This double standard on "Pro-Choice" has always bugged me

mean0dean0 · 2014-01-25T23:45:51+00:00

The idea of "getting" a woman pregnant is a fallacy--unless you rape a woman against her will and then keep her away from any opportunity to receive an abortion, she is consenting to pregnancy by remaining pregnant. She has contraception, the morning-after pill, RU-486 (the abortion pill) in certain regions, and surgical abortions once the fetus is too large for an effective pharmaceutical abortion procedure. And that's just during the pregnancy--she can also choose to give the baby up for adoption, leave the child with social services at any point, or even just abandon the child at registered "Safe Havens" whenever she likes, free of legal complications.

At NO point either before, during, or after pregnancy is the woman ever NOT in control of her reproductive choice. Sure, republicans are trying to get rid of abortion, but that's a moral/religious stance which need not be shared by all. So long as women's organizations keep up the fight, women will continue to have complete and sole control over their reproductive choice.

So what about men?

sp105 · 2014-01-25T23:44:23+00:00

That's a false equivalence, though.

In case A, there is a kid who now has 1 person funding them instead of 2.

In case B, there is no kid to be funded.

If there was a way for the man to sign out of it before the deadline for abortion, it would be a different story.

AustNerevar · 2014-01-26T05:52:43+00:00

I have a very legitimate question I want to ask. Maybe if I ask here, you guys will actually answer me. Every time I post this anywhere, I get downvoted and called names.

The abortion debate is often simplified into opposing positions that aren't traced back to the root of the issue. Pro-Life'rs claim that when a child is conceived, it is already a human life. And that to abort the pregnancy is to murder a helpless person. Pro-Choice'rs claim that a fetus is not a human life until it is born and thus an abortion isn't morally wrong because no life is really being taken.

Of course, if the scientific fact of the matter is that it's not a human life until it is born, then I agree that women should definitely have the choice to end a pregnancy. However, whenever I see people arguing about Abortion, I see right winged Christians just outright condemning abortion without presenting many facts or data, and I see the other side just calling the Pro-Life'rs misogynistic control freaks.

No one bothers to actually show any research as to whether or not a fetus is a human life. This is so incredibly astounding to me because it is exactly what the entire debate hinges upon. Whenever I ask for someone to show me the proof, they just yell at me for being a "sexist" asshole who doesn't want women to control their own bodies. So many Pro-Choice'rs hurt their own cause because they fail to actually try to prove their points and debate the Pro-Life'rs.

I have not been able to ever make an educated desicion about where I stand on Abortion, due to this. If a fetus is indeed a human life, then I'm afraid I cannot condone a woman choosing to end another life because it is inconvienent to her. However, if a fetus is just a fetus, then I will be right along with the Pro-Choice'rs. If we have the science to back up the Pro-Choice side of things then it's imperative that abortion be legalized accross the board, because it would be a horribly invasive law for the state to tell a woman she can't control her own body.

Maybe someone here will actually give me a straight answer. Any other time I've asked this on Reddit (even though I phrased it as peacefully and rationally as possible) I've been downvoted, critisized, and insulted...simple because I want to know which side I should be on. Maybe this is harsh, but the Pro-Choice argument is correct, the people who refuse to acknowledge my questions are turning their backs on the women who dontr have control over their own body.

Also, if abortion is legal, then so should a financial responsibility abortion be available for the man. As it is, men have few to no reproductive rights at all.

Edit: And the downvotes have already already started. I officially give up on ever having a rational discussion with someone about this. It blows my mind how so many Pro-Choice'rs do not care enough about their cause to actually help the people they stand for by getting the word out.

Edit 2: Just so everyone knows, I realize that this post is no longer in the negatives.

Edit 3: Wow guys, I'm proud! At first, it looked like this comment would get buried like the others, but here we are at 16 points. It's not that I had a poor opinion of the objectivity of MRAs or even this sub, but that people in general, don't remain objective enough to take this question seriously. You guys make me proud to be subbed to this subreddit.

kencabbit · 2014-01-26T02:15:37+00:00

Of course, not every pro-choice person embodies this double standard, and a lot of pro-life advocates are just as bad in their double standards when it comes to men versus women and parental responsibility.

texasjoe · 2014-01-26T09:38:45+00:00

Double standard? I'm "Pro-Choice" for both genders. "Pro-Choice" is compatible with MRA ideals.

zwirlo · 2014-01-26T03:45:40+00:00

Lets let the women decide whether they want to have the kid or not, and the man can opt out or in for support.

famouscomposer · 2014-01-26T15:24:41+00:00

Yeah I'm sorry but this is dumb. I'm a man, and all about Men's Rights, but this does not apply. A woman should have dominion over her own body, and the major difference here is that an abortion is terminating a fetus. If a man chooses not to be a father to a child that actually will continue to exist even though he has decided to opt out of fatherhood, then yeah, he's a deadbeat.

When a man has sex with a woman, he must be aware of the risk of a conception, and that in the event a child is conceived, that woman has complete and total control over whether or not it's born. No exceptions. A man who has an equal hand in creating a human being should have an equal hand in raising that human being.

These are not the same thing. This comparison is a load of crap. If a woman had a child, and decided she didn't want to be a mother after it was born and left all the responsibilities with the father, she'd be a deadbeat, shitty mother! Jesus Christ, reddit. The front page with this shit?

Edit - I see a lot of people who don't know what it's like to be a child whose father didn't want them when the mother did.

scolionophobics · 2014-01-26T07:45:23+00:00

This comic takes advantage of euphemisms changing meanings when being applied to different sexes. "Deciding to not be a mother" implies an abortion. "Deciding to not be a dad" means he skipped out on the responsibilities of being a father. Its not a double standard. The comics accurate as is.

10J18R1A · 2014-01-26T10:37:20+00:00

Pro choice is apparently the choice to choose for everybody.

Don't try to tell a woman than men should have an option to opt out JUST LIKE THE WOMAN DOES, or that if they really think that men shouldn't have a say in their own choice to be a parent, just outlaw abortion. That's a fun conversation filled with rage where logic should be. "He made the decision when he put it in."

I bet if things were a bit more equal, trying to play the baby lottery wouldn't be so prevalent.

aokna2736 · 2014-01-26T17:14:16+00:00

I understand this, and I agree that there should be a sort of "financial abortion" available to men, but the problem is that if a man chooses not be a father, there's still a baby. There's still a being that requires care and momey in order to care for it. Men leaving doesn't make the problem go away, whereas a woman getting an abortion does.

charlesbukowksi · 2014-01-26T08:11:41+00:00

I'm not sure it's fair to equate one position with the other.

midmopub · 2014-01-26T11:46:49+00:00

The last choice a man makes is to release his sperm. From them on his choices are at the behest of the maternal parent.

3G6A5W338E · 2014-01-26T13:21:34+00:00

Always stupid in a super-populated world that there's any stops to abortion at all.

What a sick society.

ssinatra · 2014-01-26T14:35:56+00:00

I had a book once of this guys comics. Hands down this guy gets it.

davebilliams · 2014-01-26T14:47:23+00:00

I was thinking about this this morning in the shower. Another example of how feminism never considers males. In the conversation of productive rights, I never hear anyone discussing how men are affected by the laws. It's like humans reproduce asexually or something.

giegerwasright · 2014-01-26T19:53:27+00:00

Like Aokna2736 said, no matter the issue if a male opts out, there's still a baby. We can't, as a society, force women to get an abortion. It violates every principle of bodily autonomy. But we can't have unprepared and irresponsible people creating new lives that they will fail to provide for.

So. What could be done that would prevent new life from being created in unsustainable or unsustained conditions without violating anyone's bodily autonomy and respecting the agency of both potential parents?

linxiste · 2014-01-27T02:54:27+00:00

I think it's important that people who are having sex with one another discuss their options in the event of accidental pregnancy. Even plan b isn't 100% and for some women abortion is simply not an option. In that case, you shouldn't take the risk unless you are both willing to deal with the consequences.

vax0r976 · 2014-01-27T07:22:22+00:00

This can be equated with the phrase " A woman's choice a Man's responsibility" or more appropriately " A woman's choice a man's servitude " . It is a bullshit unjust concept that has destroyed (and in many cases ended) the lives of men throughout this country. The consequences of this mentality are damning and real to "deadbeat men" .

2014-02-11T00:37:53+00:00

Just the normal social narrative of women being bailed out of all social responsibility every time!

Deer-In-A-Headlock · 2014-01-26T00:19:16+00:00

There's a lot about conception & birth that's really unfair, it sucks.

If a women wants a baby and the man doesn't, then we shouldn't force the man to pay child support or have any interaction in it's life.

If a man wants a baby and the woman doesn't, then we shouldn't force the woman to pay child support or have any interaction in it's life.

We shouldn't just let the woman kill the baby-to-be if she wants, and let her ruin the mans life if she decides to keep it. It's messed up.

gazork_chumble_spuzz · 2014-01-26T05:53:28+00:00

Yep, I hate that too. People don't want to grasp the fact that a woman who aborts her child is mostly motivated by the same kind of self-interest that motivates a man who buggers off and abandons his kid instead of sticking around to be a dad. They are equally selfish, and neither one of them should get a free pass because of their gender or because they didn't feel like being a parent. And quite frankly, killing your child before it's born is worse than abandoning it after birth...at least in the second scenario the child is allowed to remain alive.

mewmewmewmewmewmewme · 2014-01-26T16:16:09+00:00

You're all conflating decided whether or not to be a parent with controlling what happens to your own body. Again.

Todda468 · 2014-01-26T02:50:33+00:00

I disagree, with an abortion there is no child going without support, with a deadbeat dad there is.

Harbinger147 · 2014-01-26T03:05:02+00:00

You know I used to be very pro choice. but in recent years I've flipped, I'm all for choice, but to me the thought if how complex life is and how amazing the process of the cells combining to create a life it to great to just simply terminate, which is why I could never do it.

I also believe that if you did the deed and you got pregnant then you should love with the consequences, doesn't matter about gender, you both should accept the responsibility

Purp · 2014-01-26T04:23:38+00:00

blatant false equivalence /r/TumblrInAction

Nukemarine · 2014-01-26T05:29:55+00:00

To be fair, for the person on the right, there's likely an offspring with half of the person's genetic information in it. For the person on the right, there is no offspring.

Now, if you have a woman that has an offspring then decides not to be a mother, I'm sure she'll be called the same names as the person on the right. Likewise, a guy that does not have an offspring that also doesn't want to have a child is likely to be called the same name as the person on the right.

It's the existence of an offspring that's at play here.

Number357 · 2014-01-26T06:49:01+00:00

I don't like the idea of comparing legal parental surrender to abortion. Abortion is the termination of a not-quite-living fetus, whereas legal parental surrender is the termination of rights and responsibilities to an already existing child. Instead, this is basically the same thing as adoption: Parent(s) have a child, decide they aren't ready, and so legally surrender their rights/responsibilities to another person without having further child support obligations. If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, she can abort it yes, but she can also carry the child to term and then give it up for adoption, without ever even telling the rapist/father that he has a child. By contrast, if a man passes out and has his unconscious body repeatedly raped by a woman who gets pregnant, he has to pay child support to his rapist.

tojal · 2014-01-26T13:36:35+00:00

This is stupid.

Golnarth · 2014-01-26T02:45:40+00:00

I wish it were possible for this legal exchange to happen:

Woman is pregnant, decides she doesn't want the baby.
The father does want to have a baby.
She has the option to make it just his baby, and accepts.
She is legally required to give birth to it and can then voluntarily give all custody to the father.

The father has a say on whether his son lives or dies.

"But giving birth ruins the womans body!" Unless she was raped she consented to sex.

"The man can, I don't know, poke holes in a condom or something!" And he gets to, what, ruin her body? Not only would that be the shittiest revenge ever, because he'd have to take care of a kid for the rest of his life, but baby mamas currently do this for financial gain.

gnovos · 2014-01-26T04:00:00+00:00

The two are not equivalent. There are extenuating circumstances, i.e. a living child is there who we now need to care for. It's unfair to the man, and we can acknowledge that and praise him for his sacrifice, but it's more unfair to the child, do for a limited time we will unfairly ask the man to sacrifice together with the woman. To do otherwise is inhuman.

Now, we do it wrong, of course, but the above is the reasoning behind the phenomena.

yummie4mytummie · 2014-01-26T06:37:32+00:00

As a female, I ain't even mad..,

albert_yonson · 2014-01-26T07:59:22+00:00

From Secular ProLife:

Child Support

When arguing about abortion, I’ve seen a lot of people claim "sex isn’t a contract." Other variations of this idea include:

Consent to A doesn't mean consent to B (that is, consent to sex doesn't mean consent to reproduction).
You clearly don't consent to reproduce if you use birth control.
Sex is not a crime and shouldn’t be punished / Rights cannot be restricted unless there is a crime.

The problem is, when it comes to reproduction, these arguments only apply to women.

If a man gets a woman pregnant--be it his wife, girlfriend, affair, or one night stand--he is legally bound to provide support for that child. In other words, because the man participated in the child’s conception (because the man had sex), his rights are altered. It doesn't matter if the man was only consenting to sex, and not to reproduction. It doesn't matter if he used birth control. It doesn’t matter that sex isn’t a crime. He fathered the kid, so the law considers him responsible for the kid.

And the law takes a pretty hard line on the subject. Courts can require a father to pay child support based not just on what he earns, but on what courts believe he has the ability to earn. Child support obligations remain even if a father goes to prison, or declares bankruptcy. Even if he wants to terminate his parental rights (and therefore his parental responsibilities), the courts usually won’t allow it unless there is another adult prepared to adopt the child and take over that responsibility. And there are many methods for enforcing child support. A man's tax refunds can be intercepted, his property seized, business or occupational license suspended, and in some states his driver's license can be revoked. If he still fails to make payment, he can be held in contempt and given jail time.

In short, if a man has sex he runs the risk of being (rather tightly) legally bound to any new life he creates. In the essay "Abortion and Fathers' Rights", author Stephen D. Hales summarizes the situation:

"...the father, having participated in conception, cannot escape the future duties he will have toward the child. The father can decide that he cannot afford another child, that he is not psychologically prepared to be a parent, that a child would hinder the lifestyle he wishes to pursue, and so on, to no avail."

Sound sad? If a man is forced to pay child support, that could mean serious emotional, psychological, financial, and social repercussions for him. So why do we have child support laws? Is it because we hate sex, and want to punish people for having sex?

No, of course not. And interestingly, you rarely see anyone even suggest as much. No, it’s clear to most people that we have child support laws in order to, you know, support children. Child support laws aren’t enforced to punish men for having sex—they’re enforced because it’s best for the child. In the same way, abortion shouldn’t be outlawed to punish women for having sex—it should be outlawed to protect fetal life. In both cases, it's not about punishment, it's about protection.

And that’s as it should be.

I’d love to live in a world in which there are no unplanned pregnancies and no unintentional parents. I think people should have control over whether they become parents, in the sense that people should have control over whether they get pregnant or get someone pregnant. That’s why I support comprehensive sex education: I want people to understand their own fertility and, if they do choose to have sex, I want them to understand how they can best prevent pregnancy while being sexually active.

However, once pregnancy has happened, once there’s already a new human organism in the picture, it changes everything. I think the people whose actions created that new life should be responsible for its protection.

Of course, many people disagree. Abortion rights advocates place reproductive freedom over protecting the lives we create, at least when it comes to women and pregnancy. How would this mentality look if they also applied it to men and child support? Hales has an idea:

"A man has the moral right to decide not to become a father (in the social, nonbiological sense) during the time that the woman he has impregnated may permissibly abort. He can make a unilateral decision whether to refuse fatherhood, and is not morally obliged to consult with the mother or any other person before reaching a decision. Moreover, neither the mother nor any other person can veto or override a man's decision about becoming a father. He has first and last say about what he does with his life in this regard."

(And if we’re being really consistent, he doesn’t have to inform the woman he impregnated, or anyone else, about his decision to refuse fatherhood.)

It seems to me that consistency requires abortion rights advocates to argue for the man's right to choose as well as the woman’s: the pro-choice mentality means that, as women can "walk away" from their pregnancies, men should be able to walk away from the women they have impregnated.

Not very uplifting, is it?

Or we could strive for a different kind of consistency--the kind that holds both men and women to a higher standard. This is why I’m for child support laws, and this is why I’m against abortion.

CondorFliesHigh · 2014-01-26T16:19:33+00:00

You're an idiot

MojoMonster · 2014-01-26T16:37:42+00:00

For the guys.

Here's a rule you might want to consider.

Don't put your dick in any woman unless you know she want your babies.

Or get a fucking vasectomy.

Savipalooza · 2014-01-26T03:22:47+00:00

The cartoonist didn't put much thought into this. If you leave your partner so they have to raise the kid on their own, and you don't pay child support, you're a deadbeat. That's the part I agree with. There are deadbeat moms and deadbeat dads. However if you end the pregnancy, there is no child to raise. You can't be a deadbeat if there's no kid. The woman in the cartoon didn't leave her partner to raise the kid on his own. She didn't do what the man did, so it would be unfair to call them both deadbeats. They did two different things. The cartoonist used the broadest words possible by saying, "decided not to be a father/mother," but the man and the woman had two different ways of carrying out that decision.

Morichalion · 2014-01-26T03:29:43+00:00

Which one do you want to change? You can only pick one.

If you want to change the one on the right, you're wrong. Lots of reasons WHY you're wrong, but it's really not worth getting into anymore. The been gone over and over billions of times.

If you want to change the on left, then we can have a discussion.

Gonzored · 2014-01-26T02:05:17+00:00

This is a bit of a misnomer.

If my mother had an abortion I wouldnt exist and Id never have a chance to care. but if the child exists and then one of the parents abandons it then that makes them a dead beat doesnt matter if its the mother or father.

I say this as I was raised by my mother. my fathers a was rarely there for me. The way I see Id like to think I was entitled to a father (to both parents being responsible to their actions). It doesnt really work like this tho but I for one would like to see society push the notion that if your mature enough for sex your going to be mature and deal with pregnancy and child rearing if it a raises. I see this as protecting mens rights because we equally entitled to good parenting. I think that this is protecting society and mans best interests from both irresponsible men and women.

rcinmd · 2014-01-26T05:41:19+00:00

If you don't want kids use a condom.

Xaxxon · 2014-01-26T06:41:50+00:00

The world is not symmetric. Double standards aren't always bad.

warmonga · 2014-01-26T05:06:26+00:00

It's a false dichotomy based on a straw man, which may be part of the issue.

pauselaugh · 2014-01-26T06:58:14+00:00

That's a pretty terrible comparison and twisting of the words.

Deciding not to be a father = the social act of raising the child.

Deciding not to be a mother as relevant to pro-choice = the choice to not gestate fully AND/OR the social act of raising the child.

The apt analogy here would be the father somehow terminating the gestation as well.

So no, it isn't a double standard on pro-choice. Men do not have as much of a biological investment as a woman giving birth, if any at all.

Men's biological involvement in birth ends when they ejaculate into the woman. So yeah, not really a double standard so much as "how biology works" when giving control to a woman over what they have the power to allow to grow inside of them.

Boo hoo.

What, are you going to force a woman to not have an abortion after impregnation?

rrandomhero · 2014-01-26T03:30:01+00:00

I would disagree, there was a video posted a while back of some guy who addressed this and he made a great point. After the semen leaves your body, you have already made your choice. You decided not to use contraceptives and you made your choice already. If you didn't want a kid and you got a girl pregnant you missed several opportunities to prevent that.

you could have not had sex in the first place. Since everyone is human and sex is awesome this isn't always the #1 choice, nor does it have to be.
Condoms. They are incredibly effective, and should be used regardless if you are having sex with a partner outside of a monogamous relationship.
Vasectomy. If you really are sure you don't want kids ever, just get a vasectomy. You cannot possibly get a woman pregnant and if a woman tries to lie that you got her pregnant, you can absolutely prove you can't be the father.

It's easy to make an argument like this, but you are EQUALLY responsible, regardless of gender, for safe sex and use of contraceptives if you are not prepared to be a parent. Sex has consequences if you aren't smart about it. A woman has just as much right to terminate a pregnancy as you have to prevent it from happening in the first place.

DaRightGuy · 2014-01-26T04:29:40+00:00

There is no double standard! Men and women are not equal. Men cannot give birth.

Title	This double standard on "Pro-Choice" has always bugged me
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	1489
Comments	458
Date	January 25, 2014 10:27 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/mensrights/comments/1w5bat/this-double-standard-on-pro-choice-has-always-/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/this-double-standard-on-pro-choice-has-always.1614100 https://theredarchive.com/post/1614100

Comments