Mens' Reproductive Rights

[The Serbian Empire]

Yeah right, and you're going to tell me there's no TERFs saying that I am eternally male even if I have a vagina some day after SRS.

that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Would it be a surprise if someone against HRT and SRS would also be against vasectomies for the reason it renders biological males as infertile (The combo of HRT and SRS is permanent, vasectomies are reversible)?

[Ashmoria]

that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I don't see how denial of the fact that there is a frequent movement of people devoted to discriminating against men that constantly rears it's head is going to get us anywhere.
These people are real. We've seen the effect of them frequently.
Due process rights in courts etc.

The sentiment existed in the 70s, and Jezebel still prints the sentiment.
If we know this, pharmaceuticals certainly do. It's not worth it.

And again, it comes back to the issue of men not demanding the pill partially because they have been forced into silence about their experience of sexism by womens groups.

no no men have been silenced by women's groups on the issue of men's contraception. no women's group is out there demanding that it not be researched. if there were such a movement wouldn't there be women's groups demanding that ...walgreens...stop selling condoms-- the only existing male contraceptive?

[Celsuis]

Procedures like vasectomies should be granted to anybody who can pay for one. It's not the government's responsibility to protect yourself from your own reckless decisions.

Well, to be a devils advocate since you are an ancap, you don't think there's a compelling public interest in having free vasectomies available so as to avoid thousands of children nobody can afford?
It's cheaper in the long run.

Unless you're fine with them starving ofcourse.

I don't usually answer responses, but I'll answer this. I don't believe in the concept of a "public interest". Besides, if people can't afford to have children, they should act responsibility and abstain from doing so. Also, if a government is powerful enough and rich enough to provide free vasectomies, the taxes funneled into government could have easily fed all the "starving children" if those funds had been in the private sector and charities where they belonged. (meh.. perhaps i should've telegramed my response... this seems like a digression from this thread's topic... oh well...)

[Ashmoria]

that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Would it be a surprise if someone against HRT and SRS would also be against vasectomies for the reason it renders biological males as infertile (The combo of HRT and SRS is permanent, vasectomies are reversible)?

yes it would be a surprise but since i don t know anyone who is against HRT and SRS except for some religious or skittish people. i cant say what would surprise me unless YOU surprise me with a link of someone who is against both. (with the understanding that one person is irrelevant anyway)

[Banija]

Procedures like vasectomies should be granted to anybody who can pay for one. It's not the government's responsibility to protect yourself from your own reckless decisions.

Well, to be a devils advocate since you are an ancap, you don't think there's a compelling public interest in having free vasectomies available so as to avoid thousands of children nobody can afford?
It's cheaper in the long run.

Unless you're fine with them starving of course.

On the flip side, having children is important to actually sustain the society, as people grow old and, at the end of the day, reach some point where they can no longer work.

It's "cheaper" in the short-term to not have a child, I guess, but in the long-term its really costly to not have children as your society will then die out within a generation. And it wont' just die out; everyone will suffer because as the population ages, you'll have people who physically cannot work and less and less people to support them, ending up screwing the last generation of people that were born.

We were all children once. We were all 'expensive burdens' on our parents, and yet most of the time, they were happy to have us. A society where nobody's having kids is a society that is setting itself up to die out.

[The Serbian Empire]

Would it be a surprise if someone against HRT and SRS would also be against vasectomies for the reason it renders biological males as infertile (The combo of HRT and SRS is permanent, vasectomies are reversible)?

yes it would be a surprise but since i don t know anyone who is against HRT and SRS except for some religious or skittish people i cant say what would surprise me unless YOU surprise me with a link of someone who is against both. (with the understanding that one person is irrelevant anyway)

I haven't asked Chessy about her opinion of vasectomies, but I am almost certain she's against them.

[Ashmoria]

yes it would be a surprise but since i don t know anyone who is against HRT and SRS except for some religious or skittish people i cant say what would surprise me unless YOU surprise me with a link of someone who is against both. (with the understanding that one person is irrelevant anyway)

I haven't asked Chessy about her opinion of vasectomies, but I am almost certain she's against them.

im sure she will be if it will upset you.

