Should men have a choice in abortion?

[Ostroeuropa]

But nevermind if men want to be able to reduce the impact of risks.

They... can? They can use contraceptives or say no if the woman doesn't want to. Or use a cure on any STDs if they don't and get them.

Because it's better to violate the rights of men

What right is violated by a woman being the one with the ultimate choice as to what happens to her body?

than inconvinience women or deny an entitlement to children that could easily be provided by the state.

Not sure I follow - we're entitled to children and the state should provide it? We have reproductive rights, but if no one wants to have kids with us, no one should be obligated to impregnate us/carry our kids.

"Should have used contraception" is not an argument accepted when used by the anti-abortionists. It is not an argument that should be accepted when used by the opposition to LPS.
No right is violated by that. The mans rights are violated when they are forced to be a legal parent to children they do not want.
Children are entitled to a decent living. I don't see why forcing people who do not want to be parents to be the ones to provide it makes any sense when the state can provide.
There is a reason I responded to Gravlen and not you.
Her response that I seem to have a problem with biology is so stupid it doesn't really deserve a response but i'll give it one anyway.
Presumably Gravlen is opposed to extra funding for womens healthcare to accomodate for differences in biology and equalize them in outcome.
Presumably they are opposed to womens sports leagues. etc.
Oh no wait, those benefit women. So ofcourse she isn't.
She would never say "Well, you women just have to put up with having equal funding and stop quarreling with biology about vagina's being more expensive to maintain medically than dicks."
She would never say "Stop whining about being unable to compete in a unisex sports league, you're quarelling with biology."

The equalization of outcomes by compensating for biology works great for gravlen when it benefits women.
And only then.

[Transhuman Proteus]

They... can? They can use contraceptives or say no if the woman doesn't want to. Or use a cure on any STDs if they don't and get them.



What right is violated by a woman being the one with the ultimate choice as to what happens to her body?



Not sure I follow - we're entitled to children and the state should provide it? We have reproductive rights, but if no one wants to have kids with us, no one should be obligated to impregnate us/carry our kids.

"Should have used contraception" is not an argument accepted when used by the anti-abortionists. It is not an argument that should be accepted when used by the opposition to LPS.
No right is violated by that. The mans rights are violated when they are forced to be a legal parent to children they do not want.
Children are entitled to a decent living. I don't see why forcing people who do not want to be parents to be the ones to provide it makes any sense when the state can provide.
There is a reason I responded to Gravlen and not you.
Her response that I seem to have a problem with biology is so stupid it doesn't really deserve a response but i'll give it one anyway.
Presumably Gravlen is opposed to extra funding for womens healthcare to accomodate for differences in biology and equalize them in outcome.
Presumably they are opposed to womens sports leagues. etc.
Oh no wait, those benefit women. So ofcourse she isn't.

Sorry, misread, thought you were making a anti-choice argument contingent on the man's opinion/desires in the situation.

[Ostroeuropa]

"Should have used contraception" is not an argument accepted when used by the anti-abortionists. It is not an argument that should be accepted when used by the opposition to LPS.
No right is violated by that. The mans rights are violated when they are forced to be a legal parent to children they do not want.
Children are entitled to a decent living. I don't see why forcing people who do not want to be parents to be the ones to provide it makes any sense when the state can provide.
There is a reason I responded to Gravlen and not you.
Her response that I seem to have a problem with biology is so stupid it doesn't really deserve a response but i'll give it one anyway.
Presumably Gravlen is opposed to extra funding for womens healthcare to accomodate for differences in biology and equalize them in outcome.
Presumably they are opposed to womens sports leagues. etc.
Oh no wait, those benefit women. So ofcourse she isn't.

Sorry, misread, thought you were making a anti-choice argument contingent on the man's opinion/desires in the situation.

No problem. I could have been clearer. I'm pro-choice on both sides.

[Gravlen]

Yes... But... if those risks should materialize, she's able to handle them, to reduce the impact of them. She's is able to cure herself of diseases. And she's able to terminate a pregnancy.

But nevermind if men want to be able to reduce the impact of risks.

