abortion is legal), just as you can. Killing a person would be murder, which is a crime pretty much everywhere. or have a baby and not say anything to the men…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:00 AM
1

I’m confused as to how your comment was in any sense an intelligible reply to mine
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:56 AM
1

What
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:51 AM
–

I’m trying to understand where you believe a child’s rights to parental care terminate. In your scenario, the man is “baby trapped,” consenting to a sex act that could create a human but not to the creation of a human. In this case, I presume you believe the man thus has no obligations to care for his resulting child and could—correct me if I’m wrong!—abandon the child. In my scenario, both mother and father are “baby trapped,” consenting to a sex act that could create a human but not the creati…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:50 AM
1

Naw it is because he didn’t get a choice after sex, this should be an option. Being a father is a big deal, so if the kid actually matters like you say then why want the kid to be with someone who doesn’t want them. A child owns a right to parental care. If a parent refuses to provide care personally, the parent has the option of financing that care impersonally. Sounds insane when you actually think about it. I agree that demanding additional rights as compensation for women achieving equal rig…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:47 AM
–

Yes, but in pregnancy, the man's action (having sex with the woman) predates the existence of the helpless child, while in your analogy, the man's action (crashing the car) postdates the existence of the helpless child. In both cases, the man’s actions predate and cause the existence of a person in a helpless condition who requires care to survive.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:30 AM
–

The fact is women are allowed to abort(which is agree with) along with abandoning the child(which i also agree with), but men are not. Men possess equal or, in many places, greater rights than women to evict unwanted persons from their body. Men and women possess equal legal rights to access safe haven and adoption transfers-of-care, where they exist. What additional rights do you believe women possess that men do not? It’s pro choice for women and pro life bootstraps for men that says men have …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:26 AM
–

You are mistaken.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:23 AM
–

What unequal legal obstacles exist that inhibit men from making use of these options?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:21 AM
–

Should parents who use faulty birth control and who become parents unintentionally have the legal and moral right to abandon their resulting child to die of starvation?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:19 AM
–

Men who provide care for their children are providing care for their children, not for the mother of that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:17 AM
–

The analogy doesn't work because in real life the man's choice happens before the woman's choice and the final outcome is fully contingent on what the woman chooses to do after the man. In both the car accident scenario and the birth of an actual child, the mother’s choice to abort her pregnancy or not predates the existence of a person who enters into a helpless state as a result of your actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:12 AM
–

No the right option is allowing a man to go free, that doesnt agree. The man is free. Fulfilling positive obligations owned by another person that the man created through his actions is not a violation of his liberty. Yes because she wants to force it, like I said. The way you spoke of it earlier was as something that government is just forcing. When the woman is the one that makes this happen. If you witness a murder and report that murder to the police, who then arrest the perpetrator, you are…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:09 AM
–

Those are interesting additional questions.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 09:02 AM
–

Oh ok well that means she shouldn't be looking to put him on child support then. An alternative is simply providing care for your child, perhaps by assuming custodial responsibilities. Remember that isn't automatic, she is having to go to them to enforce that. If she doesnt they wont bother with the situation if she refuses to go after him. Person A making the state aware of a crime being committed by Person B against Person C does not somehow make Person A responsible for state enforcement agai…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 08:19 AM
–

The child’s rights don’t hinge on your “consent” any more than an accident victim’s rights hinge on your “consent.” You causally contributed to the existence of another person with a positive claim on your care.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 08:09 AM
–

she shouldn't also be able to force him to pay for her decision on top of that. She doesn’t. You’re mistaking the state’s enforcement of the child’s rights for an additional right belonging to the mother. It does not belong to the mother. It belongs to the child. She made her choice but it should remain hers alone. Correct: a person’s choices about their own body should remain exclusively theirs. Well yes because the woman made the decision to have the child, even if he didn't agree. The existen…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:53 AM
–

Your obligations to any children you cause to exist do not change as a result of counterfactual scenarios in which someone could have (but factually didn’t) intervene to prevent their existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:49 AM
–

Yes, I said that both should, so she can have the child if she wants. However, the man should get a choice in regards to having to pay or be a father at all. This is all I’m saying. A man’s obligation to care for a child he caused to exist is not superseded by someone else’s right to bodily autonomy, any more than a man could weasel out of caring for an accident victim he crippled by claiming that the victim’s mother could have aborted her pregnancy. BTW they didn’t cause anything, if they didn’…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:45 AM
1

Having spent any time on this subreddit, I can confidently inform you: yes
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:43 AM
1

Consent to sex does not eliminate a person’s right to evict another unwanted person from their body. For example, if you consented to gay sex, you should not lose the right to evict your lover’s penis from your anus, in the event that you change your mind. This is also true for women who become pregnant. Consenting to a sex act does not eliminate her right to bodily autonomy. The rights of a child whom you caused to exist do not depend on your separate and unrelated right to bodily autonomy. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:42 AM
–

You don’t have to fund what goes on in a woman’s body.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:37 AM
–

Men and women should both have an equal say over their own bodies. Men and women each have equal responsibility to provide parental care for any children they caused to come into existence in a helpless state. Your rights and obligations are equal (where abortion is legal and accessible).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:37 AM
–

Men and women have equal recourse to safe haven laws where they exist, so no.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:35 AM
1

Alienation, social atomization, the erosion of third places, the commodification of all social interactions, the dismantlement of non-commercialized social networks, the expansionary creep of work into non-work time, precarity…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:34 AM
1

Women have famously never been victimized by reactionary politics and will surely this time get a taste of their own medicine!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:31 AM
–

Well it’s simple if women get to kill baby's men should be allowed to abandon them. Women should have equal rights to men to bodily autonomy. Parents bear equal obligations to provide parental care for any children they caused to exist. Or women should not be allowed to kill them. So either men should gain the additional, superseding right to sever their child’s right to parental care, or women should lose the equal right to bodily autonomy, in order for you to feel “fair”? In your understanding…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:30 AM
4

“Nobody wants to have sex with me! So I’ll adopt a loathesome reactionary politics that’s universally coded as repulsive and murderously villainous, and that is well-understood as hostile to the rights and safety of the people I desire as romantic partners. That will surely attract many people to wish to have sex with me!” Maybe instead you could check out whether anyone was already writing about things like alienation in a capitalist hellscape more than a century ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:24 AM
-3

both analogies fail because the victim already exists which is contrary to a fundamental part of the pro-choice side that life doesn't start at conception. The victim is brought into being in a state of helplessness, just as a child is born into a state of helplessness. So in the context of your pit analogy abortion would be for the woman to get a gun and shoot the kid because she doesn't want to help him...which seems even less reasonable than the guy just refusing to help. This makes zero sens…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:47 AM
3

If I prevent you from seeking and receiving medical aid, unto your death, you don’t think I have violated your autonomy? Not even a tiny bit?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:42 AM
1

Having sex is not consenting to parenthood. If you acted in such a way that a child now exists because of your actions, that child owns rights to your parental care. And if you're okay with the mother aborting the kid for any reason she likes, the sudden concern for its wellbeing rings a tad hollow. I’m ok with any person exercising autonomous rights over their own body in any way they desire. It is illegal to impregnate a woman against her will In most places and to compel her to have (or not h…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:31 AM
1

In what example?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:01 AM
7

Wow, you really changed my mind
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:00 AM
6

I don’t even think we need to point to an unequal burden during pregnancy to dismiss this argument. Men and women should enjoy equal rights to bodily autonomy, which includes the right to evict any unwanted person from their body. That right is of course not equally available—many women around the world, including in the US, are coercively prevented from exercising bodily autonomy in this regard, and have decidedly fewer rights in this critical area of autonomy. But even if those rights were per…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:00 AM
3

Boo hoo
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 11:38 PM
1

The child only exists because the mother chose not to have an abortion, chose not to legally abandon the baby and chose not to give it up for adoption. Why should he be responsible for the results of her choices? Because he acted to create a person in a helpless condition and thus that person possesses a positive claim on his care. That you can imagine a counterfactual scenario in which the child doesn’t exist doesn’t change the fact that the child exists and thus possess positive claims on the …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 11:38 PM
9

You’re mistaking the victim for the victim’s mother. The victim has no power to “make the accident disappear,” any more than the child had the power to “make the pregnancy disappear.” The right to care is owned by the person you caused to exist in a helpless state, not by that person’s mother. That right to care is not affected by your ability to imagine a hypothetical scenario in which that person never existed.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 11:30 PM
2

Say psych. Please tell me this is a joke.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 11:20 PM
1

Asphyxiating to death is the natural outcome of choking on food you chose to eat; therefore, your autonomy is not violated if I coercively prevent you from receiving immediate aid from someone else. Do you not hear yourself? Do you genuinely think this was a good, sound argument?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 11:04 PM
20

Imagine thinking something like this: A growing share of men—especially younger men—are: • Persistently excluded from the dating and mating market • Falling behind economically relative to prior generations • Socially isolated and culturally delegitimized • Informed, implicitly or explicitly, that their struggles are either imagined or morally suspect And concluding that the solution is to support the reactionary politics of the capitalist elites who caused these problems for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 11:00 PM
1

A child he did not consent to having. A child who exists because of his actions and who thus owns equal rights to his parental care. Men’s responsibility isn’t to carry the child, it’s to provide. At the very least “18 years of child support” should be reduced to 9 months. Women have the same obligation. You’re asking for a man to have the additional right to sever his obligation to person A because person B possesses equal rights to bodily autonomy as the man. That’s not how rights and obligati…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:58 PM
2

Byeeee
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:32 PM
3

Ah, so you’re racist and sexist, got it. “Why am I so lonely? I know, it must be feminism’s fault!”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:26 PM
2

she can legally get the law to force him to provide. You mean, the state will enforce his obligation to his child, which is owned by the child and not by the mother? How is that not a violation of bodily autonomy? As an anarchist, I don’t believe laws should exist at all. But insofar as they do, in this particular case, the law (sometimes) grants men and women equal rights to evict unwanted persons from their own bodies and also guarantees a child’s rights to parental care from both parents. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:26 PM
2

Do the laws specify preferential rights for women? Ensuring care for a child in the absence of one’s own a capacity to care for that child is caring for that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:19 PM
5

There are more than 8 billion people in the world. No “civilization” is going to disappear any time soon. Declining birth rates are not linked to women laboring or changes in cultural attitudes towards the role of women in society. Even impoverished societies with “traditional” gender roles are experiencing declining birth rates. Whatever your bogeyman is, it’s not the fault of women or feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:18 PM
6

Setting aside the fact that you are not owed any particular global birth rate, you are also incorrect about the facts: https://www.forbes.com/sites/avivahwittenbergcox/2025/06/16/no-more-babies-nobel-laureates-take-on-fertility-decline/
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:11 PM
3

“the fact that they’re constantly bullied by both genders.” I wonder if any feminists ever wrote about the corrosive effects of patriarchal heteronormativity on both men and women who are subject to its constraints and demands.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:06 PM
20

<image> This but for incels
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 10:02 PM
9

If women being able to take on wage employment undercuts your ability to earn wages, by “flooding the market,” wait until you find out how many men have jobs!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:54 PM
18

“1 off them is a high ranked Employee in the Company off his Father” This was even funnier a response than I could have expected. I hope you’re robbing them, then.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:53 PM
2

Equal decisions to have the child were not made When you act in such a way that you cause to exist a child who is born helpless, that child owns obligatory rights to parental care from you. so responsibility for the child should not be split equally. The rights owned by the child are not somehow mitigated or ameliorated by the existence of unrelated and equal rights to bodily autonomy. No amount of mental gymnastics will justify not having an equal choices regarding a decision You have, or at le…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:50 PM
2

A woman does not force a man to do anything by obtaining or refraining from any medical care related to her own body, any more than any man forces a woman to do anything by obtaining or refraining from any medical care related to his own body.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:45 PM
2

Should men lose the right to vote until all women are guaranteed legal rights to abortion?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:44 PM
16

I do not believe you know any actually rich people, at all, of any kind. I do wonder if you may have been conned by people whose literal job it is to create the illusion that they are wealthy and sell that illusion online.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:40 PM
6

“I don’t think women should be enslaved, but…” lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:32 PM
4

Then leave them alone, if you dislike them so much.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:31 PM
1

Men don't have equal say on the choice to carry the child to term. You should each have absolutely equal rights to make choices about your own respective bodies, which many women currently lack. I hope you’re working to establish abortion rights everywhere they are absent so women everywhere can finally have equal rights to bodily autonomy. But then they shouldn't be equally responsible for the result of a decision the woman unilaterally made. That's not equal at all. Her body, her choice, her r…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:29 PM
4

Women are not net taxpayers, men are. Is this based on that one New Zealand paper that found that women are net recipients of welfare payments during the early years of their working lives when they’re more likely to be pregnant and/or raising young children, and net payers otherwise? Some studies I read years ago had teachers grade papers without names and with names and without any identifying information the grades were similar between boys and girls but with identifying information the boys …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:25 PM
1

There shouldn't be equal rights without equal responsibilities Good news, there aren’t equal rights without equal responsibilities. But, perhaps just as importantly, these are not commodities to be traded for each other. Everyone should have the right to bodily autonomy; everyone should have the right to care from people who caused them to enter into a state of helplessness. When will be forced to use their body to labor for close to 2 decades based on a one time decision Because you owe care to…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:18 PM
2

