Hypothetical: Consent and Conception

ConanTheCybrarian · 2024-01-10T00:49:22+00:00

I want to preface this by saying I am aware there are always exceptions, that adoption is sometimes an option, etc. I am answering in general about the majority of cases, as things are currently in the US.

Question 1: At what point is consent a factor? Pre-inebriation? Post? Pre-coitus? Post? Is consent a factor all the way to conception? Post?

What does "a factor" mean here?

Question 2: At what point post conception does the more inebriated person either have or not have responsibility for the decision? For the outcome?

What does "more inebriated" mean?

Would one person pass a breathalyzer and one wouldn't? What is the difference in inebriation between the two? Does one remember the evening and the other doesn't?

Is one so inebriated that the other has officially SAed them? If so, my answers below mostly won't apply because that's a totally different set of circumstances than your post currently implies.

Are the rights of both parties equal?

In the US, big picture, no. Men have more rights than women, both de facto and de jure (since the ERA was never ratified).

WRT pregnancy in general, also no. Women do not have the right to refuse to have the baby in all parts of the US, whereas men do, by ghosting.

WRT to your specific hypothetical, the rights are potentially not equal for each party in that the woman (assuming she has access to one) can choose to abort, but the man cannot.

If not, should they be?

All things being even, all rights should be equal. However, when it comes to pregnancy, all things are not even so: no.

Pregnancy has a more immediate and long-term, physical, emotional, mental, financial, and social impact on the pregnant person than it does on the other, and the rights should reflect that imbalance in responsibility and impact, just as they would with many other civil laws.

Is the issue consent?

That is an issue but not the only one.

Does one or both parties consent to sex only, with the potential of conception? Or not?

No one legally consents to straight intercourse without also de facto consenting to pregnancy.

What if one party cannot, or does not consent? Does this factor influence the outcome? Should it?

If you mean that they can and do consent to sex but not pregnancy, then no, it should not factor in. See above.

If you mean that they can't/ don't consent to sex then it ideally should.

However, in reality, the difficult truth is that sometimes people create situations for us that we would not have chosen for ourselves but we end up in them anyway; and no protestation that we didn't choose the situation will make it go away.

The reality is that a fetus does exist, and one cannot wish it out of existence simply by saying one didn't actively choose to create it.

Given that this pregnancy has occurred in your hypothetical, it has to be dealt with by both active participants, whether anyone likes it or not. Currently, the ways one can do so are determined by law and personal morals.

If someone doesn't like the laws, there are remedies for that.

If someone doesn't like the morals of a date, they can choose to leave the situation and not consent to sex with them.

So (unless one party was so inebriated that the other officially SAed them), they both opted to conceive a child and have to manage the consequences of that decision.

If one party is SAed, that is awful! There are remedies for them, too, although I'll acknowledge they are often not as robust as they should be.

edit: spelling and comma for clarity

Safinated · 2024-01-10T01:06:53+00:00

Post conception is not equal due to biology

But you have equality before conception

You know, during the important part

EulenWatcher · 2024-01-10T00:17:29+00:00

I support paper abortions as long as they protect women too. Consent to sex isn't consent to pregnancy and having a kid and men should have a way to opt out of being a parent. It should have a very limited timeframe so women would have enough time to terminate pregnancy though as well as some other caveats for the safety of both partners.

Having said that men have to operate under current legislative system and not the notion how things should be. Use condoms or do vasectomy if you're sure you don't want to have kids. Don't have sex with a woman you can't trust or who you disagree with on the topic of abortions.

On the topic of drunk sex, I guess it's the question of who was drunk-er and who initiated the contact. Overall I'd advise just not to have sex when you or your partner is drunk enough so you or they aren't able to consent. Don't have sex with drunk strangers in particular.

ArtifactFan65 · 2024-01-10T02:10:05+00:00

I think you automatically consent to the risk of conception as soon as you have consensual vaginal sex with somebody. If you don't want to take the chance that protection will fail then stick it in a different hole.

The woman has the option to have an abortion but she also has to bear the costs and health risks that go along with it. Not everything can be equal men and women's bodies are different.

Ideally lying about being on contraception or stealthing should be illegal but they are impossible to prove anyway so idk.

blebbyroo · 2024-01-10T01:56:40+00:00

Reproduction is not equal, the woman has to have a medical Procedure either way (birth or abortion).

Opting out for men as a default status would encourage men to not care about protection and would have the impact of coercing women into abortions because they can’t financially afford it where a system where men are forced to take responsibility in the birth of a child encourages them to protect themselves with condoms.

Both men and women should be motivated to protect themselves from unintended pregnancy right now the burden is on both albeit women will always carry the higher burden generally (excluding millionaires/ famous men here) , what you are suggesting places all the responsibility on women and last I checked reproduction takes two.

januaryphilosopher · 2024-01-10T07:21:51+00:00

Post conception, one party doesn't have anything to consent to as their body isn't being used in any way. Their role was giving sperm, and that was in the past, and they can't revoke consent for past actions. Those actions having consequences isn't something you can just remove by saying you don't consent. While the other still has something in their body in the present that they can consent or not consent to. It's asymmetric because conception is asymmetric, it's a much longer process on one side.

velvetalocasia · 2024-01-10T10:00:18+00:00

This might blow your mind but consent is no factor with conception.

Conception is a biological process that occurs if you consent to it or not.

FutureBannedAccount2 · 2024-01-10T00:57:25+00:00

1: By drunk, i'm going to assume you mean like slurring words, falling out of chairs and things of that nature. In that case it's not possible for either person to consent.

2: Since consent isn't possible to be obtained the nondrunk person is responsible for any result of their actions.

These answers would remain the same regardless of the gender.

AutoModerator · 2024-01-09T22:53:40+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AutoModerator · 2024-01-09T22:53:41+00:00

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

PowerGlove-it-so-bad · 2024-01-09T23:03:59+00:00

Pre-inebriation.
Neither unless they were drugged, kidnapped, or raped etc. Their FULL consent was given the moment they agreed to go on a date or out with whomever to wherever and do whatever. These are adults.

Makuta_Servaela · 2024-01-10T15:51:05+00:00

I'm not sure what specifically you are asking, but are you referring to consent to the pregnancy?

Disclaimer: I don't think anyone should be required to provide emotional care to a child they don't want. That just hurts the kid- he knows he is a burden. I think we should just in general have better social networks for assisting single parents or abandoned kids. I think both parents should be legally allowed to permanently forfeit all rights to their child with no chance of getting them back and no child support requirements, and give the kid to the other parent completely. This is especially important because as often than babytrapping a man is a thing, babytrapping a woman is a thing (especially since in a good chunk of countries and states, it is illegal for a pregnant couple to divorce, and once the baby is out, even if you divorce, an abusive partner can use access to the baby to abuse their ex partner, and it is way easier for a man to run from child support payments than for the woman to run from the man to whom she has a child.) That whole system needs to be overhauled.

Being legally and personally responsible for a child should be opt-in at or after birth for both parents. It would save a lot of people a lot of trouble.

The Question

As for "who consented to the pregnancy", the consent is the same:

As long as the being is in your body, you can consent or not consent to it being there. Once it is no longer in your body, you can't consent to if it continues to exist. Simple as. Abortion is the act of removing the pregnancy because you no longer consent to it being in your body. A woman can't kill a newborn just because she doesn't want a kid. She can retract consent as long as it is in her uterus, and the man can retract consent as long as it is in his balls.

As for the drunkness, my other note above would address that: the man, just like the woman, should be able to forfeit all rights permanently.

Plus, if we think of consent like I stated above, maybe we will finally think about taking male birth control medication studies seriously.

Title	Hypothetical: Consent and Conception
Author	TheRedPillRipper
Upvotes	1
Comments	63
Date	January 9, 2024 10:53 PM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/192sb6n/hypothetical_consent_and_conception/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/hypothetical-consent-and-conception.1242640 https://theredarchive.com/post/1242640

Comments