[The Serbian Empire]

I haven't asked Chessy about her opinion of vasectomies, but I am almost certain she's against them.

im sure she will be if it will upset you.

Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting. That she's playing devil's advocate.

[Ashmoria]

im sure she will be if it will upset you.

Are you suggesting what I think you're suggesting. That she's playing devil's advocate.

i think she enjoys playing the radical feminist.

[Reploid Productions]

im pretty sure they are reluctant to sterilize a young childless woman too. while I believe that it really ought to be up to the patient we americans are such a whiny people that I can see why doctors are reluctant to do it when it might come back on them later.

Hell, they're reluctant to sterilize a young woman, period, regardless of kids. My cousin had to deal with that set of hoops when she wanted to get her tubes tied after her second kid. Apparently the rule (no idea if it's law or her doc was BSing her) in Colorado is they can't (or won't) perform the procedure unless you're over the age of 25 or have 3 kids. And considering kids #1 and #2 both happened despite being on birth control at the time, she was seriously done having kids. 100% done.

I could see a doctor wanting to make sure that a patient looking to be sterilized, regardless of gender, is really, absolutely certain that the patient is aware of all the consequences/risks before going ahead with it; but outright refusing because someone is "too young" is little more than that doctor pushing their reproductive ethics onto somebody else. Not everyone wants or needs to have kids, and people looking at a permanent solution like that are usually pretty certain that is what they want and that they won't be changing their mind later.

[Torisakia]

I'm young and already obtained a vasectomy. It's called being a shut-in.

Honestly I don't see how it matters how old you are, how many kids you've had, etc. in order to obtain sterilization. That pretty much goes for anyone, not just men.

[Threlizdun]

Absolutely, the legal complications in getting a vasectomy are ludicrous. Men should be free to do what they want with their bodies without concern for society's insistence that everyone must have children.

[Chessmistress]

yes it would be a surprise but since i don t know anyone who is against HRT and SRS except for some religious or skittish people i cant say what would surprise me unless YOU surprise me with a link of someone who is against both. (with the understanding that one person is irrelevant anyway)

I haven't asked Chessy about her opinion of vasectomies, but I am almost certain she's against them.

I think wives shouldn't interfere with husbands' decisions, nor husbands's should interfere with wives' decision.
And that interferences I despise even includes wives pressuring their husbands to get a vasectomy: that's pretty common where I live. I even have been called "anti-feminist" for saying wives shouldn't pressure their husbands to get a vasectomy.
I find very interesting - and pretty funny - that things are so reversed compared with USA.
Regarding male pill: I couldn't care less. It's a males' issue. I do not oppose it, nor I support it.

Absolutely, the legal complications in getting a vasectomy are ludicrous. Men should be free to do what they want with their bodies without concern for society's insistence that everyone must have children.

^this^
And also:
"Men should be free to do what they want with their bodies without concern for their wives' insistence to perform a vasectomy".

[Geilinor]

I even have been called "anti-feminist" for saying wives shouldn't pressure their husbands to get a vasectomy.

You mean that other Swedish feminists are more radical than you are?

[Fanosolia]

I think maybe some review might be in order by a doctor to make sure you really want to do this, but otherwise you should be allowed to. I personally would like to see more options for those that don't want the operation as well, but this a more sensible if you're dead set on not having kids and want to not worry about that. Sounds painful though.

I don't see any logical ethical reasons not to.

[The Serbian Empire]

I even have been called "anti-feminist" for saying wives shouldn't pressure their husbands to get a vasectomy.

You mean that other Swedish feminists are more radical than you are?

Now that's a scary thought to me.

[Chessmistress]

I even have been called "anti-feminist" for saying wives shouldn't pressure their husbands to get a vasectomy.

You mean that other Swedish feminists are more radical than you are?

Pressuring husbands to have a vasectomy isn't a feminist thing. It's very common among all kinds of women, and maybe even more common among tradcon women.
Please note: I advocate for chemical, fully reversible, castration for rapists.
These (mostly tradcon) women pressure their husbands for a not-so-reversible sterilization.
To rid out chemical castration a male have just only to stop to take pills, to reverse a vasectomy he need a quite complex surgery.