Neither a man nor a woman should have any say over the other’s body. Both owe equal obligations to any child that comes into existence as a result of their actions. What’s so hard to understand? What additional rights would you like assigned to men?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 09:10 PM
1

In what ways have you been fucked over by feminism?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:58 PM
12

The obligation for parental support is owned by the child who comes into existence in a helpless state because of the actions of the parents involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:56 PM
4

Men and women (except in those places where abortion is criminalized) have and should have the equal legal right to choose whether another person is inside their bodies. Men and women should and do have equal obligations to any children they cause to exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:55 PM
5

Neither men nor women have the moral or legal right to opt out of the responsibility to care for children they cause to come into being.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:27 PM
7

Parents bear both legal and moral obligations to care for any children they cause to come into being. Men and women bear these obligations equally.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:24 PM
2

Reproductive responsibility: Bodily autonomy is defended as a right for women, while parallel autonomy for mensuch as legal parental opt-out is often rejected is difficult to acquire, revealing discomfort with symmetrical accountability. In the US, at least, men and women have legal equality with regards to reproductive responsibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 08:22 PM
-1

Do you have any male friends? If one of your male friends revealed that his interest in you was not Platonic, and that he desired a romantic relationship with you rather than friendship, would you make no value judgment about his revelation?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 03:23 PM
–

But none of these things affect your chances to date. You’re describing things that might affect the preferences of people you might seek to date. Should women be forced to date broke losers to make things equal? Or perhaps you could adopt the higher standards to match those of the women you seek to date? That would make things equal, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 01:48 PM
–

lol ok
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 01:45 PM
–

So nothing affects your chance to date except the preferences of the people you seek to date?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 01:43 PM
–

In what sense are your chances to date unequal?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 01:26 PM
–

Gross
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 12:45 PM
–

What kind of “equality” are you seeking here, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 12:45 PM
–

Sounds like a great reason to support feminists in trying to dismantle the patriarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 12:44 PM
–

Those reason should still have validity People are and should be free to associate or disassociate from anyone the please for any reason, and do not and should not require your approval.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 12:43 PM
–

If women are as terrible as you claim, then why should men complain about not being able to secure relationships with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 12:39 PM
3

What historical evidence led you to the conclusion that your claim was true for “most of human history”?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/25 10:33 AM
1

The odds that you yourself have committed rape keep going up
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 10:26 PM
2

No one is stopping you from saying words like “clitoris.” You’re mistaking “the disapproval of others” for a dynamic of privilege. No one owes you their approval. You are not disadvantaged as a result of experiencing social consequences of your actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 07:50 PM
3

It’s a false dichotomy. They are not like for like. Some people die during pregnancy or childbirth. Some experience life-threatening complications and permanent injuries. Dismissing it as a “temporary inconvenience” because you feel the need to downplay women’s suffering in order to feel more righteously indignant about men’s suffering is so intensely pathetic. Two things can be bad at the same time. Mothers can experience immense hardship, permanent changes to their bodies, and even illness and…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 07:48 PM
26

So “no one but yourself,” got it. You’re doing the “kid with a boot on his face but he’s also holding the boot” meme but in real life.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 11:24 AM
25

Their lives. An obsessive need to find a comparison between “men’s” problems and “women’s” problems has led you to a foolish dead-end. Instead of taking action in your life to actually help people—instead of, say, campaigning for bodily autonomy for all people for all reasons—you’re sitting here whining about pregnancy being easier than circumcision. It’s an absurd, ridiculous position.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 11:23 AM
28

When you say “pregnancy is over in nine months” as if to minimize the effects pregnancy has on a mother’s body, and the risks involved, you are letting everyone know that you know nothing about pregnancy or childbirth.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 11:09 AM
27

Who is stopping you from saying “clitoris”?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/25 11:07 AM
13

You posted a few weeks ago that you refuse sex without a full STD panel. Either this post is a lie or that post is a lie, but my guess is that both are lies and this is all just fanfic about some imaginary version of yourself that has sex with women (but is still disgusted by women).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/25 09:51 AM
12

You guys spend way too much time thinking about other dudes having sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 03:55 PM
0

There is no such thing as “alpha.” It’s folk-wisdom based on a faulty study about wolves, not humans, that the authors recanted. It doesn’t exist. That’s now how humans socially self-organize.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 03:23 PM
34

I’m happy I could be here with you today, the very first day that you learned that different people are different from each other and can have different preferences and desires, and that these preferences and desires can even change over time for the same person! Wow.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/25 12:56 PM
–

Unless coercion is involved, all long-term relationships require any partner to “do whatever the other wants.”
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/25 11:58 AM
1

The equivalent for men is the identical right to make choices about the condition of their own bodies. That the outcomes of those choices can be different when those same rights are applied to different bodies does not somehow mean the rights are not equal. Equal rights do not imply identical outcomes. You want additional rights for men to sever obligations to their children that are born as a result of those men’s actions, because equal rights are not sufficiently fair in your eyes.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 07:33 PM
0

Nope and nope!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 07:14 PM
2

Women cannot abort their parental responsibilities. They can abort pregnancies occurring in their bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 06:52 PM
0

Women do not reproduce through parthenogenesis.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 06:50 PM
-2

Child support is equitable.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 06:31 PM
2

Men and women each have the same post-conception right to control their own bodies and the same post-birth responsibilities to their children. You’re asking for men to have an additional right to sever their obligations to their own children because women can exercise their right to bodily autonomy differently than you can. You are not owed additional rights to compensate you for different outcomes from identical rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 06:04 PM
2

Pregnant women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies, just like men and non-pregnant women do, you’re right. That has nothing to do with a child’s right to parental care.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 05:09 PM
2

You’re arguing for men to have no rights to any child they fathered whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 05:02 PM
6

Child support is owed to the child, not to the custodial parent. Women cannot “demand” child support, but—just like men—can receive it on behalf of their child in their custody.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 02:03 PM
2

Why would a child’s rights to parental care be severable by someone else’s contract?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/25 02:02 PM
3

Yeah, pretty much
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/25 05:33 PM
4

I love how this sub is simultaneously full of people who believe it is too hard for men to abandon responsibility to their children and people who believe it is too hard for men to secure responsibility for their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/25 01:11 PM
4

Yes—statistics which just as readily show lower average interest in serving as custodial parents. Men cannot both shy from caring for their children and then complain that they have lower access to public benefits to the custodial parents of children. In any case, those payments are made to benefit the child and facilitate its care.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/25 01:02 PM
5

They are not locked out of benefits.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/25 12:51 PM
6

That women are more often the custodial parent does not somehow mean that men are not eligible for all of these same payments if they are the custodial parent, or share custody with the mother and meet the same eligibility requirements.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/25 12:43 PM
8

All of those are also paid to men with children.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/25 10:17 AM
3

Where do women get paid for having children?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/25 09:46 AM
13

Fathers can also place their children up for adoption and make use of safe haven laws.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:59 PM
12

It is, in fact, her body. A fetus has no separate biological existence from its mother’s body, so any decisions the mother makes about her own body—with which you have no right to interfere—also affect any fetus inside her body. You have the same exact right to make decisions about the condition of your body.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:48 PM
10

Off the top of my head: ultra-endurance running and swimming, as well as shooting. Shooting at the Olympics used to not be sex-segregated until a woman took gold overall in Barcelona in 1992. After that, they introduced separate categories for men and women so men wouldn’t have to worry about losing to a girl.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:46 PM
4

There are sports in which women outperform men. There are sports in which men outperform women. And there are sports in which neither outperforms the other. Yet we segregated virtually all of them, because sex segregation is a policy choice, not something that emerges intrinsically from biology.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:19 PM
15

Women can choose whether to have another person inside their body. You similarly have that choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:17 PM
16

Women also can receive the moniker “deadbeat” if they fail to care for their children, in the same sense as men. Are you perhaps upset that so many more men abandon their children than women, and thus earn the moniker? That does not warrant expanding the circle of what constitutes a “deadbeat mother” to achieve some sort of parity. Perhaps you should work to encourage fewer men to abandon their children, such that the numbers equalize downwards?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:05 PM
5

The unfairness that women experience in things like sports segregation and employment is similarly not biological. It’s cultural and political—choices that people make to exclude some people on the basis of their sex. Correcting for this unfairness does not require biological intervention—it requires making different choices. There is no biological intervention that could make you capable of undergoing a pregnancy that you could abort. However, in terms of policy interventions, you already posse…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:01 PM
5

So when you wrote I share the contempt of single men for women as a consequence of their existing failures. You didn’t really mean it?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 05:41 PM
6

Yes, you did. You said you shared the disdain, contempt, and resentment that single men feel towards single women. These are people who did nothing to you whatsoever; you resent them, as you have asserted, because they belong to the class “women.” That’s definitionally misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 05:19 PM
6

I have read everything you have written. What have I mischaracterized?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 04:52 PM
6

Because you are seething with, in your words, contempt, disdain, and resentment towards women—not because those women have done anything wrong to you, but because they are women, according to you in your own words.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 04:36 PM
5

You are a misogynist.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 04:34 PM
7

Yes, you. I can’t help but wonder if, as you sit there unsuccessful in love and seething with unattractive contempt and childish resentment, that you might consider a different approach than wallowing in your misery and blaming everyone else for your problems. “There are terrible men in relationships” sure, and there are terrible women in relationships. People are complicated and often contradictory and make mistakes. This does not mean that women owe you a relationship because you think of your…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 04:20 PM
13

I’m just wondering if you don’t have cause and effect backwards. Perhaps being the kind of person who is predisposed to feeling contempt, disdain, and resentment towards women, and generally displacing your frustrations into other people not responsible for your problems, is what makes you unattractive to other people and unsuccessful with the women you find so repulsive.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 03:45 PM
10

What failures make women so contemptible to you, and why do you desire them if you find them so contemptible? Do you think you would find people attractive if they felt contempt, disdain, and resentment towards you?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 03:37 PM
14

You described it had disdain and resentment towards women who are potential romantic partners. Do you think feeling and expressing disdain and resentment towards women might be the source of their lack of success with these women?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 03:21 PM
10

Oh, ok. Why would these single men, then, desire relationships with women they disdain?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 02:29 PM
19

You desire relationships with people you disdain? Why would you do that?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 01:54 PM
1

It’s funny because the Charles Boyle character is something of a buffoon and thinking “it was funny because his surname sounds like boobs” is the sort of thing a buffoonish character would find amusing. You have the mind of an angry, confused child.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:27 AM
3

You wish someone you knew in high school had never changed and you’re mistaking this for “feminists.” Why were you looking her up on TikTok anyway? Just kidding we all know.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/25 08:16 AM
3

What do you think the punchline of that joke was? What made that joke funny?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 08:58 AM
11

You made someone uncomfortable in high school and they later grew into an adult and were no longer uncomfortable in the same way they had been as an adolescent and this upsets you? This is your basis for a claim about society?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 08:36 AM
3

Which marriage forms were those?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/25 07:36 AM
7

Before the Industrial Revolution, it was really rare for anyone to work for money outside the home. Men and women both performed agricultural labor and both engaged in cottage industries to generate income. Medieval European brewers, for example, were very often women. Childcare was radically different in most places in most of history, and would not have fallen to lone individuals. Women were frequently employed in factory labor during the Industrial Revolution. It wasn’t until around the middl…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 11:29 PM
1

In which places, at which times, for people in which socioeconomic class?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 09:52 PM
1

Oh no, we could have the same material standards of living while enjoying more time away from work! That would be the worst. Best to structure human relationships to adapt ourselves to producing maximal value for capitalists.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 09:20 PM
2

Productivity has increased while wages have stagnated. We’re fully capable of maintaining our living standards while working less. You’re so close to the actual problem and a solution that could solve it.. Soooo close.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 09:10 PM
2

What if, instead of trying to relegate one sex to the drudgery of wage labor and the other sex to the drudgery of domestic labor PLUS the vulnerability of independent access to income, you fought for shorter working hours so that no one feels trapped and overwhelmed?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 08:07 PM
12

No. There is no such thing as “traditional marriage.” It’s pointless to quibble over which is “more traditional.”
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 07:53 PM
34

It just absolutely erases the fact that for countless millennia, men and women both labored—sometimes alongside each other on farms or in home-based craft industries, sometimes separately outside the home.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 06:33 PM
65

I love how a construct that existed for a brief period of time in some countries for members of some socioeconomic classes has become “traditional marriage” as if it is some trans-historical universal truth that we have lost.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 06:19 PM
7

A thousand times this.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/25 08:29 AM
2

Right—men pretend they’re not afraid of baby shit, just grossed out, so they can construct themselves as “protectors” on the basis of women’s fear and their own alleged lack of fear. What is it that men are providing to women, in your “protectors and providers” construction?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 11:15 PM
2

If your evidence that men are providing more protection than women is “media depictions of gender roles,” why do you believe these media are accurately depicting actual human behavior and not simply teaching you how you should feel about yourself, your role in a relationship, and the categories to which we assign men and women’s actions? Goes back to my “baby shit” example: women are “scared” of spiders, but men are “something else” about baby shit. Why not “scared” of baby shit too? Far more wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 10:51 PM
2

You claimed that “only men” perform the role of walking on the road-side of the pavement, and for evidence you cited your own experience and the experience of them men you know. Do you know all men, or even some substantial fraction of men? You claimed that far more men than women are afraid of creepy crawlies. What, in your experience as a man, allowed you to learn this about a plurality of men? Do you know a plurality or men?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 10:38 PM
2

Yeah I got you. You have some feelings and have mistaken them for facts. That happens to a lot of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 10:20 PM
2

Haha ok. “It is known”
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 10:08 PM
2

Evidence? These are just assertions.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 10:02 PM
2

I just asked what evidence you had for your claim. You listed: Walking on the road-side of the pavement Dealing with “creepy crawlies” Going to check for noises downstairs Do you have evidence that men perform these tasks more than women, and that they outnumber and/or outweigh protective tasks like “protecting men from yucky things like baby shit and vomit” that women tend to perform more than men?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 09:55 PM
1

What evidence do you have that men provide more protection than women at an individual level?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 09:40 PM
1

That “protection” doesn’t seem like a particularly gendered role in heterosexual relationships. If I had to hazard a guess, the perception that some people possess that men “protect” women (from things like spiders) have simply defined the protective services of women outside the sphere of “protection” into other categories of labor.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 09:32 PM
9

How much do you think a father would have to pay for childcare services in the absence of the mother providing those services gratis?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 09:30 PM
1

Are the women who change more diapers than their male partners, because their male partners are too squeamish to wipe their childrens’ asses, thus providing protection to their male partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 09:24 PM
1

You are confusing demands for institutional equality for demands with interpersonal outcomes. You absolutely deserve fairness from the institutions in your life. You are not owed any particular outcome from any other person. Feminist demands for institutional equality do not create some entitlement for you to sex from women who are promiscuous but do not desire you. Feminist demands for institutional equality do not create some entitlement for you to demand “consistency” in anyone else’s persona…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 01:17 PM
1

Admitting what? That you are not entitled to outcomes from other people? lmao sure I’ll “admit” that
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 01:02 PM
1

What equal protection act are you talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 12:56 PM
1

You do have to pay to support any children you cause to exist. There is no right to “disagree with birthing” or to sever your obligations to children you caused to exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 12:56 PM
2

The best way to think about this problem is that it benefits a small number of primarily men at the top of our socio-political-economic hierarchy. They in turn recruit most other men and some women as coercive enforcers, granting them lower ranks in that hierarchy, at the expense of the people at the bottom and all of the men and women—especially queer and neurodivergent people—who suffer as a result of having to conform their personalities to this hegemonic standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 12:55 PM
1

Sufficiently that most men have internalized the lesson that they must police their own behavior and the behavior of other men around them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 12:02 PM
1

Then stop seeking them out.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 10:14 AM
2

Nobody owes you fairness. Other people’s contradictions are not your problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/25 12:32 AM
8

I’ve noticed. They also tend to universalize from incredibly small data sets or, more properly, from some sensationalized claims about “all women” they read on some redpill forum and took as gospel truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 07:53 PM
13

“If you’re not consensually using your body the way I want, that’s bad and gross and I hate it and it makes me sooooo mad” go touch grass bro
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 06:58 PM
3

You are not entitled to “relationships working out these days”
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 06:22 PM
3

You’re experiencing the human condition and confusing it for an overwrought melodrama you’re starting in.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 05:10 PM
6

No one is having a gender war, except perhaps for the men who are murdering women on a daily basis. This is so fucking overwrought. Societal degradation? Gender war? “Some guys had some bad dates” and it gets cranked into this endlessly melodramatic tale about “Women” and “Men.” Get over yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 04:56 PM
5

Ok. And?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 04:47 PM
2

Feel free to look up the details
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 04:25 PM
–

The skin color of someone lethally enforcing hegemonic standards of masculinity is not relevant to the violence they are committing.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 04:04 PM
1

That’s nice.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 04:03 PM
5

Gibberish. Try again.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 03:58 PM
4

It is not the same logic. A person who aggresses against others is a potential threat to everyone in a community. A person who is unpleasant on a date is not. You have not articulated a need for accountability for unpleasantness. I find you unpleasant but don’t believe you owe me any accountability for that. “Don’t date people you find unpleasant” is also hardly applicable only to men. And 20% of women is something like a billion people. You have not surveyed 20% of women. You’re whiny for prete…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 03:11 PM
8

Nonconsensual assault is not comparable to being in a consensual relationship with someone who annoys you. If you’re dating someone with impossible expectations, date someone else. There are literally billions of women in the world; whatever fraction of them you’re whining about are a tiny minority. You don’t know if a woman holds these impossible standards until you’ve gone on a first date? That’s rough. She doesn’t know that you’re a whiny snowflake until she goes on her first date with you ei…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 02:41 PM
5

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 02:35 PM
5

Why is this a problem? If you are not these women or dating these women, from where does the problem arise?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 02:12 PM
12

If you were personally promiscuous and Fred from down the block placed his erect penis in your hand, uninvited, while you weren’t looking, you might also experience outrage. But even if we were to take your premise for granted, I’m hard-pressed to imagine that “some people in the world are outraged in disproportion to the act causing them outrage” is actually a meaningful problem that requires discussion or solving.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 02:00 PM
8

Which truth do you imagine is making me feel insecure and uncomfortable?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 01:11 PM
30

It’s not my fault your post and responses just absolutely reek of frustration and resentment.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 01:06 PM
9

You’re welcome. Something that might make you feel better is logging off and touching grass.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 01:04 PM
18

That is clearly and obviously a lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:58 PM
19

Why does it bother you if a potential partner of a woman perceives of that woman as promiscuous and judges that negatively and none of the people involved are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:57 PM
17

Why are you so upset about other people’s perceptions of yet other people?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:56 PM
22

“Other people have desires that are different than mine and behave in ways differently than I would prefer, and that makes me so mad!”
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:53 PM
28

Consent is not diminished by freely engaging in it. Sounds like you’re just butthurt that some people freely engage in consent with other people rather than you.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:42 PM
34

Are you really unsure of how someone who enjoys a thing consensually and seeks that thing out as they desire it might not enjoy that thing nonconsensually or uninvited from sources they did not seek out or desire?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:30 PM
11

Imagine being a full and complex human being with multiple, competing, and often contradictory impulses, desires, values, goals, and motivations, such that one cannot be easily slotted into restrictive and artificial models of “kinds” of person. What an absolute trip that must be!
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 12:22 PM
21

Men often face physical abuse or murder at the hands of other men who believe they are gay or otherwise effeminiately failing to live up to hegemonic standards of masculinity.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/24 11:45 AM
1

I’m not in America; I don’t have to worry about that. But nice try! Do you want a do-over for that round or nah?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 10:33 PM
1

Children can’t vote, silly. I know you’re fibbing
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 10:27 PM
1

Wow. I didn’t know that. You are telling me now for the first time. She led an amazing life. What else can you say.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 10:19 PM
1

If you had to identify the feature that ruined your life, which one was it and why was it your jawline?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 10:07 PM
1

Yeah. It’s rough. I hear you buddy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 10:00 PM
1

Thanks. I feel really bad for you. You seem really sad and lonely.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:54 PM
1

Thanks mate, but I’m a possum. Keep crying though. Maybe someday being awful to everyone and wallowing in self-pity will pay off for you and you can touch a second (?) tit.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:39 PM
–

You’ve had so many gfs. Oh my god so many. Maybe you’ve even touched a tit once. Cry harder and my bath will be ever more luxurious for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:33 PM
1

I’m just curious about your random capitalizations. Like when you say Men is it because you don’t know rules of English capitalization or because you imagine that you speak for “all men” as a class.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:26 PM
1

Is English your first language?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:16 PM
–

I will rest in peace (after bathing in incel tears). Moisturizer and unbothered.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 09:16 PM
1

Women don’t need to do anything for your approval or validation. Nobody does. If you don’t like hearing some women complain about their relationships online, you have this credible option to not read what they’re writing or, more likely, to stop reading the incel fiction about what “women” are doing with their lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 08:30 PM
1

“Never” “every time” “they” you seriously need to get offline and live in the actual real world for even like five minutes.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 08:23 PM
1

Comrade, I’m a possum.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 08:17 PM
1

Because they’re human beings, and we all constantly make bad choices, and we all constantly complain about it. It’s sort of the human condition.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 08:09 PM
1

If you generally dislike everyone, you’re probably a curmudgeon. If you pick a class of people based on some unchangeable characteristic, you’re probably a bigoted asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 08:09 PM
1

Because women are people, and people are different and have different preferences and make different choices. You’re trying to solve women like a math problem. Go ahead and behave like the entitled asshole you imagine that women desire and see how that works out for you. (Spoiler alert if you’re a “nice guy” you’re already an entitled asshole.)
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 07:48 PM
1

If you’re a “good guy” who is kind instrumentally so women will sleep with you, and gets mad when they fail to live up to their side of this transactional bargain, you are, in fact, one of the asshole entitled guys and many people will be able to figure that out for themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 07:19 PM
2

I did not dismiss rape victims.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 12:31 PM
1

Equal rights cannot guarantee equal outcomes. You are not owed any particular outcome from equal rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 12:29 PM
1

You experience equal rights as unfair, so you demand more rights for men to compensate you for this imagined unfairness and mistake this for fairness.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 12:25 PM
1

Can you cite which safe haven laws grant these rights to women but not men? Women similarly do not have the right to surrender parental responsibilities, including monetary contributions, to their children. Male rape is a rare but serious situation that warrants an exception without invalidating the general principle of equal responsibility to any children you father.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/24 12:23 PM
1

Answer the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 11:12 PM
1

You’re asking for science fiction to allow you to control women in ways that the real world hasn’t provided you yet.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 11:12 PM
1

When you feel alienated and on the receiving end of powerful forces beyond your control that shape your life for the worse, what you should really do is identify ever more marginalize and powerless communities to hate. How’s that working out for your mental health?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 11:11 PM
1

If Fred fucks you so hard (consensually) that he paralyzes you, he creates for you a positive right for restitution of the losses he caused you to incur.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 11:03 PM
1

There is no Fortune 500 company that does not employ men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:50 PM
1

Of course you do. Why try to figure out what is actually materially wrong with society or figure out who has actual material power over our lives when you could just blame “self-affirming bitches.”
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:49 PM
1

Somalia has had a federal government since 2004. Your “joke” was based on false premises even before that, but it’s still 20 fucking years outdated.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:42 PM
1

You absolute fucking clown. You know exactly what’s wrong with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:40 PM
1

I’m addicted to the little dopamine hits I get from fucking wrecking you
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:40 PM
1

You literally brought up the cocks of other men in a conversation that had nothing to do with them because you struggle to think about anything other than the cocks of other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:27 PM
1

Any day now
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:26 PM
1

That’s correct. No embryo, zygote, or fetus has a biological existence separate from the mother’s body. She cannot act against your will with regards to her own body because your will does not extend to her body; she is not your property. Since every decision about the fetus is a decision about her body, it is hers and not yours to make.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:26 PM
1

And yet here you are, whining at me in another reply about other men’s cocks.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 09:40 PM
1

There are no such things as artificial wombs. Even if there were, you have no right to seize her person and force surgery on her to remove anything from her body. “Cock carousel” has got to be one of the most pathetic self-owns you incels ever came up with. You are so fucking obsessed with each other’s cocks.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 09:39 PM
1

You’re going to hurt your back if you keep moving the goal posts every time facts contradict your bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 09:37 PM
1

Never said it was. Yes, you did, but I’m willing to believe you have no idea what you’re saying from moment to moment rather than intentionally lying. It is beyond absurd to dismiss a young man’s need for social mobility as irrelevant, and it speaks to a deeper cultural rot that belies your worldview. Strawman. Never once said this. I said that no one has a positive right to social mobility, such that people are owed social mobility from other people. Speaks to either intentional lying or uninte…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 09:35 PM
1

I dunno, humiliation fetish?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 08:47 PM
1

A person cannot use their own body “against your will,” because you have no claim to their body.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 07:40 PM
1

If you can achieve a voluntary agreement with someone, knock yourself out. You otherwise have no right to compel someone to gestate for you. You have negative rights to use your own body without interference. You have no positive rights to anyone else’s body. We teach this to toddlers but apparently you missed those lessons.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 07:37 PM
1

Yes, under the law, precisely the same rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 07:27 PM
1

Don’t get married if you want. Your preferences have no bearing on anyone else’s voluntary choices. Being able to cite unhappiness as a reason for divorce is not a positive claim to happiness. If you’re unhappy with Fred fucking you up the ass, you’re entitled to tell him to stop. That does not somehow imply a positive claim to happiness, merely the negative liberty to use your own asshole as you please without interference by Fred or anyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 07:27 PM
1

Women do not have positive rights on the basis of sex to employment. They have rights to compensate them for structural and institutional discrimination and ensure them access otherwise impeded by men. If men allowed zero jobs to be available to women, and the law required at least half of jobs to be available to women, then you have not been harmed because you never had a right to that privilege in the first place. Prohibiting men from interfering with women’s negative freedom to pursue employm…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 07:23 PM
1

You have no right to impose a surgical procedure on another person to extract a fetus for your personal use. You cannot absolve yourself of responsibility to any children that you father. If you have some positive claim to a woman’s body to gestate a fetus for you, such that you imagine you’re owed some compensation if she refuses, what compensation do you owe her for gestating the fetus for you? Not “men already pay child support,” which men and women both do to the child, but what compensation…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 07:03 PM
1

Men are not somehow guaranteed as a class to initiate divorce at an equal rate to women. If they were, then either some number of men would have to be forced to initiate divorce against their will to bring their numbers up, or some number of women would have to be prohibited from initiating divorce, against their will, to bring their numbers down. You have no right to impose your will on people to achieve some arbitrary parity at the expense of their autonomy. Yet another example of people havin…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:59 PM
1

lmao you’re over here whining that members of the public might criticize you for your actions as if it’s the worst possible injustice anyone could face and demanding rights at the expense of, or to control, women in compensation. It is so fucking pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:49 PM
1

Women do not have to provide any reason whatsoever to justify denying the presence of another person in their body, any more than you would need to provide a reason for denying the presence of Fred’s erect penis in your anus. Men are not required to care for women after birth. Parents are required to care for any children they helped create.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:26 PM
1

Women do take care of children they cannot afford. So do men. Sometimes they do it together and sometimes they do it separately. Neither has any more or fewer rights in this regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:21 PM
1

You’re allowed to pursue happiness without interference. You are not entitled to happiness such that anyone else is obligated to take action to make you happy. Your inability to understand this is breathtaking.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:20 PM
1

Those are negative rights. People are obligated to refrain from interfering with you. They do not owe you property.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:16 PM
1

Should a woman who desires not to have a pregnancy in her body, which you desire for her to continue, be imprisoned? Perhaps restrained, for the duration of her pregnancy? Trying to figure out how coercively intrusive you think the state should be towards women to protect your positive claim to her body.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:15 PM
1

Men and women have equal rights to decide whether another person is inside their own body. They have equal rights to make use of safe haven laws and the foster care system. They have equal rights to choose infidelity and equal rights to engage in divorce. “Socially reviled” is the tell here. Not only do you think equal rights are unfair; you’re making a positive claim to positive public opinion in response to your actions. It is so fucking pathetic
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 06:06 PM
1

It’s genuinely remarkable how blind you are to your experience of equality as not just unfairness, but tyrannical and pervasive unfairness. This is psychotic levels of entitlement.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:58 PM
1

Since Roe v Wade has been overturned and abortion effectively outlawed in several states, should those states similarly revoke your legal right to say no to Fred down the block inserting his erect penis into your anus, to keep things both equitable and equal?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:48 PM
1

You’re dodging the point: you have no positive right to social mobility. No one is impeding your rights by requiring you to care for your children.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:34 PM
1

As you noted earlier, measures like affirmative action are intended to equalize unequal access. If you have a group of people who are institutionally excluded from some resource, and then create policies to remedy that exclusion, you are simply pursuing the equality that should have been there all along, not unfairly advantaging anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:33 PM
1

All of those are negative rights, not positive claims on anyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:28 PM
1

“Sure our rights are equal but I want more rights so the same rights feel unfair” what an absolutely clown
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:26 PM
1

Correct, and also a non sequitur. You have a right to say no to Fred down the block inserting his erect penis into your anus.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:25 PM
1

You cannot demand equitable outcomes with regards to gathering children without impinging on the rights of mothers and of your children. You have no positive claim to equitable outcomes from identical negative rights. ie, you do not owe compensation to the blind because you can see more than they can. You do not possess any more “rights” to see than the blind do. The blind have no claim to blind you to create equity or equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:24 PM
1

With working and education, we started overtly holding a proportion of finite seats for women and overtly enshrined a system of “protected” nepotism. Women have exploited these protections to discriminate against merit-based hiring in general and men in particular. This is just to good not to address directly. First of all, there is no “we” here. You did not play a role in this. Your inability to imagine human beings as anything but extensions of biologically-determined corporate actors is a rid…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 05:09 PM
1

There is no right to social mobility. No one owes you social mobility, which is what you’re claiming. You legitimately possess negative liberties—that is, rights to not be interfered with—but cannot make positive claims without imposing demands on other people. If no one wanted to hire you because they could smell your irrational contempt for women, no one would be violating your “right to social mobility.” They don’t owe you anything but to refrain from interfering with your voluntary choices. …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 04:54 PM
1

You’re not asking for equality. You’re asking for additional rights because equality feels unfair to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 04:35 PM
1

Irrelevant to the right to exclude someone else from your body, which you possess equally.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 04:34 PM
1

Which of these laws is written unequally? Can you please be specific?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 04:26 PM
3

Are you just fucking with me at this point? Can you articulate what OP got wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 11:32 AM
4

I don’t have a narrative here. I don’t care about the argument or your petty and imagined grievances. I haven’t said anything about how many men are sexually violent. I just noted that OP got the data wrong, in a really immense way, and that when you get data that wrong you should absolutely not insist that you were correct anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 10:57 AM
1

I don’t know and I honestly don’t care. I’m in this only for good data and accurate reporting of that data, not this made-up bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 02:13 AM
3

I have no dog in this fight. I genuinely don’t care. I was just scrolling through and noticed the catastrophic error. Now I’m amused by your efforts to keep tweaking the data to try to prove your original point rather than just taking the L and trying again later with better data and a better understanding of them. You can’t derive a divorce rate by dividing the number of divorces by the number of marriages in a given year. The divorce rate is a ratio of divorces to all married couples. Your 15%…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 01:57 AM
1

Being forced to pay $103,000 for a child you never wanted and didn’t consent to have is NOT “reproductive rights”. It’s the opposite of that; it’s explicit denial of reproductive rights. Providing care for children is outside the purview of reproductive rights, because rights to care belong to the child and not to the parent. These obligations fall equally on men and women. Since you’re so narcissistic that you’ve have zero empathy with men, I guess I have to spell things out in even simpler ter…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 01:45 AM
5

Which stat? Your first fake divorce rate or your second fake divorce rate?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 01:36 AM
5

Yeah you did. You claimed the divorce rate was 72%. Then you claimed it was actually 15%, by dividing the number of lesbian divorces in a given year by the number of lesbian marriages in that same year, which is also not how divorce rates are calculated.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 01:35 AM
7

It is catastrophic in the sense that you didn’t understand the source you were citing and struggled mightily to figure out what it meant even when people were trying to walk you through some basic math. “Yeah I was totally wrong about what it meant but it feels like it supports my claims” is up there with Naomi Wolf’s “death recorded” error. It’s just embarrassing and doubling down only makes it worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 01:28 AM
6

You’d be better off scrapping this and trying again later once you’ve read and understood your sources and can base claims off them, rather than insisting that a catastrophic error like this is fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 01:23 AM
12

The second link says: Of all the divorces among homosexual couples in their sample, 72% were of lesbians and 28% were gay male. Conveniently, this adds up to 100%, because these are not divorce rates. It does not say “72% of lesbian marriages ended in divorce.” It does not say “28% of gay male marriages ended in divorce.” It merely says “of the pool of homosexual marriages that ended in divorce, more involved women than men.”
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 01:16 AM
1

Can you cite a single instance in which I argued, bitterly or otherwise, against reproductive rights for men? I have repeatedly said that parents owe care to their children. When you reframe that as “a man just has to pay,” that is dishonest, but I can’t tell if that’s because you’re being deliberately malicious or if you’re genuinely so addled that you can’t understand. I’m quite happy to leave all of my posts up for anyone interested to see how you’re lying about what I’ve said.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/24 12:53 AM
1

The same basis by which you claim that only one gender should have reproductive rights, I have never claimed that. Both sexes already have equal reproductive rights. and that gender should be able to financially rape Caring for your child is not rape. the other to pay for their personal lifestyle choice. Child support payments are made by parents of both sexes. Those payments are for the child, not the other parent. Everyone has to pay for activities they voluntarily undertake. Like men with the…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 11:48 PM
1

All women are manipulators and all men are too pathetically helpless to resist. God what is so hard to understand, people? Men are weak and women are strong!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 07:16 PM
3

Men are too afraid to say what they think. They’re small babies. The world is very scary 😨
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 07:15 PM
1

What have I failed to understand? Women manipulate men when they tell men what men want to hear; women also manipulate men when they tell men what men don’t want to hear. Men are, apparently, helpless clay to be molded by the whims of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 07:13 PM
1

She can pay it to the federal government, to be spent on prostate cancer research. Currently prostate cancer research recieves 59% less taxpayer funding than breast cancer research, despite killing a roughly equal number of people. On what sex-neutral basis should someone owe the US government $103,000 following a medical procedure in their own body? She’s paying it in order to achieve gender equality, which feminists like you claim to want. The is not a sex-neutral claim. You’re not proposing t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 03:05 PM
1

To whom would she pay that money, and on what sex-neutral grounds?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 01:51 PM
6

“All they have to do is tell men what they want to hear.” But apparently they’re also manipulating you when some women call some men “broke losers,” which I assume all the men don’t want to hear. They’re so powerful! They control men! No matter what they do, they’re clearly in charge and men are helpless to resist.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 11:51 AM
6

Your OP is about how powerful women are at manipulating men and how helpless men are to resist it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 11:42 AM
7

Shit they’re so powerful! How can you resist the power of some people who call you a broke loser! Women are unstoppable monsters!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 11:27 AM
11

Why do you have so much contempt for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 09:38 AM
2

You do have the same reproductive rights. There is no “right to consent to parenthood” that women possess that you lack.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/24 08:47 AM
1

You’re welcome to believe that
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 08:49 PM
1

I think I actually will block you now
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 04:27 PM
1

I can go back to dunking on you if you’d prefer
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 04:24 PM
1

I didn’t block you. I just decided this wasn’t worth it. I saw that I had upvoted some of your other comments and didn’t want to turn this into yet another fight
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 04:19 PM
1

Enthusiastic consent is not a male-oriented issue or question. It’s a human issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 04:13 PM
–

Agreed: women should stay away from you because you present the threat of assuming consent when none was given.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 01:27 PM
5

Your boss says “let me fuck you in the ass until your anus prolapses or you’re fired.” Not coercion?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 01:11 PM
–

The fun thing about consent is that it is a) revocable and b) specific. Entering someone’s home and removing your clothes in consent to a) being inside their home and b) being seen unclothed. It is quite literally consent to nothing else and even if it is then consent can still be revoked. Edit: love the downvote. If someone entered your home wearing revealing clothing they would similarly not be communicating consent via their clothing. “Nudity is consent” is literally “she was asking for it.” …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 01:08 PM
–

Non sequitur, as I never claimed anyone did. You, on the other hand, have let me know in your other reply that you’re a serial rapist, so I’m not particularly interested in your perspectives on, well, anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 12:06 PM
3

So you have been raping your spouse.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 12:05 PM
–

No one owes you sex. If you’re raping your spouse, they should be free to bring charges against you or defend themselves against you, lethally if necessary. If you’re unsatisfied in your marriage, you should be free to divorce.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 11:58 AM
3

Marriage is consent to be married. If your spouse does not consent to sex, you have raped them. Have you been raping your spouse?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 11:51 AM
2

I am an anarchist communist. You’re a reactionary trying to hide behind “I voted for Bernie.” The secret ingredient you’re missing is class and material analysis. Men and women are not classes, and transferring all your frustrations about exploitation and oppression from their perpetrators onto women is not class analysis. Cry harder.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 11:45 AM
–

You’re tattling on yourself
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 11:27 AM
–

This is on par with Ben Shapiro admitting he can’t get his wife wet. What an incredible self-own.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 11:24 AM
6

There is no such thing as irrevocable pre-consent. You cannot contractually obligate yourself into non-consensual sex. If you are married, I feel bad for your spouse.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 11:21 AM
–

“Enthusiastic consent” merely conveys the presence of an explicit and clear “yes” that is informed, reversible, specific, and freely given. Your post is a strawman.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 11:07 AM
1

“Women should advocate for their rights to ‘paper abortions’ if they want them” is an admission that you folks are looking for rights on the basis of sex and pretending that you’re interested in sex equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 10:26 AM
2

You’re so leftist that all of your posts are about how unfair it is that women have bodies that are different than yours and none at all about the material conditions that leave you exploited by the people who actually do you harm by their possession of class power over you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 10:22 AM
1

50% of the child is the child. The other 50% of the child is the child. You do not own the child. Infant circumcision should absolutely be outlawed and its continued existence is an atrocity. It doesn’t somehow justify anything you’re claiming, however. You’re not owed greater rights at the expense of women and your own children vis a vis childbirth because infant circumcision exists.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 09:31 AM
2

Yes—pregnancy and abortion place considerably greater burdens on the pregnant person. And yet, for some reason, this does not seem to strike you as “unfair” such that women warrant greater rights to compensate them for this unfairness. That is because your entire claim to “fairness” is whiny, self-serving bullshit that has no relation to actual material fairness, much less “equal rights.”
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 09:29 AM
1

If you say so!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 09:27 AM
1

You have precisely the same right to decide whether another person is inside your body. Fred from down the block, for example, cannot insert his erect penis into your anus without your permission.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 09:26 AM
1

You possess precisely the same rights. Now you’re claiming a right to social mobility and concocting a fiction that women possess more of these rights than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 09:25 AM
1

Men have this same right.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 09:13 AM
2

No I’m not. Yes, you are. You’re not advocating for women to also have the right to “paper abortions.” You’re arguing for exclusively men to have this additional right because you consider unequal outcomes from equal rights to be unfair. Women have all kinds of options to avoid parenthood before, during, and after pregnancy. Yes: and despite all of this, they have no legal right to decline consent to parental care for children they produce. You want men to have this right, in addition to the equ…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 12:51 AM
1

Equal rights cannot guarantee equal outcomes, as you just noted. Men and women have and should precisely equal rights to bodily autonomy. Men and women have and should have precisely equal rights to make use of safe haven laws. What you’re demanding are additional rights for men to compensate you for an inequality of outcomes stemming from precisely equal rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 12:42 AM
2

Men have precisely the same right to make use of safe haven laws. It absolutely is an extra right.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 12:35 AM
2

That’s like saying that, before gay marriage was legal, both gay and straight people had the same rights because both could marry a person of the opposite sex of their choice, and neither could marry a person of the same sex of their choice. It’s not like saying that at all. Prior to the legalization of gay marriage, straight people also lacked the legal right to marry people of the same sex. The legalization of gay marriage is predicated on a universal right of consenting adults to marry whom t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/24 12:11 AM
-4

Imagine thinking that a video on TikTok of one woman in one instance tells you everything you need to know about her, much less women in general, of whom there are about four billion.
/r/MensRights25/12/24 11:28 PM
1

Your blind person analogy doesn’t work because no one has a right to watch a tv, the TV company didn’t have to make TVs to sell it to you, they did so of their own private volition. It was merely to illustrate the simple fact that equal rights cannot guarantee equal bodies or equal outcomes. But this is all besides the point anyway because that argument is already settled, women do not have a federally recognised right to abort. They absolutely should. Intrusions into personal autonomy to coerce…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 11:19 PM
1

What legal right, with regards to the conversation about “paper abortions,” do women possess that is denied to men? Please cite the text of the specific law you’re referring to.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 08:03 PM
1

Absolutely. These are people who can’t stand the idea of being held responsible for their own actions in any way, and believe that having equal rights with women is an insult that requires them to have additional rights in compensation.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 08:01 PM
1

Nothing I said can be used to justify eugenics. You either didn’t understand what I said, don’t understand eugenics, or both. Both parents acted to bring the child into existence and so the child has rights to care from both.”it’s like the father is solely responsible” is particularly rich given that you are literally arguing for the mother to be solely responsible and I am merely arguing for equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 04:19 PM
1

such an argument can be made to justify eugenics, let’s not go down that path. This is nonsense. but the truth of the matter is if the mother is supporting the child’s rights, the father doesn’t have to reciprocate. That is the thing you are being too pedantic to acknowledge. You are acting as if the child will be homeless and starving simply because the father isn’t giving alimony. Each parents’ obligations are unaffected the the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 04:14 PM
1

The child’s rights to care from its parents are not mitigated by the parents preferences. They accrue to the child by virtue of having been made to exist by its parents, without its consent, in a manner such that it is helpless and will die in agony without care. Saying “I don’t want to meet my obligations to your rights” doesn’t make those rights go away.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 03:41 PM
1

Correct. There is no way that an equal right to parental care from both parents could guarantee any particular outcome for the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 03:36 PM
1

rights can shift and change for individualism, it’s not a concrete argument against hypocrisy. Right to life changed for autonomy of my body, see how insignificant your argument is? I’m sure you meant to say something here, but I can’t figure out what it was. So the mother is the one caring for the child, the child’s right is being fulfilled from the mother as she wanted to keep the child. So this cycles back to why should the father not opt out if the mother decides to keep the baby. Parents ow…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 03:32 PM
1

Your father was both breaking the law and violating your rights. The existence of people who violate rights does not somehow invalidate those rights or justify other people violating those rights. Mothers cannot ask for and receive parental support. Parental support is owed to the child, not the custodial parent, on the basis of the child’s rights, not those of the custodial parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 03:28 PM
1

The child’s rights to parental care accrue to the child, not to the parents. If you owe me money, you cannot say “another person who also owes you money can pay my share too” and mitigate your debt to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 03:14 PM
1

Yes, mothers and fathers can work and provide for that child financially
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 02:17 PM
1

De jure rights cannot guarantee de facto outcomes. You do not have more rights to watch tv than a blind person does. Women have the choice that they do because they have the same right rights as you and bodies that are different than yours. That might be unfair in some existential sense but it is not unfair in a juridical sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 02:00 PM
2

Ok but that also means that both mena and women can agree to having somone in thier bodies. They can. You can consent to taking as many dicks as you want. So it’s a contradiction to say that women don’t consent to all of the potential repercussions of having sex whereas men have to. You absolutely give equal consent to all the potential consequences repercussions of having sex. That doesn’t mean that, having consented, you’re somehow obligated to take no subsequent action. If a woman becomes pre…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 09:20 AM
2

Men and women have an equal right to say no to having another person inside their bodies. Men and women have an equal obligation to care for any children they create through their actions. What’s the confusion? What right do you imagine you’re missing that someone else possesses?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 02:33 AM
2

I have no idea how you could reach such a ridiculous conclusion. Everyone has an equal right to say no to having another person inside their body.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 02:25 AM
2

No, the state is coercing them to meet their obligations to the children they created. Men are not being forced to become fathers by other people making choices about their own bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 02:15 AM
2

No. They are coerced by the state to meet their obligations to their children. No one forced them to father a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 01:23 AM
2

That does not mean men are somehow compelled to be fathers.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/24 12:44 AM
1

There is no compulsion involved. No one is using force by not taking an action to terminate a pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:36 PM
1

What additional choice should men have to be fathers that they don’t currently have?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:10 PM
1

Men are not “compelled” into becoming parents after having sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 09:42 PM
1

lololololololol
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 06:13 PM
1

The stage doesn’t enforce child rights in a way that benefits women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 06:12 PM
2

That’s trivially solved by the ready availability of infant formula. So why are newborns largely with their mothers all the time?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 06:06 PM
1

I have no idea what you’re trying to say here and, honestly, I don’t really care to know
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 06:05 PM
2

Why is the child basically with her all the time?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 06:04 PM
0

It’s not her choice. It’s the state’s choice to enforce the child’s rights on behalf of the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:26 PM
0

Yes, if a father kidnaps a child from its mother and attempts to drop it off, he would be pursued as a kidnapper if authorities became aware of this fact. This is also true of a mother who kidnaps a child from its father and attempts to drop it off if authorities become aware of this fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:25 PM
2

No, I asked whether a child’s rights to parental care are predicated on a parent’s understanding of the biological process that created the child. Do you believe fathers should have a right to neglect their children if they didn’t understand how sex worked?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:16 PM
1

Fathers have the same rights with regards to safe haven laws.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:14 PM
1

I’m not demanding that you care about “women’s issues.” Bodily autonomy is a universal issue. The rights of other people do not somehow come at your expense.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 05:13 PM
1

It is also kidnapping and a crime if a woman does it without the father’s permission.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 04:03 PM
1

Whatever makes you feel better
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 04:03 PM
1

You’re not “talking about men’s issues;” you’re crying about equal rights because equality seems unfair to you, and about women in general because they’re just such big unfair meanies to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 04:02 PM
1

lmao you’re such a baby
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 03:44 PM
2

Men and women have equal rights to make use of safe haven laws. Men and women are equally subject to all of the obligations the state imposes on parents for support if it can identify them later. Safe haven laws provide an imperfect proxy for parental care; it is a kludge rather than a feature.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 03:35 PM
0

God you are all so fucking whiny
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 03:31 PM
1

You have an equal right to make use of safe haven laws. Now you’re fantasizing about the mass murder of children to extort a new, additional right for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 03:05 PM
2

This is an argument for men to have no parental rights to any children they conceive.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:55 PM
2

Yes, I want all people to be free to make choices about the condition of their own bodies without coercive interference. Of course you wouldn’t view a rape exception as remotely equal, because you want all men to have the freedom to abandon their children without consequence.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:45 PM
2

Whatever this is, I didn’t ask for it and I’m not interested in it
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:30 PM
2

If men were indemnified from caring for children produced by rape, I have a hunch you’d still be whining about all men not having a right to abandon their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:18 PM
–

Not interested in engaging with a liar. I watched your comment change in real time.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:18 PM
1

Yes, they can. You’re lying about a simple and knowable fact. Men can absolutely make use of safe haven laws in a unilateral fashion.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:14 PM
3

It should; this does not somehow validate your argument. “Some men are unfairly obligated to support children produced by rape so all men should have the right to abandon their children” is silly and ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:11 PM
1

If a child is born because of a rare instance of female rape of a man, then we can make use of an exception to the rule. This does not, again, invalidate my point that you lack a right to abandon children you caused to exist through your voluntary choices.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:06 PM
5

“Nothing is my fault, all my beliefs about myself are because mean mommies made mean girlies make me think bad thoughts about myself” is a mild comic exaggeration of OP’s argument, not a strawman.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:04 PM
2

You are not owed a right to control someone else’s body and determine whether they become and stay pregnant after you impregnate them. You are not owed a right to abandon children whom you helped create through your own voluntary choices.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 02:00 PM
2

A man cannot be the sole custodial parent of a child without the woman’s consent (or conviction I suppose). This is trivially untrue. Since women run the risk of dying in childbirth, for example, men can become sole custodial parents without either the woman’s consent or criminal conviction. A woman can, since there is no duty to inform the father of a child that the child exists. Yes, men and women can both become sole custodial parents. The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 01:56 PM
2

If a man is the sole custodial parent of the child, he is as legally free to make use of safe haven laws as a woman is if she is the sole custodial parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 01:48 PM
1

What do you think the word “counterfactual” means?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 01:30 PM
2

Men and women can each make use of safe haven laws unilaterally.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 01:25 PM
1

“I do not owe rights to my child because the mother could have aborted but didn’t” <- your counterfactual
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 01:23 PM
0

The possibility that people will lie to exploit rights does not invalidate those rights. Men and women can equally make use of safe haven laws.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 01:21 PM
2

Financial responsibility already falls on men and women together. You’re in luck! You’ve already gotten what you wanted. Your children accrue rights to your care by virtue of having come into existence because of your choices. You cannot sign away their rights. Their rights to your care do not change because of a counterfactuals about the mother and abortion.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 01:11 PM
0

They should not be. Exceptions for which a carve-out could and should be created do not somehow disprove the rule. As an aside, should the mothers of children conceived by male rapists be free to abandon their children to death?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:51 PM
2

You’re my crush
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:50 PM
1

“If I act like an obnoxious shit and the other person gets tired of my shit, that must mean I won the debate!” Cool story bro
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:50 PM
2

My sense of futility has crystallized into certainty of futility. Your failure to make a compelling argument for a right to abandon your children is not my fault. I already explained that your legal obligation in this type of scenario only arises if you were malicious or reckless in your actions. Sometimes people do nothing wrong and a bad thing happens anyway by chance. In that case we do not attach blame to those people. Having sex that produces a child you later regret producing seems to meet…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:48 PM
0

Then fathers have no rights to their children, at all, except insofar as mothers grant them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:47 PM
1

“Analogy is not an argument, again” he said, furiously jerking himself off at the thought of women losing the right to vote
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:46 PM
2

“Affording equal rights to women means men no longer have more rights, and that feels like less rights, waaah boo hoo”
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:45 PM
1

Abortion is not merely the mother’s right. You have an identical right. You have no right to control another person such that you can force them to gestate a fetus for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:44 PM
2

Paper abortion is, in no way, equivalent to actual abortion. It’s the equivalent of a sovereign citizen declaring himself outside the jurisdiction of the state and imagining anyone is obligated to respect that declaration when he then aggresses against other people.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:43 PM
2

You do not possess ownership rights of a child or its mother because it shares your DNA. Men and women are equally obligated to care for their children and should be so, I agree. A civilized society affords people equal rights to bodily autonomy and equal rights to parental care, I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:42 PM
–

“Mean mommies make mean girlies make me think a certain way about myself” lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:40 PM
1

Never miss a chance to jerk yourself off a bit more about women having even fewer rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:40 PM
0

I have no idea what you’re trying to say here.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:27 PM
1

Men do have equality of rights. You’re mad that there is inequality of outcomes and demanding more rights for you, or less rights for women, to make you feel more equal. A seeing person does not have more rights to watch television than a blind person. A blind person cannot demand that you be banned from watching television so they feel equal to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:27 PM
2

Correct. It still has no biological existence separate from the mother’s body, such that it is subject to every choice the mother makes about her own body, regardless of her intent towards the fetus.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:26 PM
1

If men’s obligations are contingent on the choice of the mother, then so are their rights. You’re arguing that men are irrelevant to the decision because women are the ones who make the “final choice.” Under no other circumstances can someone freely opt into or out of rights to another person. “She could have aborted so I am not responsible for the resulting child” = “she could have aborted so I have no rights to the resulting child”
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:21 PM
2

I am reminded of that study whenever I encounter a feminist who simply cannot, or will not, engage with the idea that men are human beings who also deserve the same rights and freedoms that women enjoy. This would be relevant if I had argued that men are not human beings or that men don’t deserve the same rights and freedoms as women, but I didn’t argue that. Also, I’ve found from much painful experience that many feminists simply lack the intelligence to grasp abstract concepts like “gender equ…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:19 PM
–

It did before you edited yours, so you could now dishonestly claim it doesn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:04 PM
3

“Men are meat robots subject to reprogramming by those wily women who somehow possess both agency and control over men” lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:02 PM
1

Prior to birth, there is no child with a biological existence separate from the mother’s. After, there is. Why is this so difficult? If fathers can abandon their children because mothers could have but didn’t abort, then fathers have no parental rights to their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 12:00 PM
1

Yes, an individual’s right to determine the condition and state of their own body is paramount. I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:52 AM
–

“Women basically get to set the value system by which men will judge themselves” I agree OP went straight to strawmaning
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:50 AM
5

The state should kidnap your child and care for your child at public expense because you abandoned your child, and you should experience no consequences as a result? Could you articulate that right in the form of a law that could be universally applied? Short of rape, in what sense are women overriding the consent of men?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:43 AM
2

Rights to care accrue to the child, not to the other parent. To the extent that anyone is forced to do anything here, it is to meet the positive obligations to care for a helpless person they helped create. Male rape is a rare exception for which carve outs should be created. Exceptions at the margins don’t disprove the rule—if you act to create another person, without that person’s consent, in a manner that renders that person helpless and vulnerable to agonizing death without your care, you ow…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:38 AM
2

I fixed your question begging. You were having a separate conversation unrelated to reality that added zero value to the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:36 AM
2

You were question begging; I fixed it for you. I’m sorry if truthfulness contradicts your presumptions and makes you feel bad =(
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:35 AM
–

You’re subject to globe-spanning advertising efforts that people pour hundreds of millions of dollars into each year in order to make you feel certain things about yourself and your relationship to commodities. You’re subject to institutions of the state, the media, education, and religion. Thousands of engineers work around the clock to tweak social media algorithms to manipulate your behavior, capture your attention, and sell more advertising. And you’re upset because mommies make girls make y…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:28 AM
–

You live in a society with vast institutional and systemic inequalities of power and you’re whining about your mommy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 11:07 AM
0

If your child holds no rights to your care on the basis that the mother could have but didn’t abort then you have no parental rights to that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:55 AM
2

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:54 AM
2

How would you prevent women from aborting pregnancies in their own bodies without violating the security of their persons?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:54 AM
1

If your child holds no rights to your care on the basis that the mother could have but didn’t abort then you have no parental rights to that child.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:51 AM
1

G and H: women and men deserve precisely the same right to bodily autonomy. You’re identifying inequality of outcomes and confusing it for inequality of rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:46 AM
0

Are the rights of your child determined by the actions of its parents?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:44 AM
3

Why are you sucking so many dicks? Day in and day out, all you do is suck dicks. It’s a miracle you have any time to post on Reddit, what with all the dick sucking you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:41 AM
1

Why are you sucking so many dicks? Day in and day out, all you do is suck dicks. It’s a miracle you have any time to post on Reddit, what with all the dick sucking you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:41 AM
6

When you choose whether to have another person inside your body, you are engaged in the exercise of bodily autonomy. Is English not your first language? I’m not sure why this is hard for you. If you were to father a child out of ignorance of the biological effects of sex, would you have a right to abandon your child to die?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:38 AM
1

The argument for why the state should not impede abortion is that people possess intrinsic rights to their own bodies and to make choices about the condition of their own bodies. Men should have precisely this same right; to make choices about their own bodies. This is precisely equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:36 AM
-1

Your reply is nonsensical. Bodily autonomy is a synonym for the capacity to make choices about one’s own body. Rape is the one exception that could justify a carve out. Exceptions don’t somehow invalidate the rights to care, however.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:26 AM
2

The rights to parental care belong to the child and are independent of any agreement in place between mother and father. You cannot contractually engage with person A to negate the rights of person B.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:22 AM
-1

Yes, they absolutely have precisely identical rights to choose to be a parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:20 AM
3

Competent adults do not require anyone else’s consent to make choices about their own bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:20 AM
0

Why choice do women possess that men lack?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:18 AM
1

The moral root is a) bodily autonomy, which men and women possess equally, and b) obligations to provide parental care to any children you produce, which men and women possess equally.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:17 AM
1

The argument for the obscene euphemism “paper abortion” seems to go something like this: 1) man and woman have sex 2) neither takes any subsequent action related to reproductive rights 3) baby is born 4) father is free to abandon his child because the mother could have but didn’t take any actions to impede the pregnancy (but also somehow can still claim rights to the child if he desires) It’s the sort of logic that you might produce if you’re a) not very bright and b) so familiar with entitlemen…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:15 AM
–

God this is so intensely pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 10:11 AM
1

The word you were looking for was “quintuple,” not “quintile.”
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/24 08:23 AM
1

Maybe your mommy will help you wipe it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 11:25 PM
1

Hope you get the ass situation figured out.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 11:19 PM
1

If I have assumptions up my ass, it’s my right to remove them from my ass, just like it’s your right to remove your neighbors cock from your ass.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 11:05 PM
1

Couldn’t get fucked by “Western” women so you’re fantasizing about finding a waifu. God you suck so bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 10:48 PM
1

“Four billion women are all like this ridiculous stereotype I picked up on the internet because no real-life women will talk to me” lmao get wrecked
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 10:39 PM
1

It doesn’t matter why someone might choose to abort a pregnancy in their body, any more than it matters why you might say no to a dick up your ass. You are the whiniest, most pathetic little bitch. “Waaah women waaah” go touch some grass
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 10:23 PM
1

If “women are lousy excuses for human beings,” as you’ve asserted, then I’ve got bad news for whiny pathetic losers like you. “Waaah it’s so unfair that other people can make choices for their bodies! I want their bodies to be my property! Waaah!”
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 09:44 PM
1

I have no problem with any person exercising autonomy over their own bodies. If someone were inside you, I’d support your right to evict them. For example, if your neighbor Frank were to insert his erect penis into your anus without your consent, I’d support your right to evict him. I support every person meeting their obligations to the children they create. I hear “control over our bodies” in many contexts all the time. I am an anarchist; autonomy is extremely important to me. “How convenient……
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 09:43 PM
1

Men and women possess equal rights to their own bodies and equal obligations to the children they produce through their actions. I’m sorry these simple moral facts bother you so much and that you’re not allowed to abandon your children.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 07:51 PM
1

Men and women possess equal rights to their own bodies and equal obligations to the children they produce through their actions. I’m sorry these simple moral facts bother you so much and that you’re not allowed to abandon your children.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 07:51 PM
1

Neither of these is more important than the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 07:49 PM
1

They are precisely equal. You deserve equal rights; you are not owed equal outcomes. A blind person cannot watch tv; do you have more rights than them if you can see? You owe obligations to your children. You cannot sign away your obligations to person A by making some agreement with person B.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 06:30 PM
1

Shiiiit you figured me out gosh dang
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 06:01 PM
1

The core issue here is - women can escape parental rights and obligations by doing an abortion. Men do not have this option. Yes, men and women have different bodies. They also have the same rights. Equal rights cannot guarantee equal outcomes. I do not have more rights than you by being much stronger and smarter than you; I just have a different body. This makes women final decision makers, but puts obligations on both men and women. If women are the final decision makers, such that men should …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 05:41 PM
1

In what sense is choosing whether another person is inside your body not an act of bodily autonomy?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 04:57 PM
1

Yes. This is because all people have the right to determine whether another person is inside their body. You have no positive right to force another person to be pregnant. Once a child is born, that child possesses positive rights to parental care. The parents caused that child to exist, without its consent, in a state in which that child requires parental care or else it will die in agony. Men and women can be and are equally compelled to provide parental support to any children they create.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 04:57 PM
1

I strongly suspect that you don’t understand either anarchist communism or much of anything else fr fr
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 04:52 PM
1

Women have a right to make decisions about their bodies. So do men. What is so hard to understand?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 04:48 PM
1

Men and women are equally responsible for any children they produce together. Neither men nor women are free from being forced to meet their obligations to the children they produce together.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 03:42 PM
1

Ah, another “men should murder women to avoid obligations to their own children” guy. Totally normal. Very sane.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 03:34 PM
1

Men are not taking responsibility for another person’s decision. Men owe parental care to another person who exists because those men acted to cause their existence. There is no injustice. You possess precisely the same rights; you are not owed any particular outcome from the free exercise of those equal rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 03:16 PM
1

Ok lol
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 03:15 PM
1

In what sense was I disingenuous?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 03:14 PM
1

Men have to be responsible to any children they father, just as women have to be responsible for any children they mother. I don’t know why this is hard to understand. Arguing that women have exclusive control over the production of children, such that men should not bear responsibility for any children they help produce, is to argue that men should have no parental rights whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 03:10 PM
2

I’m sorry for acting immediately defensively around someone who described women as “passages” who care too much about bodily autonomy. That’s my bad bro.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 11:19 PM
1

I’m not particularly interested in the opinions of someone who views women as a passage for another person. Abortion rights are part of a person’s autonomous control of their own bodies. Everyone should have the equal right to decide whether another person is inside their body. Everyone similarly has the equal obligation to care from children that result from their choices. This is only hard to understand for people who view women as objects to control, and for people who are so entitled that th…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:19 PM
3

For abortion procedures, the woman is largely affected by having another person inside her or not. That’s the bodily autonomy part that seems to be eluding you: to have a choice about the condition of your own body.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:05 PM
2

Abortion is a medical procedure carried out on a pregnant person.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:38 PM
1

👍
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 08:28 PM
1

These idiots have such a supreme sense of entitlement that I don’t think it ever occurs to them that their whining for more rights than they already have could ever result in them having less power over their children. What they want is power without responsibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 08:08 PM
1

You’re still at it? Go touch grass. It’s cute that you think I care enough about your thoughts to read all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 07:29 PM
3

Abortion is not illegal for men. You’re mistaking equality of outcomes for equality of rights. You have precisely the same negative rights to autonomy. You have no positive right to any specific outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 05:32 PM
2

Exactly, I should not owe you compensation because my body is different than yours. Except that you believe you are owed additional rights to compensate you for the different outcomes that can occur when women exercise rights identical to yours. When abortion is legal for women and not for men Abortion is not illegal for men. women are allowed the right to decide if they wish to become a parent while men are not. Women are not afforded an additional right. They are afforded precisely the same ri…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 05:29 PM
1

Men and women have equal rights to make decisions about their bodies. Men and women have equal obligations to the children they create. You have exactly the same rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 02:33 PM
1

I am much stronger and more athletic than you, and as a result I am a professional athlete who commands salaries far higher than yours. I do not owe you compensation because my superior body is different than yours. Equal rights cannot guarantee equal outcomes. What you’re demanding are more and unequal rights to compensate you for outcomes you’re not satisfied with.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 02:31 PM
–

Lives under a hegemonic system of capitalism Blames women for being made to feel alienated and reduced to purely transactional exchanges
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 12:37 PM
1

So if a system with such a major error, how the fuck is this valid. It would be trivially easy to carve out an exception for this rights violation. How is this rare, Because it doesn’t happen often. especially when it comes to teachers having sex with students? A vague allusion to some anecdotal headlines does not constitute data. You are major hypocrite, when there’s a mistake that affects men than is fine No but if there s a mistake that affects women than this is because men consider them pro…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 11:42 AM
1

You fail to see the advantage women have when giving birth, Equal rights cannot guarantee equal outcomes. they can just move and immediately after giving birth to drop the child. So can men What can a father do there, nothing, legally he has some options but practical can’t do shit. Equal rights cannot guarantee equal outcomes. On what grounds? Simply on the grounds that sex have consequences that results in children, This is why men owe parental support to the children they produce. if men cann…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 11:39 AM
1

I did not say rape justified parental care. I said it was a serious and rare exception that does not invalidate a system that applies to all other cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 11:01 AM
1

Huh, go figure: in some US jurisdictions fathers can be made to share the costs of a medical condition they helped to create. Go figure! On what grounds would women owe men compensation for using their bodies in ways men disapprove? You have consistently refused to answer about your own point that started this conversation. Men can also make use of safe haven laws. God you are so fucking tedious.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 11:00 AM
1

Men and women each have an equal right to make decisions about their own bodies and reproductive choices. Men and women have different bodies. Equal rights cannot guarantee equal outcomes. You are not owed compensation from people whose bodies are different from yours because their exercise of equal rights produces different outcomes. Rape by women of men is a serious exception but it is also sufficiently rare that it cannot serve as the defining case.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:35 AM
1

And a men has to share all/most medical expenses done to the child before birth legally speaking. Citation plz Do you actually know what the fuck property means what it entails? Yes Asking for compensation doesn’t make anything be property and you think you have your got you moment. On what grounds would women owe men compensation for making choices about their own bodies? Like in your own definition men are property since they have to pay even if it’s woman’s only decision to keep a child. Men …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:33 AM
2

You possess equal rights. You have different bodies. You are not entitled to equal outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:16 AM
1

There is no law I am aware of that requires men to pay medical expenses to women during pregnancy. You absolutely did argue that women’s bodies are the property of their male partners. Your discomfort with the implications of your own argument is your problem, not mine. Parents of both sexes owe obligations to the children they create. I don’t know why this escapes you.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:14 AM
3

An imperfect solution does not justify parents being free to neglect their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:09 AM
1

