an article on why men shouldn't be able to financially abort : spoiler it would make it hard on women!!

Aimless-Nomad · 2022-05-03T18:07:18+00:00

"I dont want to lose my meal ticket"

There i saved you some time.

patxiku93 · 2022-05-03T22:11:01+00:00

Aren't we equal? Why don't they man up

antifeminist3 · 2022-05-03T19:34:47+00:00

If she cannot afford the kid then she should have kept it in her pants...

I learned that from feminism; they do not quite say it that way.

B1G_Fan · 2022-05-03T20:02:37+00:00

If women want to say “my body, my choice”, then men should be allowed to say “my money, my choice”

Men should be allowed to refuse to pay alimony and child support as well as cutting all taxes and spending that disproportionately benefits women

PaulfussKrile · 2022-05-03T18:36:02+00:00

I don’t think that the feminists thought it through when they decided they should reserve any power to take their kids away from their fathers. They just created the perfect narrative for fathers to be negligent with the new lives they put into the world. After all, why should I, as a man, support a child if I have no control over the role I play in their lives?

White_Ranger33 · 2022-05-03T19:06:42+00:00

“But ‘Paper abortions’ would, in general, make the situation even worse for women. Some would be forced to have abortions against their will or better judgment because they can’t afford to raise a kid alone.”

This is actually not against their will. This is them using their brain and making a rational decision. Forcing them to get an abortion against their will is akin to throwing them down the stairs. Something men would be infinitely less likely to do if the responsibilities of fatherhood could just be signed away.

TrilIias · 2022-05-03T18:48:06+00:00

"LEGAL PATERNAL SURRENDER"

not "financial abortion," not "paper abortion," stop trying to suggest that legal paternal surrender is the male equivalent to abortion. Every time MRAs do that it's just shooting ourselves in the foot.

Hitman322 · 2022-05-04T08:45:11+00:00

The author actually wrote this mental pretzel of a sentence, "One is a medical procedure that takes part in a woman’s body, and means there is never a child. It is a gesture that comes with a fraught history and political context. The other is a signature on a piece of paper. It doesn’t do away with parenthood itself, it just allows a man to free himself from financial obligation, allowing him to opt-out of his responsibilities towards a woman and child who already exists." Schrödinger's child?

gamerlololdude · 2022-05-03T21:49:35+00:00

it’s important for abortion to be easily accessible to women for men to be able to have financial abortion.

Otherwise you can get the case where neither of the couple wanted a child but it happens by accident and now they can’t abort. neither the woman nor the man.

In cases where the mother 100% chose to have the baby but father did not, then yes it would be fair for the father to have the right to not pay child support.

But if the mother did not choose to have the baby, father choosing to abort financially would be an unfair transaction. It’s putting the burden on the mother to birth and raise.

though if you think about it, women should have the right to financial abortion too. Just all humans. Leave the child with the father and claim that don’t want to pay for it. Since say the father was the one who wanted the child but not the mother.

alclarkey · 2022-05-04T02:07:37+00:00

Well since access to traditional abortion is no longer guaranteed for women, I no longer support financial abortion. You squirted the kid into her belly, don't make the rest of us pay for it.

Waterdrinker420h20 · 2022-05-03T19:18:21+00:00

I don't like the tone of men's rights because it seems to aim ultimately at an even more decayed and libertine society. I don't want to live among an entire country of deadbeats and baby killers and our generations will deal with the consequences of being raised (or not) by such pieces of shit. I'm sure giving up your kids for adoption will stop being shamed next.

JosephsonAdam · 2022-05-03T17:41:51+00:00

Up until recently, I leaned against the male right to a paper abortion out of a concern for how it could be abused. Having given it more thought, I suppose it could be a good idea under certain conditions to make abuse more difficult.

I present the following as a hypothetical model.

Here in Canada, I can legally consent to sex starting at the age of sixteen and, biologically, most boys can impregnate a woman once they reach the age of twelve.

Add to that that female sexual abuse of boys and men is far more common than is generally acknowledged:

https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/coerced-sex

So imagine a Right-to-Self-Exclusion Act that would allow me to apply for a free passport starting at the age of fifteen along with access to a free online passport account.

Starting at the age of fifteen, I could sign into my passport account to self-exclude, for five years autorenewable, from the freedom to give my consent to fornication under threat of a heavy fine that doubles for each repetition of the offence. I'd be locked in to the five-year self-exclusion period but could opt out of the autorenew at any time.

However, the Right-to-Self-Exclusion Act would grant the following benefits to any man who chooses to self-exclude:

The freedom to obtain a paper abortion.

Making it an offence, punishable by a heavy fine that doubles for each repetition of the offense, for any person to encourage, beyond merely giving her enthusiastic consent to, a self-excluded man to give his consent to fornication, as that would constitute incitement to commit a self-exclusion offense.

If a woman want to encourage, beyond merely giving her enthusiastic consent to, a man to give his consent to fornication, the onus would be on her to confirm his status. He could confirm his status to her by simply signing into his online passport account to send her an official email confirming his status.

Protection from rape-shield laws and a right to an inquisitorial hearing on request.

Since it would be linked to his passport, he might even enjoy this right abroad too depending on international agreements.

Since incitement to commit a self-exclusion offense would be much easier to prove than sexual assault, it would therefore provide a more effective deterrent against it. While the above would grant a man a right to a paper abortion, it would also provide more effective deterrents against him raping a woman and against a woman sexually assaulting him.

Anih1list · 2022-05-04T05:42:01+00:00

If we have a societal need to address an issue, and can't justify forcing individuals to pay, have the government subsidize it. This is why the government exists. This is not rocket science.

fh78f783_hH943gj-34f · 2022-05-04T06:53:22+00:00

The same women that are getting complete welfare free rides plus child support and untaxed earning ability up to the poverty level, with the child support and welfare not being counted as income?

Huge_Faithlessness35 · 2022-05-04T09:12:09+00:00

Like Kevin Samuels once said on one of his YouTube lives. If men had the chance to financially drop out of supporting a child he does not want women will stop getting pregnant to try and trap a man financially.

DirtyPartyMan · 2022-05-04T16:39:30+00:00

shocked Picachu face

Title	an article on why men shouldn't be able to financially abort : spoiler it would make it hard on women!!
Author	hailtotheking999
Upvotes	207
Comments	63
Date	May 3, 2022 4:44 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/uhka1a/an_article_on_why_men_shouldnt_be_able_to/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/an-article-on-why-men-shouldnt-be-able-to.1115710 https://theredarchive.com/post/1115710

Comments