No, they're free to do it too. They can have all the medicines they want.

...are you having trouble understanding biology and the reproductive process again? Because, you see, men don't get pregnant. They don't have the same ability as women to reduce the impact of pregnancy since they can't have abortions, and that's because (I hope I'm not going too fast for you here) men don't get pregnant.

Because it's better to violate the rights of men than inconvinience women or deny an entitlement to children that could easily be provided by the state.

What "rights" are violated by women having abortions? Is an abortion an inconvenience for women? What child are you talking about?

You seem to be confused by the conversation, and have suddenly started talking about things that happen after birth?

[Gravlen]

They... can? They can use contraceptives or say no if the woman doesn't want to. Or use a cure on any STDs if they don't and get them.



What right is violated by a woman being the one with the ultimate choice as to what happens to her body?



Not sure I follow - we're entitled to children and the state should provide it? We have reproductive rights, but if no one wants to have kids with us, no one should be obligated to impregnate us/carry our kids.

"Should have used contraception" is not an argument accepted when used by the anti-abortionists. It is not an argument that should be accepted when used by the opposition to LPS.
No right is violated by that. The mans rights are violated when they are forced to be a legal parent to children they do not want.
Children are entitled to a decent living. I don't see why forcing people who do not want to be parents to be the ones to provide it makes any sense when the state can provide.
There is a reason I responded to Gravlen and not you.
Her response that I seem to have a problem with biology is so stupid it doesn't really deserve a response but i'll give it one anyway.
Presumably Gravlen is opposed to extra funding for womens healthcare to accomodate for differences in biology and equalize them in outcome.
Presumably they are opposed to womens sports leagues. etc.
Oh no wait, those benefit women. So ofcourse she isn't.
She would never say "Well, you women just have to put up with having equal funding and stop quarreling with biology about vagina's being more expensive to maintain medically than dicks."
She would never say "Stop whining about being unable to compete in a unisex sports league, you're quarelling with biology."

The equalization of outcomes by compensating for biology works great for gravlen when it benefits women.
And only then.

You seem confused, and it seems like you're having a conversation with an imaginary person. Are you having a stroke? Do you need medical assistance?

[Ostroeuropa]

You seem confused, and it seems like you're having a conversation with an imaginary person. Are you having a stroke? Do you need medical assistance?

You can consider it a response to your previous post to me while taking what you just said in response to another poster as a segway into why you hold a double standard.

[Gravlen]

You seem confused, and it seems like you're having a conversation with an imaginary person. Are you having a stroke? Do you need medical assistance?

You can consider it a response to your previous post to me while taking what you just said in response to another poster as a segway into why you hold a double standard.

Do you hear voices? Hallucinations can be a serious issue, should we call someone?

[Ostroeuropa]

You can consider it a response to your previous post to me while taking what you just said in response to another poster as a segway into why you hold a double standard.

Do you hear voices? Hallucinations can be a serious issue, should we call someone?

Considering you just said I was the one having a conversation with an imaginary person, and the quoted response here is an entirely coherent one in that conversation, it's a bit rich for you to immediately then launch into a non-sequiter.

[Gravlen]

Do you hear voices? Hallucinations can be a serious issue, should we call someone?

Considering you just said I was the one having a conversation with an imaginary person, and the quoted response here is an entirely coherent one in that conversation, it's a bit rich for you to immediately then launch into a non-sequiter.

No really, you should stop having conversations with imaginary people in your head and instead talk to real people. Like me, and not your imaginary version of me. You can do it, I know you can - if you put your mind to it!

[Ostroeuropa]

Considering you just said I was the one having a conversation with an imaginary person, and the quoted response here is an entirely coherent one in that conversation, it's a bit rich for you to immediately then launch into a non-sequiter.

No really, you should stop having conversations with imaginary people in your head and instead talk to real people. Like me, and not your imaginary version of me. You can do it, I know you can - if you put your mind to it!

Do you have any example of me responding to something you havn't said?

[Gravlen]

No really, you should stop having conversations with imaginary people in your head and instead talk to real people. Like me, and not your imaginary version of me. You can do it, I know you can - if you put your mind to it!