This is your argument—if a woman uses her body in a manner her male partner disapproves, she owes compensation to him. You introduced the idea that a woman’s body is the property of her male partner. You did. That’s what the language of compensation means. You don’t get to say “she used her body in a way he didn’t like so she owes him compensation” and the pretend I am the one who introduced property rights into the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 10:04 AM
6

Men and women are are equally free to make choices about their own bodies and equally obligated to provide care for any children they create. Do you actually understand now?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:57 AM
3

Yeah, no solution is ever going to be perfect. I’m happy I could be here for you to learn that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:56 AM
1

Custodial parents serve as proxies for the rights of the children in their care.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:51 AM
1

This was your claim—a woman owes moral compensation to a man if she declines to use her body in ways he desires. Are only women property of men or is everyone property of everyone?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:47 AM
3

They are not. The rights to parental care belong to the child, not to either parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:43 AM
3

Yes, a woman’s body is not your property, even if you really want to use it for your purposes. You got it right!
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:42 AM
1

You asserted that you are owed compensation from other people for not providing their bodies for you to use as you please. Why is your body not also available to other people to use as they please, such that you owe them compensation if you fail to make it available? There you are, pathetically and compulsively jerking off into a crusty rag, day in and day out. Why don’t you owe moral compensation to your partner?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:41 AM
2

No. The father can give up his rights, but not (financial) responsibility. The woman can drop the kid off at a fire station and be free of rights AND responsibilities. This is false. Men and women have equal access to the foster care system and safe haven laws. Everything you say? Then abortion shouldn’t be allowed. You consented to create a child the moment you consented to sex, and now the innocent child is dependent on you for everything, including use of your body, and the innocent child’s n…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:38 AM
2

None of your answers are compelling or actually gave me a proper answer, but I do appreciate the response. Oh no my fee fees If the woman cannot provide for her kid, or just doesn’t want to, she can give said kid up to the state. Fathers have an equal right to do this. Of course. But creating a child is not robbery. No: creating a child is bringing someone into existence without their consent, rendering them utterly helpless and dependent on support for everything. Neglecting a child you forced …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:22 AM
2

No, a man doesn’t. Yes, he does. He’s ordered to pay child support for a kid he didn’t want. His choices now are 1) go to work, using his body, time and energy to produce value, which equals money, and then give up some of that money/value against his will (that he traded his body/energy for) or 2) be put in jail, which is a restriction on the freedom of his body. Mothers face the same consequences if they neglect their children. You make the arguement that NO ONE, not even an innocent unborn ch…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 09:03 AM
4

Apparently, this means you “owe damages” to anyone who desired to use your body to produce children. Somehow, I’m guessing, it only occurred to him that women might “owe damages” to men in this manner.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 08:23 AM
1

Men and women have precisely the same options. Those options can produce different outcomes in different bodies because bodies are not identical. Identical rights cannot guarantee identical outcomes. Why would someone have to pay “moral” damages for making a choice about their own body? If you were addicted to porn and compulsively jerked off every day, would you owe moral damages to someone who wanted children with you, but couldn’t conceive because of your constant, ceaseless jerking off?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/24 08:19 AM
2

Men and women do not “opt into” each other’s decisions when they individually act to produce a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:32 PM
3

Both of us would owe you restitution, because both of us would be responsible for your situation. That’s why you’re jerking yourself off about the scenario rather than confronting its implications—your responsibility for your actions is not mitigated by counterfactuals about what someone else could have done but didn’t. A mother could have aborted but didn’t—you’re still responsible to your child. A father could have murdered the pregnant mother but didn’t—the mother is still responsible to her …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:27 PM
3

Then fathers currently have no parental rights and mothers can do as they please vis-a-vis fathers. You said so yourself. “Paper abortion” would be irrelevant—you cannot voluntarily opt into someone else’s decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:19 PM
3

If my supermodel wife distracts me with her gorgeous décolletage, but she could have instead worn a burka, does that indemnify me from paying you restitution?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:14 PM
3

Why would another person’s participation in the analogy effect my obligations? My supermodel wife could have borrowed my car but didn’t. Does that mitigate my responsibility to pay you restitution? She had the power to supersede all other aspects and prevent the crash from happening. I can cripple you now without worry?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:41 PM
3

If the choice to have children is unilaterally the mother’s, then fathers have no parental rights. They’re not part of the process, period.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:34 PM
1

I wish I had something useful to say in response to this shitty situation
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:26 PM
2

What does this have to do with your obligation to care for your son? Do you believe you should have been able to withhold your consent for his birth and thus waive your obligations to care for him? That was the point of this thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:21 PM
3

You would be dictating my bodily autonomy by prohibiting me from consuming alcohol while driving. Our society already does this; it applies equally to men and women. If, in my scenario, I crashed into you while perfectly sober and still left you paralyzed and unable to care for yourself, would that affect my obligation to pay you restitution? Would I be able to sign away my obligation by withholding my consent to crash and care for any victims prior to driving?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:18 PM
3

Again, one person’s failure to meet their obligations had no bearing on another person’s obligations. If the rather declines to care for the child, that does not create license for the mother to abandon the child, and vice versa.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:14 PM
2

Can you ask your question again and answer mine? If not, it’s ok—I know that you realize that if you answer my question honestly, you’ll be left unable to defend your position.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:10 PM
2

The answer to “how to fix custodial assignment problems” is beyond my knowledge or ability. Nothing you’ve said here changes any of my points—the failure of parent A to provide adequate care does not exempt parent B from providing adequate care.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:09 PM
2

Yes, a non sequitur. Can I sign away my obligation to pay you restitution by withholding my consent?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:05 PM
2

Sure. The point is, “the custodial parent is a bad parent” does not somehow sever the other parent’s obligation to care for their child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:04 PM
2

What if, before going out drunk driving, I had signed a piece of paper that said “I do not consent to crashing into anyone and rendering them paralyzed. I furthermore do not consent to caring for them or paying them restitution”? Would that change my obligation to pay you restitution?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 08:03 PM
2

Sounds like the father should be the custodial parent then
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:58 PM
1

If I went out drunk driving and crashed into you, rendering you paralyzed and unable to care for yourself, would I owe you restitution?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:57 PM
1

Why would the justness or unjustness of his crime be contingent on his consent to parental care?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:50 PM
3

If a father neglects his child, and the child dies, and police arrest the father and charge him with a crime, is that also unjust force, from a pro-choice perspective?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:35 PM
2

And this is unjust force?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 07:02 PM
3

What force is involved?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 06:48 PM
2

The solution to having equal parental rights is to take equal parental responsibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 06:43 PM
4

“Financial abortion,” an obscene euphemism, is precisely an infringement on the rights of a child to parental support.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 06:22 PM
6

If the decision is entirely the woman’s, and the father bears no responsibility to the resulting child because of this fact, why would the father hold any rights to the child?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:32 PM
7

If women are the decision makers, then men have no say in the outcome of that decision, not men. You’re arguing for men to have no parental rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:18 PM
1

I’m not surprised you remain firmly committed to extra rights for men. Privilege for men qua men remains a hegemonic aspect of modern western society, so of course lacking extra, special rights feels unfair to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:09 PM
2

What reproductive right to their own bodies do men lack?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:00 PM
2

I believe that if the reason that woman is having an abortion is because she is not ready, willing, or able to have a child right now, the. Her abortion is not actually rooted in in the concept of bodily autonomy like you’re saying. Instead, it’s rooted in the concept of “I don’t want to be a parent right now”. The legal argument that enables her is based in bodily autonomy, but she’s using concerns outside the physical concerns of her body and instead concerns about the impact and burden on her…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:46 PM
2

Now, please tell me where I assume women create children out of thin air in my comments. You wrote, two posts above, “Men don’t create children, women do” Also point to where I suggest men should have no parental rights. Why would men have rights over the outcome of a decision in which, as you claimed, they play no role? Also it’d be great if you stop equating pregnancy with born children. I’m not. My entire argument is premised on that distinction. It’s only fair to consider the man’s involveme…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:36 PM
2

The ability of women to make choices about their bodies that are different from the choices you can make about your body does not change the obligations you face to children who exist because of your actions. You could, during the course of the pregnancy, murder the mother. This gives you a “final say” in the birth of a child. That you do not choose to do so, hopefully, does not somehow mean that all of the obligations to care then fall to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:22 PM
4

You’re arguing for men to have no parental rights whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:11 PM
2

Until the welfare system funds the cost of parental care, the cost is born by the people providing that care. Currently, that is men and women together responsible for the children they create. To you, this is dehumanizing to the man but somehow not to the woman. You object to this system, even in the absence of welfare payments that could compensate the mother for the father’s withheld (and thus stolen) obligation. What did I get wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:07 PM
2

Men are not disadvantaged. You believe that requiring men to pay their share, half, of the child’s parental care is dehumanizing. You believe instead that, in the absence of welfare, a woman paying her share and the man’s share is preferential to a man paying his share himself, and that this somehow does not dehumanize the woman. How can you not see the perverse bias in your position?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:02 PM
1

You didn’t address the argument, you just sidestepped it. I didn’t sidestep it. You’re just unclear about how rights work. I can easily say that men currently lack the same right to opt out of parenthood as women You would be wrong. What right are men missing that they currently lack? You’re just assuming what you want to be true instead of proving it. 👍 Ah, so people’s rights depends on what bodies they have, gotcha. Given some people have different coloured skin, should that mean they ought to…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:56 PM
2

So in the absence of a complete overhaul of state welfare such that care for children is provided entirely publicly, you’re ok with the present system of requiring men to meet their obligations to their children?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:48 PM
3

“It’s dehumanizing to men to make them meet their shared obligation to their children. Women should be instead coerced into paying the entirety of their own obligation and the entirety of the man’s obligation as well.” I guess when you’re systemically dehumanizing women it’s ok!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:41 PM
1

Meeting your obligations to another person is not objectifying or dehumanizing.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:34 PM
2

It’s not my fault I’m much stronger and more attractive than you. What compensation do you feel you’re owed on the basis of my physical superiority to you, and on what grounds?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:25 PM
4

Women do not reproduce parthenogenetically with no input from men, as you absurdly suggest. You’re arguing for men to possess no parental rights whatsoever. In reality, you have fully equal rights and fully equal obligations. Your obligations to a child you helped create are not mitigated by your preferences, because those rights are owned by the child, not you or the other parent. You do not waive obligations because someone else could have chosen to do differently with their body.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:23 PM
3

If you are deathly allergic to peanut butter, you are not owed some special rights over people who can eat peanut butter in compensation. No one owes you compensation for it. I am a man who is much stronger and more attractive than you; I do not owe you special rights to compensate you for our physical differences.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:09 PM
5

Then you have no real grounds to object to the state’s enforcement of your obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 02:56 PM
3

You have an equal right to make decisions about your own body. You have no entitlement to someone else’s body. You are subject to equal obligations to any children you create. What rights are you unfairly missing?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 02:50 PM
8

It’s not semantics and I don’t particularly care about “winning” a correct position: the law cannot guarantee you equality of outcomes. You’re asking for additional rights to specific outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 02:34 PM
4

Women and men each have control of their own bodies. Men and women each have responsibilities to children whom they caused to exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 01:47 PM
3

This is an argument against fathers holding any responsibility to any child they father.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 01:32 PM
1

If you say so
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 12:43 PM
–

Men and women are equally free to evict an unwanted person from their bodies. Men and women are equally responsible to a child that exists because of their actions. There is no discrepancy. You would like men to have an additional right to sever their obligations owed to other people. Those are rights owned by the child, not the mother, and thus are not severable by an agreement with another party.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 12:32 PM
3

Men are not more or less culpable; they are equally culpable and owe equal obligations to a child that results from their actions. With the rare exception of rape, women cannot force a man to be a father. If you disagree, explain what force or coercion someone is applying by declining to undergo a medical procedure.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 11:38 AM
1

“Men can sever their obligations to care for their children on the grounds that women hold autonomy over their bodies” is an argument for no man holding any responsibilities to any child he fathers. Imagine a man and woman who have a child together. The woman leaves the child in the man’s care temporarily. The man subsequently neglects the child until the child dies. Upon the woman’s return, the man explains that because the woman had “the final say” in giving birth to the child, she is responsi…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 11:34 AM
–

You’re trying to talk yourself into murdering a pregnant woman, aren’t you?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 11:03 AM
1

Men also have recourse to safe haven laws
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 11:00 AM
–

You’re making a strong argument for women to pre-emptively murder men after sex in self-defense.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 10:53 AM
–

This is equally true of a male parent with sole custody.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 10:49 AM
–

When a person wants to exercise autonomy over their own body, that is a right. When a parent wants to sever their child’s rights to parental support, that is not their right. Fixed that for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 10:48 AM
–

They’re not. The child who resulted from the parents’ cooperative action is entitled to parental support from the people responsible for creating it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 10:47 AM
–

You cannot be victimized by meeting your own obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 10:44 AM
1

Sounds good
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:48 AM
1

Ok!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:44 AM
–

And gay men had the same right to marry a woman as straight men. People previously lacked the liberty to marry another consenting adult of their choice without interference. Now they possess it. That’s a nice try, but it doesn’t work. That’s the point of contention though. Legally, until the child is born, it is a medical condition of the mother, not a person, and therefore the unborn child has no rights, because no child exists to exercise those rights. Yeah And its awfully one sided if the wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:43 AM
–

That is correct: we can guarantee equality of rights, not of outcomes, because no two people are identical.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:32 AM
1

LMAO yes I know right LMAO
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:31 AM
1

Nope!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:31 AM
–

Nope!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 09:30 AM
–

The “system” is fair. You’re demanding unfairness in your favor and mistaking it for fairness because you’re unsure of how rights work.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:34 AM
1

That’s correct. Once a child is born, they accrue rights to care from the people involved in that child’s creation, both parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:33 AM
1

Byeeee
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:30 AM
–

A man has an equal right to evict an unwanted person from his body. This does not somehow change anything I’ve said; I’ve been consistent on that point. What you’re mad about is the fact that bodies are different from each other, and that the exercise of an equal right can produce different outcomes for different people. You’re demanding additional rights and mistaking that for equality because you’re unsure of how rights work.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:30 AM
1

The last time I checked, human beings reproduced sexually, involving two parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:28 AM
1

They probably should. Choosing to participate in the creation of another person without their consent creates positive obligations to care for that person.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:27 AM
2

Ok!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:25 AM
–

Yes, in addition to the father.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:24 AM
–

I am in favor of people being free to exercise autonomy over their own bodies, including expelling anyone from their bodies that they choose.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:24 AM
–

The people responsible for the care of someone who cannot care for themselves are the people who caused them to enter into that condition. If you were to drive while drunk and cause an accident that rendered someone paralyzed, you would owe them restitution, even if you did not intend to paralyze them. If you were to assault someone and render them crippled, you would owe them restitution, even if you did not intend to cripple them. This does not change if you engaged in these acts with the coop…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:23 AM
3

Gotcha, a nice little non sequitur in an attempt at a “what about.”
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:17 AM
–

Again, counterfactuals don’t affect one’s obligations. “The mother could have aborted but didn’t” doesn’t change the facticity of the child’s life. “I acted to create you but didn’t desire your creation as an outcome of my choices” doesn’t change the facticity of the child’s life. “The mother could have eaten listeria-tainted salami and experienced a spontaneous abortion” doesn’t change the facticity of the child’s life. “The father could have murdered the mother during pregnancy” doesn’t change…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:14 AM
–

Men should not be subject to the draft, which is a form of compulsory labor and thus akin to slavery. Having one’s rights violated in one way by another actor does not somehow entitle you to additional rights in compensation at the expense of someone else unrelated to your rights violation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:12 AM
1

You do have an equal say. You both have an equal say in consenting to sex that might produce a child. You both have an equal say about your own body, and you both equally lack a say in the other’s body. You both equally owe obligations to any child who exists because of your choices and actions. What you want in all of this are greater and thus unequal rights to either control someone else’s body along with your own or the power to sever someone else’s rights to parental care.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:10 AM
1

Cool
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:08 AM
–

The child’s rights to parental care are not subject to counterfactuals, but derive from the fact of the child’s existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:08 AM
–

Oh, you’re confusing “the negative liberty to make choices about one’s one body free from coercive interference,” a right we all share equally, with “executing children on a whim,” gotcha.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:07 AM
1

There’s no unfairness involved. You’re mad that other can make choices with their own bodies and want additional positive rights to compensate you for their choices about their own bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:04 AM
–

Citation plz
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:01 AM
1

No, I believe that a child that exists because of a person’s choices possesses rights to care from that person. You can’t explain why you disagree other than some vague allusions to unfairness as if the universe owes you either control over a woman’s body or some unobtainable right to equal biological outcomes between different bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 05:00 AM
1

If we agree that children have positive rights to parental care, what are we arguing about?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:57 AM
–

I’m not sure where that might be legally true, but it is very clearly morally untrue.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:51 AM
1

Nope! The child’s existence is the product of both parents’ choices and is not somehow contingent on counterfactuals. “But the mom could have aborted” but she didn’t. The father could have murdered the mother during pregnancy but he didn’t. The child exists; the child exists because of the choices and actions of both parents; counterfactuals like “abortion” or “murder” don’t operate on those facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:50 AM
1

A child is entitled to care from the person or people responsible for forcing that child into a position of being unable to care for itself. Do you disagree that people accrue rights to care from other people who render them helpless through their choices?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:40 AM
1

They should be obligated. In the absence of law, anyone would be within their rights to compel a parent to meet their obligations to their child.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:39 AM
1

Being born helpless and unable to care for oneself is a harm, yes, in the same way that being crippled and thus helpless and unable to care for oneself is also a harm. It is also a condition to which the child does not consent.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:38 AM
1

Because a child’s rights to parental care is not contingent on your feelings about those rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:33 AM
3

Then they are not obligated.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:28 AM
1

Why does a person you crippled in a drunk driving car accident accrue rights to care and restitution from you even if you didn’t mean to strike them?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:28 AM
3

No. I am an anarchist; I am not basing my argument in any claim about the law or the state. A person is not enslaved by obligations they themselves create.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:26 AM
4

You’re not enslaved by meeting your obligations to someone else you caused to require your support.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:19 AM
–

Nope, that does not follow from what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:15 AM
–

That’s correct, everyone possesses those rights currently.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:10 AM
–

Nope! Everyone involved has precisely the same negative liberty to make decisions about their own body and everyone involved is subject to precisely the same positive claim to parental care from a child that results from their actions. There is no discrepancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 04:01 AM
–

Men also possess this right.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:54 AM
–

Yes, the option to defer parental care to proxies is an imperfect solution that has been available to parents for a long time, I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:49 AM
–

You’re confusing the negative liberty of bodily autonomy with a positive claim about bodily outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:42 AM
2

“The final say” isn’t a meaningful concept here. Both parents participated in the creation of the child; the child’s rights are not contingent on some rank ordering of counterfactuals. “Oh, the dad could have shot the mom as she was giving birth but didn’t so technically he had the final say” is incoherent.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 03:36 AM
1

A person holds rights to care from the people who acted to put that person in a position of being unable to care for themselves. If you drive drunk and render a person paralyzed, your obligation to provide restitution to your victim does not depend on how badly you didn’t want to paralyze them, or whether anyone else acted with you. The person is paralyzed because of your actions; they hold rights to care from you by virtue of those facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 12:24 AM
1

Nope. The child’s rights accrue from the fact of its existence. That’s it! “I had sex but I didn’t want to be a parent” doesn’t someone obviate the child’s rights to parental support. It exists now; it possesses those rights. There is no discrepancy of rights or obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 12:19 AM
6

I’m not resorting to anything. Two people acted to bring the child into existence. Both people possess an equal right to make choices about their own bodies. Both people owe equal obligations to a child who results from their action to create that child. There is no inequality of rights or obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 12:12 AM
–

I’m sorry you’re having a hard time understanding that I said. If a child exists, the child possesses rights to parental care. The child did not ask to exist; the child was made to exist, helpless, by the child’s parents. It doesn’t really matter what might have happened but didn’t happen: the child exists and possesses rights to parental care. “But the mother could have aborted” doesn’t change the fact that the child exists and possesses those rights from its parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 12:04 AM
–

I have no idea what that’s supposed to mean
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/24 12:00 AM
–

The rights that a child possesses to parental care are accrued by virtue of that child’s existence without consent. They’re not subject to any counterfactuals.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:57 PM
–

An abortion ban imposes a positive obligation on someone. It interferes with their negative liberty to be free from coercive interference with their choices about their own body. Enforcing child support does not impose any new positive obligations on you. You assumed those positive obligations by virtue of the fact of the existence of another person who did not consent to exist but does through your actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:50 PM
5

Absolutely fucking not. I’m content to block you if you keep this up.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:41 PM
–

The negative liberty to enter into a consensual relationship does not imply a positive right to impose a relationship on someone who cannot consent to an adult relationship, such as a child. Your understanding of consent is troubling.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:40 PM
–

It is not. The argument for gay marriage is not the right to marry someone of the same sex. It is the negative liberty to consent to any relationship at will without interference. You similarly deserve the same negative liberty to make choices about your body.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:37 PM
–

Nope! It is not the same argument at all. You have precisely the same right to bodily autonomy as anyone else. That different choices might have different outcomes for different bodies does not somehow change the equal nature of the right. In short, you have the negative liberty to say no to other people; you do not have the positive liberty to any particular outcome or the positive liberty to impose an outcome on someone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:33 PM
1

Who is having parenthood forced on them? In what sense is coercion involved?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:28 PM
1

The best way for men not to murder women is for men to refrain from committing murder.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:21 PM
1

Can you answer the question?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:13 PM
–

No, two people decide to engage in sex that could result in the birth of a child. Subsequently, both people have an equal say in medical procedures performed on their bodies. Afterwards, a child that is born has rights to parental support from both people who chose to act to bring that child into existence. The child is the possessor of these rights to parental care. Those rights are accrued by virtue of the child’s existence without its consent. Those rights are not mediated by any counterfactu…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:12 PM
1

Can you answer the question?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:03 PM
–

Men and women equally decide whether to undergo any given medical procedure. Once a child is born, men and women have equal obligations to the person whom they caused to exist without that person’s consent. In some jurisdictions, parents have an equal right to meet those obligations to their child by transferring those obligations to proxies, like foster or adoptive parents, an imperfect solution to meeting their equal parental obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:03 PM
7

I did. I am otherwise done.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:00 PM
1

Sounds like eliminating the threat would involve incarcerating or killing murderous men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 11:00 PM
1

Let’s consider the following scenario: Two heterosexual male life partners, Steve and Frank, together push you into a pit. The pit is barren and cannot sustain life. You cannot escape the pit without assistance. Do Steve and Frank owe you any obligations of care and assistance to escape the pit? Do they owe you restitution for their choices? Yes, of course. Now let’s imagine that Frank decides that he doesn’t want to meet his obligations to you. He decides that Steve could choose to do it all hi…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:59 PM
10

You did not. You’re continuing to ask “correct?” and it’s tiresome. I have answered all of your questions. If you don’t have a point, I’m done engaging you.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:51 PM
1

That’s what we get from a sense of entitlement that reaches psychopathic levels. The way to minimize murder is for people not to commit murder, not to reward terroristic threats.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:44 PM
–

Once a child exists, it exists because of the choices made by both parents to act to bring it into existence. You keep talking about the child’s rights to parental support belong to the parents, as if parents can alienate them at will, but they don’t. They belong to the child. Your obligations to support someone you caused to exist don’t depend on anyone else’s choices. They belong to the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:42 PM
11

Can you skip the Socratic and make your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:33 PM
1

“I will murder person B if you try to enforce my obligation to person C” is both a terroristic threat that should not be rewarded and nonsensical.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:29 PM
–

Who should do the disallowing, and by what means? The child was mutually agreed upon—you both acted to create the child. The facticity of the child’s existence is what matters in terms of your obligations to it, not some counterfactual about what the other parent might or might not have done.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:24 PM
–

From conception to birth, there is no child with a separate existence to whom a father could provide parental support. After, there is.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:16 PM
–

No one is enslaved by meeting obligations to another person they created through their choices
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:10 PM
–

You have an equal right not to gestate another human being in your body. You have an equal obligation to care for a child that exists because of your actions. What you’re asking for is a right to impede someone else’s rights—the child’s—based on someone else’s choices.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 10:06 PM
–

A child’s rights to parental care are not contingent on the parents’ desires subsequent to the action taken to create the child without its consent. No one has a right to impose a medical procedure on anyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:56 PM
–

From conception to birth, there is no child with no existence separate from the mother’s body. Once a child is born and possesses a separate biological existence but lacking the ability to sustain itself, the child possesses positive rights to parental care from the people whose actions brought the child into existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:54 PM
–

The child’s rights to parental care are not contingent on either parent’s decisions other than the decision to engage in an act that created the child without the child’s consent. One parent cannot sever their obligations by citing what the other parent could or could not have done differently, because those rights belong to the child, not to the parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:34 PM
–

There is no inequality of rights or obligations.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:32 PM
–

The surrender of a child into someone else’s care in the event that parents cannot care for the child is a suboptimal compromise for meeting their obligation to provide parental care. It’s contingent on the social existence of foster care; in its absence, the child’s rights to parental care don’t just cease to exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:29 PM
–

I don’t know what this means. Giving birth at the end of a successful pregnancy is a biological fact, not something for which responsibility could be assigned or reassigned.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:25 PM
–

Parents are subject to the positive rights of the children they create. This is equally true of all parents. Until there is a child, there is no one to possess those rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:21 PM
–

Men and women have an equal right to evict someone else from their body. Once a child exists, that child possesses rights to parental care from the people who acted to bring that child into existence without the child’s consent. All people should have an equal right to engage in consensual sexual activity that could produce a child. All people should have an equal right to abort a pregnancy occurring inside their body. All people should have an equal right to parental support as children. There …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:14 PM
–

Men and women have an equal right to abort any pregnancy that occurs in their body. Once a child is born, that child possesses rights to parental care on the basis of your choice to participate in creating that child without their consent. You cannot sever those obligations on the basis of the other parent’s choices because the rights are owned by the child, not by you or the other parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/24 09:10 PM
1

You have a right, equal to any woman, not to have another human being occupy your body against your will. You have no right, just like anyone woman, to impose a surgical procedure on another person against their will.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/24 09:03 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter