If men and women are equal before the law and women can opt out of parenthood then men should have the same opportunity.
Pros: - less abortions since women will no longer be pressured by the prospective father's to abort if they don't want to be fathers - children that do make it to term will have two willing parents to raise them. Bringing a child into the world will be a mature decision made by two willing participants - men will have the same rights as women - men will no longer be entrapped by women with baby fever
Cons: - children will have to live with only one parent's money
Counter arguments: The man made a choice to engage in heterosexual intercourse without protection (or the protection failed) so he is responsible for the consequences of his actions. So men's choice are pretty much abstinence or probably fatherhood. Colloquially: keep it in his pants or pay the price
Rebuttal: The woman can choose not to be responsible for the consequences of her actions through abortion and even after the baby is born she can leave it in the hospital or at a police station, etc. So she can spread the legs and avoid responsibility. Men should have the same rights.
How would it work: The woman will be legally obligated to officially inform the man that a pregnancy has resulted from their encounter. This has to be done in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. The man has to officially respond to the information if he assumes legal and financial responsibility for the child. If the answer is no than he has no rights and no responsibilities regarding the child and is liable to pay for half of the cost of an abortion and other related expenses (transportation, hospitalisation if necessary, etc) If the answer is yes then he is the legal father of the child and financially responsible until the child is 18 years old. If the woman failed to secure an answer from the prospective father it is assumed it's no.
[–]VideoramaYT21 points22 points23 points (2 children) | Copy Link
They already started hamstering
[–]Disbursed-operant2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
What's hamstering /define.
[–]VideoramaYT-1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
Do a Google search.
[–]XavierMalory12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Great theory, but you got it wrong on the first sentence...
See that's the problem. Men and women aren't equal before the law, just "equality of outcomes." Current laws establish this equality by stating that women in this situation are essentially helpless children themselves and thus men must be the adults.
Feminists would never admit it, but they were never about equality.
[–]user_miki10 points11 points12 points (3 children) | Copy Link
It is called reproductive rights,Men don't have reproductive rights.As soon as the sperm came out of his penis the sperm is no more his propriety.The woman can store it, inseminate her even after years and man will still be obligated to pay child support.It is completely unfair and many celebrities payed the price,I remember years back Boris Becker the former tennis player she had a child after an oral sex performed by a russian model.She stored his sperm and inseminated her after.
[–]Disbursed-operant7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
If men dont have reproductive rights, then they also have no financial obligation.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Morally, you're right. Legally...not so much.
[–]Disbursed-operant1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Hence one or the huge reasons mgtow is becoming wildly popular. Men know they are taking on huge liabilities and walking away.
[–]Resident_Kiwi2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
It's funny how feminists adopt the Pro-Life stance when it comes to the male's equivalent of abortion.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
http://archive.is/1kmmH
[–]NathanHollister4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I would undo this crosspost before the NPCs start flooding in here
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
One person's hamster just ripped a black hole in the universe:
" I disagree. The baby is housed in the woman. I think until the baby is capable of living outside of the mother, she has majority right in deciding whether to keep the baby.
Of course she should get her partners input but ultimately the decision lies with her. Since the baby is literally attached to her body what is the alternative? Force her to abort the baby? Force her to carry the baby for 9 months?
If the baby is born, it can now live independently of the woman, so the rights/responsibility of the child is now split 50/50. The baby did not ask to be born into the world so he is owed support by both parents."
If it's entirely her choice to keep the baby, regardless that the father doesen't want it she should be held responsibble for her decision.
But we all know this won't happen.
[–]SlowJellyfish10 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
Don't forget the morning after pill. Women have many, MANY, opportunities to not have a child...
[–]ThirstySasquatch0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
If you want a good laugh some day, tell this to a single mom. I did it over Christmas - top keks
[–]Chill-BL-3 points-2 points-1 points (1 child) | Copy Link
shouldn't have crossposted this, not because I don't like it, but scared they're going close down the thread sooner than it's necessary.
[–]Belzebuthian[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I understand. I'll use another method next time.