Do you have any example of me responding to something you havn't said?

Well, you had an entire conversation with yourself about sports and such at the top of the page. Why don't you start there...

[Ostroeuropa]

Do you have any example of me responding to something you havn't said?

Well, you had an entire conversation with yourself about sports and such at the top of the page. Why don't you start there...

You previously said I had a quarrel with biology. In that context it's entirely relevant to bring up other equalization measures society employs to address inequalities caused by biology that you, presumably, support.

[Gravlen]

Well, you had an entire conversation with yourself about sports and such at the top of the page. Why don't you start there...

You previously said I had a quarrel with biology. In that context it's entirely relevant to bring up other equalization measures society employs to address inequalities caused by biology that you, presumably, support.

Not really, in particular since you're trying to take the thread off topic with your unfounded speculations.

Here, try this instead.

[Ostroeuropa]

You previously said I had a quarrel with biology. In that context it's entirely relevant to bring up other equalization measures society employs to address inequalities caused by biology that you, presumably, support.

Not really, in particular since you're trying to take the thread off topic with your unfounded speculations.

Here, try this instead.

It isn't off-topic.
I'm saying men should not have a choice in abortion, and that LPS is the reason why.
I have not claimed that men get pregnant, perhaps you should stop having conversations with imaginary people.

[Gravlen]

Not really, in particular since you're trying to take the thread off topic with your unfounded speculations.

Here, try this instead.

It isn't off-topic.
I'm saying men should not have a choice in abortion, and that LPS is the reason why.
I have not claimed that men get pregnant, perhaps you should stop having conversations with imaginary people.

You did say "But nevermind if men want to be able to reduce the impact of risks" when we were talking about how women should be able to have abortions to reduce the impact of materialized risk, specifically the risk of pregnancy and STDs.

And the only reasonable interpretation in the context of the conversation was that you somehow imagine that men can get pregnant. Which they can't. So... it's completely irrelevant.

Ah wait. I'm sorry. I actually thought you were trying to contribute to the conversation, and not throw out random non sequiturs. My bad. Carry on.

[Ostroeuropa]

It isn't off-topic.
I'm saying men should not have a choice in abortion, and that LPS is the reason why.
I have not claimed that men get pregnant, perhaps you should stop having conversations with imaginary people.

You did say "But nevermind if men want to be able to reduce the impact of risks" when we were talking about how women should be able to have abortions to reduce the impact of materialized risk, specifically the risk of pregnancy and STDs.

And the only reasonable interpretation in the context of the conversation was that you somehow imagine that men can get pregnant. Which they can't. So... it's completely irrelevant.

Ah wait. I'm sorry. I actually thought you were trying to contribute to the conversation, and not throw out random non sequiturs. My bad. Carry on.

You seem confused, and it seems like you're having a conversation with an imaginary person. Are you having a stroke? Do you need medical assistance?

You can consider it a response to your previous post to me while taking what you just said in response to another poster as a segway into why you hold a double standard.

The first response to you whining here I made already addresses this.
I didn't realize I had to walk you through step by step to get back to it.

[AiliailiA]

What does "LPS" stand for, please?

[Gravlen]

You did say "But nevermind if men want to be able to reduce the impact of risks" when we were talking about how women should be able to have abortions to reduce the impact of materialized risk, specifically the risk of pregnancy and STDs.

And the only reasonable interpretation in the context of the conversation was that you somehow imagine that men can get pregnant. Which they can't. So... it's completely irrelevant.

Ah wait. I'm sorry. I actually thought you were trying to contribute to the conversation, and not throw out random non sequiturs. My bad. Carry on.

You can consider it a response to your previous post to me while taking what you just said in response to another poster as a segway into why you hold a double standard.

The first response to you whining here I made already addresses this.
I didn't realize I had to walk you through step by step to get back to it.

Wait, so you're actually seriously asking why I hold a double standard for men and women when it comes to pregnancy?

Are we back to you having a stroke again, or is this where your knowledge of biology broke down ages ago? Seriously. Google "reproductive process". Learn something.

