TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/seduction
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

      • Artful Prudence
      • A Voice for Men
      • Alpha Game
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Good Looking Loser
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • In Mala Fide
      • KillToParty
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • Married Man Sex Life
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Power Moves
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • The Spearhead
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Found on imgur

Bewolfs

January 25, 2017
1652 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://imgur.com/gallery/CjSmT
Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Found on imgur
Author

Bewolfs

Upvotes 1652
Comments 196
Date January 25, 2017 10:14 PM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5q6be2/found_on_imgur/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/found-on-imgur.933274
https://theredarchive.com/post/933274
Top posts by Bewolfs

What feminism would stand for if they were for equality

3593 upvotes
February 19, 2017
/r/MensRights

Karen Straughan speaking for equality.

2622 upvotes
April 30, 2017
/r/MensRights

US Tax payers money not spent equal

146 upvotes
May 13, 2017
/r/MensRights

Judge wears feminist symbol to court, raises questions about her fairness

143 upvotes
February 1, 2017
/r/MGTOW

Feminism "Equality around the world" Only condemns female mutilation.

91 upvotes
March 1, 2017
/r/MensRights

Wanted to share this website

67 upvotes
November 12, 2016
/r/MensRights

Feminist Zoe Quinn Bullies ‘The Last Night’ Game Developer for Criticizing Social Justice

60 upvotes
June 13, 2017
/r/MensRights

pcgamer harming men in games is ok but harming women in games not ok

41 upvotes
November 7, 2016
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]I__Dont_Tele 26 points27 points28 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

i'd march for male birth control.

[–]shinslap 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Yes please, there was so much hype some years ago about how 2014 was gonna be the big year for male birth control but it's 2017 and we still ain't got shit

[–]essentialfloss 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

http://www.medicaldaily.com/male-birth-control-vasalgel-closer-becoming-reality-heres-everything-we-know-so-far-343032

[–]shinslap 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I read a very similar article in 2013 so I'm just cautiously optimistic now

[–]essentialfloss 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm on their mailing list and they are moving through the FDA approval process. I'm getting a vasectomy this spring so I'm not really concerned, but I'm pretty optimistic that it will be available in the next 5 years.

[+]flockingmongoose points 9 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

They tried a study and it was cut short due to the men in the trial dropping out because of the side effects. These side effects are exactly what women experience while on BC. So I don't know if they'll be conducting another study

[–]scyth3s 25 points26 points27 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Please don't strawman us.

except for the severe emotional problems. That was definitely more than we see with the birth control pill.

One man developed severe depression, and another tried to commit suicide.

Two committees . . . Cut the study short

Researchers stopped the experiment because the side effects were more common, and generally more severe.

If I recall correctly it was also significantly less effective in its actual performance. This article is (probably intentionally) vague about that. They left out the exact number either because of incompetence or an agenda. In an article like this, that number is absolutely critical, but instead they leave it out, saying:

there were only a handful of pregnancies among partners of men in the trial.

Don't spread mis information like this:

These side effects are exactly what women experience while on BC.

Finally, many of the participants said they would still use the medication.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

THANK YOU

[–]Erudite_Delirium 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah, one should also remember that this is by far the least promising of the male options being looked into. There is Vasagel (and I think one other similar one) which creates a solid plastic block between the penis and testicles; there is also the one that is based on an Indonesian boiled herb which pupportedly temporarily makes the sperm heads too soft to be effective.

The one that got the media attention for bombing spectacularly was the hormonal option; since the male problem is mechanically different from the female one there is no reason to go with a hormonal solution.

Many have made the argument (tldr did a good video) that those heavily pushing the hormonal option on men have previously been shown to be pushing the idea that men are defective women and that the whole world would be better if men would be more like women; and surprise surprise the totally coincidental side effect of the hormonal option is exactly that. And one should also note that the majority of the articles publicising this garbage followed the classic tactic of trying to make men capitulate with their agenda ie shame.

Sure the other options may have run into problems in their official testing; but Im sure none of us would be surprised if they were being intentionally stalled because there is no benefit on a social, governmental or financial level to giving men comprehensive control over their fertility.

[–]2fuknbusyorviceversa 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can't they just put a ball valve in the Vas. It could be powered through induction from an outside source. That way you could periodically open the valves and let the testicules work normally.

[–]essentialfloss 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Vasalgel is in the works. Looks like 2018 is the soonest possible.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/male-birth-control-vasalgel-closer-becoming-reality-heres-everything-we-know-so-far-343032

[–]Gnometard 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not exactly, dumbass.

[+]rick-p points 9 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

Why did they use a picture of Gavin free?

[–]tigrn914 128 points129 points130 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Cause he's in a penis costume drinking beer?

[–]TheSynchro 45 points46 points47 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Also a man, in fact.

[–]CASHSWAG99 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

hold on we dont know that for a fact

[–]DemonB7R 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

His girlfriend is Meg Turney. I think that speaks for itself

[–]CASHSWAG99 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

implying women arent into meg turney

[–]thefilthyhermit 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I thought it was some kind of squid costume at first, to be honest.

[–]JoelTLoUisBadass 150 points151 points152 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Lol look at the comments, "FEMINISTS WANT THAT TOO" no they don't.

"Women's issues are more life threatening like high frequency of rape and physical abuse, they exist with men too but are much more common with women" yep rape is more life threatening than war. Also aren't more men raped every year than women? Cause I swear I remember reading something like that.

[–]Dembara 97 points98 points99 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, most of our numbers on rape are misleading unless you want to spend a few hours explaining them all. But yes, more men are raped in prison than all other rapes combined by our best estimates.

[–]Mr_Fancywaters 79 points80 points81 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Surprisingly enough you're 100% correct if you factor in prison population, which absolutely counts.

[+]PurWhip points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Literally rape culture. People take it for granted that if you go to prison you're gonna get raped, it's even funny to them. "Don't drop the soap! xD"

[–]essentialfloss 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I find this so disgusting. People accept it, laugh about it, even consider it part of the punishment. Depriving inmates of their liberty isn't enough, they should get raped too?! Disgusting.

[–]marsbat 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Those rapes don't count, they're men.

[–]Mr_Fancywaters 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

God forbid men have troubles, right?

[–]I_am_jacks_reddit 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Women also get raped in prison. By guards and other inmates.

[–]Pickle_Jr 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Nobody said they don't. They just said that if you factor in prison, more men are raped than women.

[–]I_am_jacks_reddit -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I didn't see anybody link to a news article or a study that was done that actually proved that.

[–]Pickle_Jr 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2449454/More-men-raped-US-women-including-prison-sexual-abuse.html here you go!

I personally believe that we should stop making rape a gender issue. Making it so invalidates it when somebody of the opposite gender gets raped. We should focus on rape as a whole, not as a who gets raped more.

[–]I_am_jacks_reddit 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. I just enjoy sources for claims.

[–][deleted] 39 points40 points41 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Yeah that's bad but....it's not as bad as [insert women's issue here] because it's worse when bad things happen to women." -- Every Feminist I've Ever Talked Too

"Yeah I'm against [insert men's issue here] but I've never done anything to stop it and I probably never will." -- Every Feminist I've Ever Talked Too

[–]Brandwein 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

"So because some bad stuff happens to women 60% and men 40% of all cases, that means we need to focus on women 99%!"

"No that doesn't mean that we must only focus on majority cases, in fact minorities are far more important! We need to focus more on LGBT people even if they are only 1% of the cases! Fuck men and white people, and fuck logic!"

[–]PBody97 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, prison rape is not rape, apparently.

[–]Hirudin 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Read that quote as: "Women's issues are more threatening if we have no idea what men's problems are."

[–]We_Fist_Children -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Also aren't more men raped every year than women?"

And if you listen quietly, you can hear my sides disappearing into orbit

[–]MizterUltimaman 25 points26 points27 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Less shitposting, more focus on being serious

I like the idea, but wearing penis costumes?

[–]0xBEEFBEEF 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's a bit of a tongue in cheek jab at the pussy hats. At first i had to question if this was serious.

[–]dontpet 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's for a good cause dude!

[–]AFuckYou 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Real issues.

Not made up issues by people who support shria law.

[+]AliceOxalis points 9 years ago [recovered] (9 children) | Copy Link

Women should have to get the father's consent to have an abortion?

[–]AFuckYou 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

Edit: http://i.imgur.com/hDkhpBy.jpg

[+]AliceOxalis points 9 years ago [recovered] (7 children) | Copy Link

The OP's picture literally says "We can march against...women aborting your own child without your consent."

Do you agree with this?

[–]scyth3s 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't. If they don't have my consent they shouldn't get my income, though.

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The person in op's picture is not necessarily arguing for the right to deny a woman the abortion. It's maybe just describing the reality, that as a man you have no say in the decision. Its the only way it should be and I have never actually heard a mra arguing in favor of forced child birth. Why would someone even do that, it would make no sense. It still sucks though, if you want kids and your partner doesn't and aborts. Again, he's not necessarily arguing to change that.

[+]AliceOxalis points 9 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

What's the point in marching against something if you don't want to change it?

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You're making the mistake to think the guy in op's picture has thought his sentence through. Of course nobody would march for the right to force women to stay pregnant.

[+]AliceOxalis points 9 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Of course nobody would march for the right to force women to stay pregnant.

thousands of people do, though

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Marching for the right to force women to stay pregnant out of a men's right perspective is ridiculous.

Marching for the right of the unborn fetus is a coherent argument. I am pro choice though, for men and women.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Let's also protest that there isn't a male version of 18USC 116.

[–]AerMarcus 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/116

(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(b) A surgical operation is not a violation of this section if the operation is—

(1) necessary to the health of the person on whom it is performed, and is performed by a person licensed in the place of its performance as a medical practitioner; or

(2) performed on a person in labor or who has just given birth and is performed for medical purposes connected with that labor or birth by a person licensed in the place it is performed as a medical practitioner, midwife, or person in training to become such a practitioner or midwife.

(c) In applying subsection (b)(1), no account shall be taken of the effect on the person on whom the operation is to be performed of any belief on the part of that person, or any other person, that the operation is required as a matter of custom or ritual.

(d) Whoever knowingly transports from the United States and its territories a person in foreign commerce for the purpose of conduct with regard to that person that would be a violation of subsection (a) if the conduct occurred within the United States, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.



How tf do we have that, but not a male equivalent??? (I realise this is U.S.A, but still.)

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Pretty sad, in almost every modern country, the slightest pin prick of a baby girl's genitals will get your ass thrown in prison (rightfully so) but it's perfectly acceptable to cut a whole anatomical structure from a baby boy's genitals.

America is the only modern country that circumcises baby boys regularly; in Europe, Asia, South America, and Central America only Jews, Muslims, and those with extreme medical conditions are circumcised.

[–]Sproded 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What law is that?

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you could type it into Google you would find out it's the law that banned female genital mutilation.

[+]GunOfSod points 9 years ago* [recovered] (78 children) | Copy Link

Children are not aborted, foetus's are.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Wait...Has it been decided that unborn pregnancy is not alive or are you talking about first trimester?

Honestly curious. Don't bite my head off.

[–]kingjoey52a 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Depends on who you ask

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

honestly that's the main debate over abortion rights. It's not whether or not a woman has a right to her body, it's whether or not the fetus is a clump of cells or a human being. If it's basically a tumor, then yeah abortion makes sense, but if you believe it's a human being, then pro-life makes sense. Personally, I think abortion is justified before about 27 weeks, after 27 weeks there's a 90% survival rate so I pretty much say that's human at that point. Others think otherwise.

[–]mabeira 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

27 weeks is not human? Are you serious?

You're basing the decision on human/not human on survival rates/technological advancement? if we advance technologically so we can save fetus at 4th week at 100% would that suddenly change them into human for you?

baby at 27th week: http://www.whattoexpect.com/pregnancy/week-by-week/week-27.aspx

[–]DerEwigeKatzendame 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh man. If technology advanced to that point, I'd like that.

[–]thatguy3O5 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It would be interesting if that logic applied to other issues. Should it be legal to murder terminal cancer patients, they have a slim chance of survival. Should it be legal to rob lottery winner, statistically they LL probably lose it anyway. Steal a teenagers cars, they probably just wreck it anyway.

Then again if we based medical treatment on possible success rates we could all probably save a lot of money.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

deleted

[–]ArgonGryphon 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That would basically be an artificial womb at that point, which means the woman doesn't have to stay pregnant, but the fetus could be incubated and then someone who wants it could adopt it.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hey, it's a 90% survival rate, I understand it looks pretty mewling but that's the statistic I found. I'm not saying that's the by all be all end all solution but that /idea/, that concept that we haven't figured out what is and isn't a human is the core of the abortion debate.

[–]SwiggityStag 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Unpopular opinion, but I don't really think it matters whether you consider it a human being or not. It's never experienced the world, it hasn't developed a personality, it probably isn't even aware that it exists. I feel like those things are what makes a human being more than how many cells it has. I'm not saying that everyone should start having abortions right before it's born or anything, just some food for thought.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I appreciate the civility. I've thought about that, and frankly I'm not 100% decided on the matter myself.

[–]IWantToProgramInC 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Newborns fit that description too.

[–]SwiggityStag -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They're at the point where they're actually capable of developing those traits, a fetus cannot develop those traits, it is in a state preventing it from doing so. It is also in the process of experiencing the world, so it doesn't fit all of those criteria.

[–]restrictionenzyme 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, that's the only men's rights topic that I just don't get. They are upset when women get an abortion because they wanted the kid to be born but the woman did not want to have it. If it were possible for women to transfer their fetsuses (fetusi?) to the father and let him carry it, then it would be a different conversation. But it's not possible. I think that generally speaking men and women are more similar than they are different, but the few biological differences that they have are not in any way trivial. Men don't have to deal with periods and pregnancy, but likewise they won't ever get to incubate a baby themselves. Women aren't usually as physically strong as men, but they can have children without a man ever living on the same planet or in the same time period (just need frozen sperm). None of us were given the choice of what sex we wanted to be born as. Just the luck of the draw. We all have to deal with the hand that we were dealt. For women, this means choosing to be pregnant or not. Men don't have that choice because they can't get pregnant. Why do any of them think that they should also get to choose whether or not a woman has the responsibility of incubating a child that was made using half of their DNA? If they can invent a way to transfer a fetus to themselves or a device that can incubate it until it is fully gestated, then maybe we can have that conversation. But until they can figure out a way to incubate a fetus, then they have no say in the matter because it's not their bodies that are being used to carry the fetus, regardless of whether the fetus contains half of their DNA. It's just the hand that they got dealt.

[–]Sproded 45 points46 points47 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Well it's the fact that if the woman wants the baby he has to pay for it even if he wants it, but if the woman doesn't want it, he has no say in it

[–]restrictionenzyme 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, I think that's the problem. If a man doesn't want the baby, there should be some way for him to get out of paying child support.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

It seems to me, that the argument that women should carry to term if the father wants to, seems to come from some vindictive false equivalence.

A mother carrying to term when the father doesn't want it, is not equivalent to making a mother carry to term when she doesn't want it.

The physical reality that it's the mother carrying the newborn to term for 9 months. There's no argument that is going to create a perfect equality here.

[–]Meyright 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

A mother carrying to term when the father doesn't want it, is not equivalent to making a mother carry to term when she doesn't want it.

What mra's generally are arguing for is a way to sign away all responsibilities for a child and not for forcing a woman to stay pregnant. That would be nonsense

[–]Stankmonger 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

The idea that when you consent you are also consenting to throw your life away potentially seems so absurd.

[–]Meyright 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The idea that when you consent you are also consenting to throw your life away potentially seems so absurd.

Because women aren't held to the same standard. They're not told to keep it in their pants if they wanted to have no child. They have a choice.

[–]ArgonGryphon 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The hell? Yes we are. Just because we do have a choice doesn't mean women aren't shamed for it. Not to mention the increasing difficulty of getting the abortion if you're not fairly well off or can find assistance/transportation.

[–]Meyright 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

The hell? Yes we are. Just because we do have a choice doesn't mean women aren't shamed for it.

That sucks. But the issue is not being shamed for the choice, the issue is not having the choice at all. For men and for women.

Not to mention the increasing difficulty of getting the abortion if you're not fairly well off or can find assistance/transportation.

That sucks too. But at least you actually can get the abortion at all. Now lets fight together that men can have that right too, like I did my whole life in favor of abortion.

Just please try to imagine it was the other way around. A mra telling you how difficult it is for a man to "financially abort" an unborn child if you're not fairly well off to find a lawyer and how they still get shamed for "financial abortion" all while as a woman you legally can't get an abortion at all, you're forced to raise it 18 years, no choice at all if the man says so. How would you react, would you still have the audacity to ask "The hell?"

There are men, who can't afford to raise a child - man ends up in prison + child support

There are women raping men - man pays child support

There are men who are not the biological father - man pays child support

There are men who's sperm gets stolen - man pays child support

There are men who were told the woman is on the pill - man pays child support

[–]ArgonGryphon 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Literally left a comment just before my first that I'm for men being able to surrender rights for not having to pay support. I think with a woman's choice to continue a pregnancy means if she is going to need support, she needs to make sure the father is on board, or else she shouldn't continue with it.

Just kind of like...how is there any sort of equivalence between "keep it in your pants" and deadbeat vs. that, being called a whore and a baby killer, whatever.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No there isn't, but it's comparing growing apples to plowing fields.

9 months of nature [growing a child inside you, giving birth] VS 18 years of legal and financial obligation; one that if you do not uphold you will be thrown in jail, lose work licenses and no one will give a fuck about your quality of life.

Completely different situations. Neither of which we should be forcing on women or men against their will. In yet, we force it on men all the time. Even men who are not the fathers of children get stuck paying for children that are not them. Whether it's by paternity fraud, or other trumped up bullshit reasoning like "being around" a lot and there being no one else on the hook paying yet.

MRAs mostly don't care about abortion.

[–]ArgonGryphon 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because bodily autonomy should be considered one of the most important rights someone has. Do you want to be forced to give up a kidney to someone? No, because it should be your choice. Same with continuing a pregnancy. Until an artificial womb is possible, or men can gestate the fetus, it is not fair to the woman to even consider forcing her to give up the right to her own body just because you want a baby and she doesn't. And no, I do not think men should be forced to pay if a woman choose to keep a child. She makes her own decisions. I understand "it's for the child" but if a woman can't afford to have a child and the father doesn't want to be involved, she shouldn't keep it.

[+]bot92a -12 points-11 points-10 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What do you mean he has to pay for it? It's 2017 bruh women have jobs too:

[–]xx2Hardxx 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He means that raising a child is expensive as fuck and generally is intended to be supported by a family, not a single parent.

[–]thesquataholic 35 points36 points37 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I see your side. You can't force a women to carry a baby to term. But on the other hand, why should a man be forced to pay if he does not want to support a baby 18 years?

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit. I just realized this isn't the case in Canada. He has to give up any rights of being a father to not be held responsible for child support.

[–]DerEwigeKatzendame 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you sure that's possible? Sounds amazing.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. Well...I think? Elifino

[–]restrictionenzyme 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think that they should have to pay. There should be a way for them to get out of that. The current system is not right.

[–]Phrodo_00 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Sure, it's a biological inconvenience and I think you hit the mark, but what about women being able to give a child in adoption without even telling the father about it? What about women forcing a man support a child they don't want? And what about women tricking men into supporting or even rising children that aren't theirs?

[–]restrictionenzyme 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Those things are not right and should be illegal. If a woman decides that she will have a baby, she should be required to inform the father so that he can be a part of the child's life if he chooses. And of course it should also be illegal to trick men into raising kids that aren't theirs. Giving everyone DNA tests could fix that. For child support, I want children to be supported, but at the same time, if a man didn't want the kid, then I don't think he should be the one to pay for the kid. Maybe some sort of compromise? Like, if the man didn't want the kid and doesn't want to take care of it financially then he can just sign his parental rights away? The same can be true of the mom. If the dad wants the kid rather than letting the mom put it up for adoption, she would have to help pay child support, unless she wants to sign her parental rights away. For people who don't make much money but still want to be a part of their kid's life, maybe we can require very very small (token) child support payments so that people aren't encouraged to give up their parental rights just because the child support payments are too high for their tight budgets.

[–]greenbluepurple95 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Inconvenience is a very demeaning way to put it. A zit is a biological inconvenience. Being pregnant is not. Also there are so many children put up for adoption that will not find families and will stay in the system until they're 18. It isn't really a good option

[–]Pietat 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Would it be similar to a woman demanding a man get a vasectomy? Should we give our partner equal say over our reproductive organs?

[–]FrogTrainer 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

funny you should mention that

Apparently, many doctors in this country really do require men who come to them seeking vasectomies to fess up to marital status, and to then get their wives’ written consent before the physician will perform the procedure? In some cases, doctors require a face to face meeting with a man’s wife—in addition to the signed consent from her—before a vasectomy will be performed.

https://goodmenproject.com/newsroom/are-men-legally-required-to-ask-their-spouses-permission-for-a-vasectomy/

[–]ArgonGryphon 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Same thing for women. Ask about the husband, if you already have kids, "what if you change your mind?" most of the time you have to have a decently long history of asking for it before a doctor will do it. You can get lucky though.

[–]restrictionenzyme 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No one should have any say in what people do with their own reproductive organs, which is the point that I thought I was making. Perhaps something got lost in translation.

[–]Pussycatpurr 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well sakd

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Women aren't usually as physically strong as men, but they can have children without a man ever living on the same planet or in the same time period (just need frozen sperm).

I would question that a pregnant woman would survive with no one around her or any scientific progress or technological innovation made by men.

Why do any of them think that they should also get to choose whether or not a woman has the responsibility of incubating a child that was made using half of their DNA?

Nobody in their right mind does think that. And no mra is arguing for that. Mra's are arguing for a way to sign away all parental rights and responsibilities for a child until abortion is not legally possible anymore.

[–]restrictionenzyme 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why do you imagine the pregnant woman would be alone? I thought that the presence of other women and technology was implied in my brief scenario. Sorry if that was unclear. Although, your response makes it sound like you are trying to defend the scientific and technological achievements made by men...I just don't know who you are defending against? Men have made amazing contributions to those fields. Anyone who would try to deny that isn't worthy of your time.

until abortion is not legally possible anymore.

I don't believe that all MRAs are seeking to ban abortion. I'm definitely not. I won't debate abortion with you here though. There is no point when neither of us is going to budge no matter what the other person says.

[–]mabeira -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

The choice whether she wants to carry a baby is made when she decide to have sex.

you gave argument that because women can incubate and men can't they should be allowed to abort without question. i argue that is wrong, and that because they can incubate, they have bigger responsibility to practice safe sex and use and force partner to use modern contraceptives.

using abortion as a contraceptive with inane arguments like "woman body, woman choice" is just propagating lack of education in the interest of big pharma

abortion should be exceptions: rape cases, fetal development problems, danger to mother health

[–]Kmnder 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

In your opinion it should be an exception then. I'd just like you to think about what happens to a woman's body when she has a miscarriage. In your opinion the miscarriage should only happen in the case of rape, incestuous relationships that jazz right? I know you don't think that, but a miscarriage is a biological abortion, and the difference between the two is its artificial instead of natural. Idk if I got the point across, but it was presented to me like this as a different opinion.

[–]mabeira 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well yeah, I'm sorry but I didn't quite get the context.

Why are we comparing abortion to miscarriage? As an effect to woman body? I did not argue that woman should be forced to abort if raped, but that she definitely needs to have an option and full medical/social support to do it.

[–]Kmnder 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Comparing the two because they have the same result. Just different ways of it happening, like I said before one is biological and the other artificial. But if your body can do it naturally, why is it such a difference when it's done artificially? That's the context im trying to give you.

[–]mabeira 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well there are thousands people dying each second. Does that mean I can go out and kill whoever I want because the natural and artificial results are the same?

I don't really see where the moral/social acceptability raises from the result itself?

[–]restrictionenzyme 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Ideally, everyone should be using birth control and abortion should be a last resort. Regardless of the reason a woman gets pregnant, we have the technology to help women have safe abortions. There is no reason why we shouldn't do it. By your logic, if a man or a woman has sex and catches an STD, we shouldn't do anything about it because they engaged in an activity that carries risk. It's their fault that they had sex and got an STD. I hope that you can see how unreasonable that is. Humans are different from most other animals in that we find sex to be a pleasurable activity that we like to engage in with our partners without the desire for it to lead to procreation. Sex is a healthy way that couples can express their love for each other. Another problem with the "women deciding to have sex = taking responsibility for getting pregnant" argument is that if everyone had that mindset...guys would be getting laid way less often, even if they were married. Which is why I don't get why any guy would make that argument. He is basically trying to convince women not to have sex with men because it is too risky. Please don't convince them of that. Education on contraceptives is important. I know that there is a huge mistrust of big pharma, but your argument is a little flawed in that getting more women on birth control (which can be expensive) and using condoms is still going to make pharmaceutical companies a tidy profit, maybe even more than if they sell abortion inducing drugs. So, I'm not sure that they are actually behind a push to increase the number of abortions that people get (at a little googling didn't lead me to any relevant sources).

[–]mabeira 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

abortion should be a last resort

No, it shouldn't. When you propagate abortion as a contraceptive you're doing the disservice to society that should be pushing for better contraceptives and better education (in no sentence i even hinted that women should have less active sex life)

Killing human being for a pleasure is not what society should be pushing for.

[–]ArgonGryphon 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's what the last resort means. As in, only if birth control is a failure (or the usual exceptions, rape, abnormality, etc). Which is going to happen, always and forever, even the implant has a .03% failure rate, meaning if 1,000,000 women were using it, in a year, 300 will become pregnant.

And honestly, if you really think that a woman has an abortion for pleasure, you need to stop talking to mentally ill people and listen to people who have actually had one. It's not easy. Even to women who are relieved and do not regret it, it's still hard. It's still going to feel terrible. Even if you know it's the right thing for your life. It sucks.

[–]mabeira 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

only if birth control is a failure

Sorry, while one can claim that no birth control is perfect, 700k-800k abortions a year in US alone could not all be birth control failure, it is a culture of using abortion instead of contraceptives.

[–]restrictionenzyme -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, ok. I think we are just coming down to the fundamental difference between people who are pro-choice and pro-life. I do not think that a fetus has any rights. You do. We could debate all day about it, but both of us have probably already had long conversations about this topic. I don't think that either of us is going to change our minds at this point. Sorry, I guess we hit a dead end.

[–]Griddamus 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

The minute that egg is fertilised, you're preventing a child from being born by aborting it.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

deleted

[–]Griddamus 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

What wife?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What wife what?

[–]Griddamus 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Exactly

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactamundo por favor

[–]77jamjam -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

a lot of pro-abortion people don't seem to get this, it's not about whether it's a human or not, it's that the once inevitable human never got a chance

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Inevitable human?

Apparently miscarriages aren't a thing now.

[–]77jamjam 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

?? nobody chooses to have a miscarriage you know

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Missing the point.

Pregnancy, even by nature, doesn't mean "inevitable human". Keep your arguments accurate.

[–]crazypants88 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It does if there's nothing, natural or human to prevent it from forming into a human.

[+]WhoIsHarlequin -7 points-6 points-5 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

You mean a human was aborted.

[–]FeierInMeinHose 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

A group of cells containing DNA that would be consider human, yes. Fetuses lack personhood, though, so calling it a human is a bit disingenuous. Late term abortions are usually only allowed if the pregnancy is life threatening, so by the time the fetus is a person it's already not going to get aborted.

[+]PickupTrucksandGuns points 9 years ago [recovered] (9 children) | Copy Link

There is no scientific nor philosophical/moral consensus on what constitutes a person. Your argument is based on something you made up in your imagination.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

well, if it can survive outside the human body (read: 27 weeks or so) then I can consider it human/ a person. Before that, yeah it's basically a clump of life-feeding tumor growth. But isn't that the big debate behind abortion? Whether or not the cells have a right to life or not?

[–]thatguy3O5 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

By that logic is anyone requiring ongoing medical treatment for survival not a human and can be terminated?

It's hard to rationalize the other person's view. Being pro abortion but also pro helping those in need is as confusing to some as being anti abortion and pro death penalty is to others.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

well interestingly enough, to me, yeah I am in favor of voluntary euthanasia but, that's an ethical debate for another time.

[–]SwiggityStag 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I would say that human status cannot be revoked, once you develop it, you don't just lose it.

[–]IWantToProgramInC 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Is a corpse still human then?

[–]SwiggityStag 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Obviously if you're dead, you're now pretty much just an object. I thought that much would be obvious.

[–]thatguy3O5 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So if someone has a condition preventing it from being self sufficient from birth, does it ever reach human status?

[–]SwiggityStag 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If we're talking about as in whether they're able to survive without aid, again it's a matter of where they stand on the other criteria. If they are conscious of the world around them and are able to comprehend and interact with it, then definitely. If they're able to comprehend the world around them but not interact with it at all, that's where the grey area begins. It's hard to tell if someone in that state is conscious of the world around them or not, and honestly I feel like that kind of state of existence would be one of the most unpleasant things possible.

[–]ArgonGryphon 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The ongoing medical treatment is not coming from an unwilling human though. A better argument would be if we hooked sick people up to healthy ones against their will.

[–]Sproded -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Whether it's a human or not, it the government is giving you the option, it should be a decision between the parents

[–]Japonica 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like this idea, but the costumes might make the general populace take us less seriously. Recently, protesting has seemed to be an effective way to get the nation's attention, so I think it would help our cause!

[–]Bubbaluke 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

we can wear penis costumes and drink beer

we could be marching to bring back slavery, I don't care, I'm fucking in.

[–]Senpai_notices_me 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We should do this but somewhere mid march everyone puts them on unanimously.

[–]belil569 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Why the hell would you use Gavin? Meg is a huge feminist and defiantly wears the pants in that marriage. I like the AH stuff and watch quite often but he is probably one of the worst people to have picked for that post.

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

This is the problem. You think that masculinity means dominance completely.

[–]belil569 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Way to make that assumption. All I said is she is a dominating force in their partnership. Your comment is just pure assumption

[–]PBody97 -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And what is wrong with not adhering to gender roles if you don't want to?

[–]belil569 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely nothing. No one said their was.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Your post has major inflections of "her wearing the pants", what else could you mean by this? Did this saying take on another meaning completely different from my interpretation? Also saying that someone who made/partnered in two high ranking YouTube channels; one Science based and the other gaming, is a poor example of a man's March mascot because he has a partner who uses her sexuality to her advantage and he respects her ideals of feminist values ; according to you, only means he not insecure. Not that he's some wimp.

[–]belil569 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I said what I ment. She is the dominate personality in their relationship. It's not a bad thing or a good thing it was simply an observation. Stop over reaching.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Stop back peddling and making excuses for your bullshit. I called you out and didn't make any assumptions about your not vague comment.

[–]belil569 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Its not back pedaling. Nothing was meant by it. Gavin is a joker and more submissive guy even with AH crew. Meg is a dominant person in pretty much all aspects of her life that she shares. How the hell is either of those a bad thing?

[–]kingjoey52a 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why the hell would you use Gavin?

Because he's in a penis costume. I'm fairly sure that was the only thought that went into picking that photo. Also they aren't married.

[–]EAgamezz 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

They're not married.

[–]belil569 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Common law then.

[–]thatguy3O5 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Who are Meg and Gavin?

[–]CatManDontDo -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Isn't Meg the one from the Know YouTube channel who did the bit on how Battlefield 1 was sexist because there were no women in a World War One game?

Also didn't she do softcore porn or something?

[–]kingjoey52a 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just watched the video, she was reporting on a story where a former Dev for Dice complained about there being no women in the game, she didn't just make a random video about there being no women in the game.

[–]ChaosOpen 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, and it was a softcore photo shoot.

[–]belil569 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes she did and she is a cosplay model and more stuff on youtube and other platforms. She did a non nude playboy shoot. She seems like a cool person so long as she keeps her politics out of her content.

[–]flyonawall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

What is weird to me is that all these things are primarily controlled by men. Men are the ones in power - they are the majority judges and law makers. Men write most of the laws and primarily men enforce the laws.

Men need to protest their mistreatment by their fellow men.

[–]PBody97 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

That's exactly the problem. Even in a complete patriarchy, women would still have advantages, it simply is in men's nature to give women benefits, and I don't think we're going to change our own nature any time soon.

[–]flyonawall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

More would be accomplished if we focused on those who have the power to do something rather than raging at woman, some nasty feminists. Those people are not going to be able to fight this battle for men. Women are not the enemy here, men who write and enforce the laws are.

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Feminists have power. They are actively influancing legislation all around the western world. There are women who write and enforce the laws as well. And they can write and enforce equally bad laws as men, and they do.

[–]flyonawall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

They have very little power compared to the bulk of law-writing and law enforcement. There is no comparison. Even if every woman in the country decided to support men's rights, the ones that would need to be convinced to change things would be the men in power. Men's rights will get nowhere until you actually focus the root of the problem.

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The root of the problem is gynocentrism. The instinct in all of us to focus on the well-being of our ingroups women.

[–]flyonawall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

You cannot blame women for that, especially when men write the laws and enforce them. Men need to convince men, not waste time bitching about some feminists.

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You cannot blame women for that

I didn't

especially when men write the laws and enforce them

So do a lot of women.

Men need to convince men

Right

not waste time bitching about some feminists.

Right, we should fight instead of bitch. It is long due we stand up together against the feminist bullshit!

[–]flyonawall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I guess that depends on what your goal is.

Fighting "feminist bullshit" is not going to change male culture but maybe it makes you feel better because it is easier for you to fight women than men.

[–]Meyright 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

to change male culture

Its not male culture. Women in power behave the same as men! Its the ideas that are wrong. Feminist ideas.

[–]Bailie2 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I want a foreskin hat and scrotum scarf.

[–]Effervescinelephant 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm down. Let me know when it's going down I'll get a keg of sweetwater

[–]espositojoe 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Dicks for equal rights? I'll join the march!

[–]Gnometard 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Better idea to have a plan and follow it. Yelling in the streets doesn't do shit bit make you feel cool

[–]rg57 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I would certainly do it, but not if anyone participates in a f---ing costume.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As long as it's after work, cuz you know. We do that....

[–]Moonyu69 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually... yeah. Why not.

[–]Yamasee 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

DONE!

[–]WTFppl 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The era of self-importants

[–]Adderdash -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

A woman doesn't need anyone elses permission to get an abortion but her own.

[–]scyth3s 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

But she should need my permission if she expects child support.

[–]Adderdash 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

That's a seperate debatable topic, nothing to do with what I said.

[–]scyth3s 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It has everything to do with what you said. It is literally about the consequences of decisions arising from what you said.

Women get choice of birth or abortion, but should they choose birth without the father's consent, they shouldn't be able to expect free money for 18 years. That is precisely the next step of what you said, so don't call it unrelated just because it's "debatable." So is the right to abort!

[–]Adderdash -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

They're related. About the same topic. But separate issues.

A woman having the right to abort or not abort is different to the rights of either party with the consequences of either choice.

You're just telling me your opinion about what should happen if a woman chooses not to abort. I really don't care about it, I never asked for it. I only commented on a woman's right to abort, not what happens if they do or don't. They are separate issues.

Its like choosing at what time you have dinner, and what to have for dinner. Knowing one may affect your decision for the other, it may not, they're related, but 2 separate topics. All I did was argue about was when to have dinner, I don't care about what you want for dinner.

[–]scyth3s 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[from the picture]a woman aborting your child without your consent

A woman doesn't need anyone elses permission to get an abortion but her own.

This issue is "what do we do when two biological parents disagree about what to do with a pregnancy?"

A woman gets one decision, the other decision, which should rightfully rest in the man's court, is absolutely the other half of that issue.

Separating these issues from each other is a cheap tactic to avoid acknowledging a blatant inequality and perpetuate that inequality.

You're just telling me your opinion about what should happen if a woman chooses not to abort. I really don't care about it, I never asked for it.

What you've done here is express your opinion, then told me you don't want to hear mine. Don't be a hypocrite.

Its like choosing at what time you have dinner, and what to have for dinner.

It's a lot more like saying "I want an extremely expensive dinner every day for the next 18 years, and you are going to help me finance it." You created a very bad analogy. Women basically have a right to draw blood for 18 years while men can't interrupt a 9 month process.

[–]Adderdash 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"A woman gets one decision"

Literally the only point I made, the woman DOES get this decision regardless of anything else. Glad you agree.

"the other decision, which should rightfully rest in the man's court, is absolutely the other half of that issue."

As I said, I don't care about your opinion on this bit. Stop trying to debate me in something I don't care about. I made a comment about a woman's right to abort or not, that's all.

[–]scyth3s 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Literally the only point I made, the woman DOES get this decision regardless of anything else. Glad you agree.

But you failed to grasp the ramifications of that decision, which should absolutely be factored in. They really aren't separate issues. You want to talk about the right to make a decision, but not about the responsibilities of the decision, or it's effects on others.

As I said, I don't care about your opinion on this bit. Stop trying to debate me in something I don't care about.

You're still responding. I can't force you into that. The only thing that makes sense to me at this point is that you do care about my opinion because it makes you uncomfortable-- that often happens when one is confronted with cognitive dissonance.

[–]Rolten 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely agree. Rather stupid thing to say, as if a man should even be able to prevent an abortion. We should have the right to "abort" (distance ourselves from the baby) but never to actually force an abortion or prevent it.

[+]problematic_coagulum -9 points-8 points-7 points 9 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Already had a men's march, it's called world war 1&2.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Dafuq? This isn't your average stupid! This is advanced stupid.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

you are racist against vietnam lol

[–]Peterpewpew 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You mean when men where drafted and forced to fight? I guess that's why it was a men's march, women don't get drafted. Equality

[–]WaffleSports 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Pretty sure a lot of men volunteered to "march against fascism" in ww2 but instead of holding signs and dress up like a vagina they held guns and dressed in a uniform.

[+]Lolidc points 9 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Underrated comment.

[–]problematic_coagulum 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unoriginal comment (both)

[–]DerEwigeKatzendame -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I volunteer to march as an evil rabbi that sucks baby dick. I am the evil that mutilates your boy-children.

[+]happydogbark points 9 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Why shouldn't a woman abort a child in her body?

Men and women are different. They can do different things. Men are physically stronger. Women have uteruses.

I can't support guys being able to stop a woman getting an abortion if she wants it.

Some men's rights activists are as bad as the fucking feminists.

[–]GranaT0 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's not what it's about. Abortion should be allowed, but expecting a man to pay a lot of money every month for the next 21 years because a woman decided so shouldn't.

[–]scyth3s 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't support guys being able to stop a woman getting an abortion if she wants it.

I don't know anyone in RL who agrees with this. The most common view I've seen, and the one I support, is that women can abort-- but until I declare I want parenting rights, I don't deal with the responsibility.

Women shouldn't be able to rope in men for 18 years, especially if they think men shouldn't rope in women for 9 months. The equation is horribly anti equality right now.

[+]MizterUltimaman -7 points-6 points-5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Less shitposting, more focus on being serious

I like the idea, but wearing penis costumes?

[–]ChaosOpen 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You didn't see all the women wearing vagina costumes?

[–]Voctr 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just because they act retarded doesn't mean we have to do the same.

[–]manofsea -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Oh gavin you will never make a real point...

[–]FlynnLevy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Except running down a mountain. That one is genuinely valid.

[–]AtemAndrew -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean...maybe on the first Sunday of April...

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter