~ archived since 2018 ~

a man's right to choose

toptrool

October 31, 2012

20 upvotes

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/opinion/01conley.html?ei=5090&en=e0b6748a2c82b86d&ex=1291093200&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	a man's right to choose
Author	toptrool
Upvotes	20
Comments	30
Date	October 31, 2012 3:56 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/12ej4q/a_mans_right_to_choose/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/a-mans-right-to-choose.1010177 https://theredarchive.com/post/1010177

Comments

[–]mythin 27 points28 points29 points 13 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMortalOne 12 points13 points14 points 13 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I agree with you. But at the same time the argument used against men surfaces: You shouldn't do the deed if you're not prepared to become a wage slave to a woman and child.

Why is there such a discrepancy between the rights of men and the rights of women? Why do men bare all the obligations and have no rights? And by extension, when talking about correcting the situation, why not extend some of that argument to women? Why not stress their obligation to the father?

If the father wants the child, why is his desire ess important than the mother's desire? Why, in every discussion and policy and law are the woman's wishes above the man's?

What comes to mind is that the courts take the intent of the mother into account and only the mother's. As an example: A woman on her way to get an abortion is shot, and the fetus doesn't survive. Is it a double homicide? She was going to kill the child herself had she not been shot. In a similar scenario, if a woman is shot going to church and the fetus she wanted to keep to term didn't survive, is it a double homicide?

And how do the above scenario's change when the father's desires enter the picture?

[–]TenLink 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMortalOne 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I believe that defining life as beginning at the point that a fetus could survive out of the mother would work great, with transplant to a device that could sustain it for the normal nine months so that it could live a normal life being legal if the device works. This makes it so that feminists have to push for the development of an artificial uterus to help women, but this also help's men keep their child instead of it going to an orphanage.

This also removes the key obligation of the mother in a child's life as egg donors could become a thing with the artificial uterus. Feminists lose that argument for keeping women sacred. They also have to push for it. This makes it so that they have to advocate for their own downfall, even though they wouldn't realize it. And it would work brilliantly.

[–]DrRam121 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMortalOne 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TenLink 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Jazzeki -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TenLink 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mythin 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]carchamp1 -12 points-11 points-10 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mythin 10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]vicedets 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

This, I can mostly get behind... the one exception is the reason.

I don't think that whether a father has equal options determines whether a woman's options are rights, options, or privileges. The choice of which path to take regarding every option prior to conception is a right even though those rights aren't equally recognized and those options aren't evenly distributed.

Termination of a pregnancy for birth control purposes is not a right. It is legal in most first world nations, but laws permitting it are based on public opinion, and public opinion on it is based on subjective reasoning. It represents not an exercise of control over just one's own body, but an exercise of power over the body of a helpless and unprotected living human. As such, it's a human rights violation, not a human right.

Equal opportunity, however, is a right. As things stand now, the recognition of a father's parental rights (pro or con) hinges on the mother's choice to exercise or abandon hers. Women have the choice to escape maternal responsibility even after birth using safe haven laws. The ability to do that with no repercussions is a privilege, regardless of the arguments in favor of keeping that option available. It is not the existence of those opportunities that is wrong, but the fact that the mother is permitted by society and law to unilaterally make for both parents the choice to embrace or eschew parental responsibility.

If the law is going to consider full abandonment of parental responsibility (in exchange for full surrender of parental rights) to be an option to which one sex has the right, then society is responsible for legally mandating that the opposite sex has equal opportunity to exercise that same right, even if the method is not the same, and even if the other parent chooses not to exercise that right. That doesn't redefine the nature of the choice for the privileged sex. It merely indicates where there is discrimination, and what must be done to remedy that.

[–]carchamp1 5 points6 points7 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

As in...

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Yep, exactly.

Feminists always said they were fighting for equal "rights". Not the recognition of their inherent rights. MRA's are fighting for "men's rights".

What I see fought for in this sub is the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I see a fight for equal treatment under the law, as described in the constitution. There isn't anything in the advocacy here that really represents a demand for privilege, just a fight to not have one's rights overshadowed by someone else's privilege... essentially, to end the way society ignores the basic human rights of men.

[–]carchamp1 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SpawnQuixote -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1 -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link