[Ostroeuropa]

The first response to you whining here I made already addresses this.
I didn't realize I had to walk you through step by step to get back to it.

Wait, so you're actually seriously asking why I hold a double standard for men and women when it comes to pregnancy?

Are we back to you having a stroke again, or is this where your knowledge of biology broke down ages ago? Seriously. Google "reproductive process". Learn something.

I'm saying you hold a double standard when it comes to equalizing outcomes by compensating for biological differences.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The first response to you whining here I made already addresses this.
I didn't realize I had to walk you through step by step to get back to it.

Wait, so you're actually seriously asking why I hold a double standard for men and women when it comes to pregnancy?

Are we back to you having a stroke again, or is this where your knowledge of biology broke down ages ago? Seriously. Google "reproductive process". Learn something.

What is this drivel?

No, simply no. Men and women are different in many instances when it comes to reproductive stuff. Why? Simple, they have vaginas, and we don't, so we really can't say much as men about pregnancy.

It's one of those things that, even if you are homosexual, you have to admit there is no double standard.

And this is a direct response to Ostroeuropa, I'm just too damn lazy to go ahead and scroll up the page.

[Ostroeuropa]

What does "LPS" stand for, please?

Legal parental surrender.

A process by which a parent disowns everything to do with a child, and is no longer the legal parent, removing all rights to the child and all responsibilities to it.

[Gravlen]

Wait, so you're actually seriously asking why I hold a double standard for men and women when it comes to pregnancy?

Are we back to you having a stroke again, or is this where your knowledge of biology broke down ages ago? Seriously. Google "reproductive process". Learn something.

I'm saying you hold a double standard when it comes to equalizing outcomes by compensating for biological differences.

Based on what? You know, besides the conversation you had with yourself?

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm saying you hold a double standard when it comes to equalizing outcomes by compensating for biological differences.

Based on what? You know, besides the conversation you had with yourself?

Based on the fact you are opposed to LPS and one of the arguments you used against me was "You seem to have a quarrel with biology", but are presumably in favor of genderered sports groups and extra money for womens healthcare.
If you aren't in favor of those then by all means say so.

[Ostroeuropa]

Wait, so you're actually seriously asking why I hold a double standard for men and women when it comes to pregnancy?

Are we back to you having a stroke again, or is this where your knowledge of biology broke down ages ago? Seriously. Google "reproductive process". Learn something.

What is this drivel?

No, simply no. Men and women are different in many instances when it comes to reproductive stuff. Why? Simple, they have vaginas, and we don't, so we really can't say much as men about pregnancy.

It's one of those things that, even if you are homosexual, you have to admit there is no double standard.

And this is a direct response to Ostroeuropa, I'm just too damn lazy to go ahead and scroll up the page.

The double standard is that economic grounds are a reason that is acceptable for a woman to give up parenthood of a child.
But not men.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

What is this drivel?

No, simply no. Men and women are different in many instances when it comes to reproductive stuff. Why? Simple, they have vaginas, and we don't, so we really can't say much as men about pregnancy.

It's one of those things that, even if you are homosexual, you have to admit there is no double standard.

And this is a direct response to Ostroeuropa, I'm just too damn lazy to go ahead and scroll up the page.

The double standard is that economic grounds are a reason that is acceptable for a woman to give up parenthood of a child.
But not men.

Well, no shit, a woman has a right to do what she chooses with her body. It isn't a double standard if she wants to fuck all night long and men can't.

Economic grounds have partly to do with it. Alimony laws take this into consideration as well. It isn't a radical concept, it was merely created for the protection of women in general, since you know, some poor women may need the extra money to actually take care of the child. In other words, you can't just go "oh but women shouldn't be able to do it since men cannot". No, you're just opening a big can of worms that is falsely advertised as "equality" when it really isn't. Men, up to a point, sometimes have more disposable income than women do, and therefore we are partly responsible to take care of the child unless we surrender all parental rights. I am comfortable with that since that's how I think it should work.

Inequality is a part of life, and equality isn't the holy grail of society either. There will always be inequality, and men and women's issues are one part where this is seen more.