[Scyobayrynn]

You mean that other Swedish feminists are more radical than you are?

Pressuring husbands to have a vasectomy isn't a feminist thing. It's very common among all kinds of women, and maybe even more common among tradcon women.
Please note: I advocate for chemical, fully reversible, castration for rapists.
These (mostly tradcon) women pressure their husbands for a not-so-reversible sterilization.
To rid out chemical castration a male have just only to stop to take pills, to reverse a vasectomy he need a quite complex surgery.

Vasectomy at least when I researched getting mine is decidedly less invasive than female sterilization surgeries are to women.
So for a couple, the vasectomy seems the more reasonable than having the women get a surgery that is physically harder on her body but yields the same result as the easier and more simple vasectomy.

The only reason I didn't get mine was because my wife was staunchly against it, and thus demanded she get a tubal ligation because of the "less than a man" mentality associated with a man getting fixed.

Basically she was more emotionally connected to my perceived "manhood" than I was.

In spite of the opinions of myself and our doctor.

[Ashmoria]

im pretty sure they are reluctant to sterilize a young childless woman too. while I believe that it really ought to be up to the patient we americans are such a whiny people that I can see why doctors are reluctant to do it when it might come back on them later.

Hell, they're reluctant to sterilize a young woman, period, regardless of kids. My cousin had to deal with that set of hoops when she wanted to get her tubes tied after her second kid. Apparently the rule (no idea if it's law or her doc was BSing her) in Colorado is they can't (or won't) perform the procedure unless you're over the age of 25 or have 3 kids. And considering kids #1 and #2 both happened despite being on birth control at the time, she was seriously done having kids. 100% done.

I could see a doctor wanting to make sure that a patient looking to be sterilized, regardless of gender, is really, absolutely certain that the patient is aware of all the consequences/risks before going ahead with it; but outright refusing because someone is "too young" is little more than that doctor pushing their reproductive ethics onto somebody else. Not everyone wants or needs to have kids, and people looking at a permanent solution like that are usually pretty certain that is what they want and that they won't be changing their mind later.

that is so odd. my sister got her tubes tied after her second child 42 years ago. its stupid to deny it to anyone who has kids. when you have kids you KNOW that you don't want another (unless you do, of course). its also stupid to deny it to childless young people but at least then you have some (patronizing) notion that they might not know what they are getting themselves into.

[Reploid Productions]

Vasectomy at least when I researched getting mine is decidedly less invasive than female sterilization surgeries are to women.
So for a couple, the vasectomy seems the more reasonable than having the women get a surgery that is physically harder on her body but yields the same result as the easier and more simple vasectomy.

That does seem to be the prevailing logic and reasoning I've seen for it. Basically getting snipped is easier, cheaper, less risky, shorter recovery time, and more reliable for a committed couple that does not want kids in comparison to the more difficult, more expensive, more risky, longer recovery time, and lower reliability of getting tied.

[The Serbian Empire]

Hell, they're reluctant to sterilize a young woman, period, regardless of kids. My cousin had to deal with that set of hoops when she wanted to get her tubes tied after her second kid. Apparently the rule (no idea if it's law or her doc was BSing her) in Colorado is they can't (or won't) perform the procedure unless you're over the age of 25 or have 3 kids. And considering kids #1 and #2 both happened despite being on birth control at the time, she was seriously done having kids. 100% done.

I could see a doctor wanting to make sure that a patient looking to be sterilized, regardless of gender, is really, absolutely certain that the patient is aware of all the consequences/risks before going ahead with it; but outright refusing because someone is "too young" is little more than that doctor pushing their reproductive ethics onto somebody else. Not everyone wants or needs to have kids, and people looking at a permanent solution like that are usually pretty certain that is what they want and that they won't be changing their mind later.

that is so odd. my sister got her tubes tied after her second child 42 years ago. its stupid to deny it to anyone who has kids. when you have kids you KNOW that you don't want another (unless you do, of course). its also stupid to deny it to childless young people but at least then you have some (patronizing) notion that they might not know what they are getting themselves into.

And my mother had her tubes tied at 35 after her second child in my younger brother.

[Ashmoria]

Pressuring husbands to have a vasectomy isn't a feminist thing. It's very common among all kinds of women, and maybe even more common among tradcon women.
Please note: I advocate for chemical, fully reversible, castration for rapists.
These (mostly tradcon) women pressure their husbands for a not-so-reversible sterilization.
To rid out chemical castration a male have just only to stop to take pills, to reverse a vasectomy he need a quite complex surgery.

Vasectomy at least when I researched getting mine is decidedly less invasive than female sterilization surgeries are to women.
So for a couple, the vasectomy seems the more reasonable than having the women get a surgery that is physically harder on her body but yields the same result as the easier and more simple vasectomy.

The only reason I didn't get mine was because my wife was staunchly against it, and thus demanded she get a tubal ligation because of the "less than a man" mentality associated with a man getting fixed.

Basically she was more emotionally connected to my perceived "manhood" than I was.

In spite of the opinions of myself and our doctor.

or that's what she TOLD you her reason was....

[Chessmistress]

Pressuring husbands to have a vasectomy isn't a feminist thing. It's very common among all kinds of women, and maybe even more common among tradcon women.
Please note: I advocate for chemical, fully reversible, castration for rapists.
These (mostly tradcon) women pressure their husbands for a not-so-reversible sterilization.
To rid out chemical castration a male have just only to stop to take pills, to reverse a vasectomy he need a quite complex surgery.

Vasectomy at least when I researched getting mine is decidedly less invasive than female sterilization surgeries are to women.
So for a couple, the vasectomy seems the more reasonable than having the women get a surgery that is physically harder on her body but yields the same result as the easier and more simple vasectomy.

The only reason I didn't get mine was because my wife was staunchly against it, and thus demanded she get a tubal ligation because of the "less than a man" mentality associated with a man getting fixed.

Basically she was more emotionally connected to my perceived "manhood" than I was.

In spite of the opinions of myself and our doctor.

Tube ligation is scary to me. I know vasectomy is not so problematic...but....maybe you'll be surprised, but I feel uncomfortable about a man being pressured by his wife to perform such thing.
I would immediatly leave a man asking/pressuring me to perform a tube ligation, that must be my decision and he have no rights about it. It should be the same for him, I think.

[Scyobayrynn]

Vasectomy at least when I researched getting mine is decidedly less invasive than female sterilization surgeries are to women.
So for a couple, the vasectomy seems the more reasonable than having the women get a surgery that is physically harder on her body but yields the same result as the easier and more simple vasectomy.

The only reason I didn't get mine was because my wife was staunchly against it, and thus demanded she get a tubal ligation because of the "less than a man" mentality associated with a man getting fixed.

Basically she was more emotionally connected to my perceived "manhood" than I was.

In spite of the opinions of myself and our doctor.

or that's what she TOLD you her reason was....

What other logical reason is there? Why should I presume she is lying?

[Scyobayrynn]

Vasectomy at least when I researched getting mine is decidedly less invasive than female sterilization surgeries are to women.
So for a couple, the vasectomy seems the more reasonable than having the women get a surgery that is physically harder on her body but yields the same result as the easier and more simple vasectomy.

The only reason I didn't get mine was because my wife was staunchly against it, and thus demanded she get a tubal ligation because of the "less than a man" mentality associated with a man getting fixed.

Basically she was more emotionally connected to my perceived "manhood" than I was.

In spite of the opinions of myself and our doctor.

Tube ligation is scary to me. I know vasectomy is not so problematic...but....maybe you'll be surprised, but I feel uncomfortable about a man being pressured by his wife to perform such thing.
I would immediatly leave a man asking/pressuring me to perform a tube ligation, that must be my decision and he have no rights about it. It should be the same for him, I think.

I understand your position on not knuckling your partner, but, when one looks at both procedures the sensible conclusion is the man getting fixed, not the woman at least not until the surgeries are equally as easy on the woman as the man.

My wife was simply adamant that I not get fixed.