MRA's: Fighting for Men or Fighting Against Women?

[Geilinor]

I don't why Edlich keeps coming back to paper abortions and rape.

So please quote a single fucking time I mentioned paper abortions because I haven't. Meanwhile, I keep coming back to rape because of the admission by Ostro, who apparently is an expert on MRAs and a great supporter but totally not one, that MRAs don't care about female victims of rape so long as the attacker is male and his initial comment that he cares about female victims of rape provided that they have female attackers, a comment which he decided to clarify only after others noted the implication.

But hey, sue me for giving a damn about female rape victims unlike - again according to the expert Ostro - MRAs.

When did Ostro say he didn't care about female victims of rape? Remember, he said that he isn't an MRA.

[Ostroeuropa]

I don't why Edlich keeps coming back to paper abortions and rape.

So please quote a single fucking time I mentioned paper abortions because I haven't. Meanwhile, I keep coming back to rape because of the admission by Ostro, who apparently is an expert on MRAs and a great supporter but totally not one, that MRAs don't care about female victims of rape so long as the attacker is male and his initial comment that he cares about female victims of rape provided that they have female attackers, a comment which he decided to clarify only after others noted the implication.

But hey, sue me for giving a damn about female rape victims unlike - again according to the expert Ostro - MRAs.

Where did I ever say the MRAs don't care about female victims of rape. How do you manage to live with yourself telling such obvious slanderous lies about people? Jesus.
And fuck, you even accuse ME of it?
What the hell man. This is scientology levels of cult right here. Freethought blogs would be proud of you

[Tahar Joblis]

Gee, Misters Prime and Alternate Universe Fartsniffage, it doesn't seem fair to say that just because you don't use a condom, you should get smacked with involuntary obligations so serious. I mean, we're talking serious life-changing consequences, especially considering the knock-on effects of social stigmatization & crap like that.

If the woman has an abortion then it's everyone back to their corner, no harm don't.

Not according to anti-abortion activists. They would say irreparable harm has been done to a child. Look, Alternate-Universe Fartsniffage doesn't agree with you on that. He just uses the exact same arguments as you do to defend the status quo in his universe.

If the child is born then it's no longer just about the man and woman, there is also a child involved. The game changes and people need to step up.

Except that if the woman doesn't want to step up, neither parent has to, as she can give the child up for adoption. And if states actually start cracking down on giving up kids for adoption without fingering a father and getting his consent, then we'll see women using the safe haven laws for that reason.

Your description simply has nothing to do with reality here, but what I'm focusing on here is your argument for why men should be held responsible. The simple fact is that when you're saying responsibilities are assigned at conception (or consent-to-become-a-parent), that's exactly a common anti-abortion argument; and that's the argument you're offering. You're saying that having sex means it's cool to burden you with life-changing obligations. This is what anti-abortion activists say.

[Seriong]

Gee, Misters Prime and Alternate Universe Fartsniffage, it doesn't seem fair to say that just because you don't use a condom, you should get smacked with involuntary obligations so serious. I mean, we're talking serious life-changing consequences, especially considering the knock-on effects of social stigmatization & crap like that.

If the woman has an abortion then it's everyone back to their corner, no harm don't. If the child is born then it's no longer just about the man and woman, there is also a child involved. The game changes and people need to step up.

There's a trend I've seen, that people don't recognize the psychological trauma following an abortion. It isn't merely an afternoon activity, it's something that messes people up.
To someone that wants a child, losing it is harm, look at the effects of false pregnancies.

[Shie]

I'm arguing against the rights they assign to themselves arbitrarily.

Which are the rights given to men in the traditional roles you're itching for them to follow. Again, what makes you different from the MRAs?

These aren't rights that I want given to men, they're obligations, duties. If the MRAs had their way, men wouldn't have to be men, they'd have the option of being man-children.

[Edlichbury]

So please quote a single fucking time I mentioned paper abortions because I haven't. Meanwhile, I keep coming back to rape because of the admission by Ostro, who apparently is an expert on MRAs and a great supporter but totally not one, that MRAs don't care about female victims of rape so long as the attacker is male and his initial comment that he cares about female victims of rape provided that they have female attackers, a comment which he decided to clarify only after others noted the implication.

But hey, sue me for giving a damn about female rape victims unlike - again according to the expert Ostro - MRAs.

When did Ostro say he didn't care about female victims of rape?

Quoth: "And female victims of female perpetrators". He has since clarified that position - as noted in my post quoted - after others observed the unfortunate implications therein.

[Jocabia]

If the woman has an abortion then it's everyone back to their corner, no harm don't. If the child is born then it's no longer just about the man and woman, there is also a child involved. The game changes and people need to step up.

A paper abortion could be had even before the child is born.

The paper abortion only has an effect if there is a child. It's totally and entirely about severing the parent from responsibility for a born child. When a child is not born, there is no need for the document. The born child has rights.

[Ostroeuropa]

When did Ostro say he didn't care about female victims of rape?

Quoth: "And female victims of female perpetrators". He has since clarified that position - as noted in my post quoted - after others observed the unfortunate implications therein.

Get the actual quote and what it's a response to. Go ahead.

[Fartsniffage]

You know what? Fuck unwilling fathers. The guys have the options to prevent the conception of the child, they didn't take them. Once the child is born then it requires money to survive in a capitalist society and that is the responsibility of the parents, both of them.

You know what? Fuck unwilling mothers. The gals have the options to prevent the conception of a child, they didn't take them. Once the child is conceived then it requires a uterus to survive and that is the responsibility of the mother.

Gee, Misters Prime and Alternate Universe Fartsniffage, it doesn't seem fair to say that just because you don't use a condom, you should get smacked with involuntary obligations so serious. I mean, we're talking serious life-changing consequences, especially considering the knock-on effects of social stigmatization & crap like that.

You really want to make the argument that fatherhood carries the same social stigma as unmarried motherhood? Being a deadbeat dad maybe....

[Geilinor]

If the woman has an abortion then it's everyone back to their corner, no harm don't. If the child is born then it's no longer just about the man and woman, there is also a child involved. The game changes and people need to step up.

There's a trend I've seen, that people don't recognize the psychological trauma following an abortion. It isn't merely an afternoon activity, it's something that messes people up.
To someone that wants a child, losing it is harm, look at the effects of false pregnancies.

Hoping that you'll have a child and not having one =/= choosing to end a pregnancy. The former is involuntary, the latter is voluntary.

[Llamalandia]

Taht would make sense, as it gives both parties the same amount of time for an actual abortion.

My view is de-facto LPS.

The child is born. The birth certificate is offered, and both parents can say

"mmm... nah, i wont sign."

The child is born without legal parents. Only by signing the document do you become the parents. Once signed, the child is yours, and you cannot simply walk away. You now have a responsibility to it.
Unless you can prove you signed under false pretenses I guess, like if the child isn't biologically yours, or the mother signed expecting the father to, then he said "Nah."

Actually there was a court case which decided that if a man signed a document agreeing to pay child support even though he had no knowledge he wasn't the father at the time he's still liable for the payments. Kinda messed up isn't it.

[Ostroeuropa]

Gee, Misters Prime and Alternate Universe Fartsniffage, it doesn't seem fair to say that just because you don't use a condom, you should get smacked with involuntary obligations so serious. I mean, we're talking serious life-changing consequences, especially considering the knock-on effects of social stigmatization & crap like that.

You really want to make the argument that fatherhood carries the same social stigma as unmarried motherhood? Being a deadbeat dad maybe....

Which you're trying to perpetuate by the use of the term deadbeat dad.

[Fartsniffage]

Simple really. I see the reproductive process as being a complete thing, not separated into pre and post conception. The fact a woman has a bit longer to consider it is simply a product of biology.

Which doesn't answer my question at all. You're still avoiding. Because whether or not it was intended, and wheyher or not you want to see things that way, abortion gives the mother the ability to determine whether or not she wants to be a mother. Post-conception.

Why don't you want men to have that same capability? Women have it. Why don't you want men to have it?

Let me ask you this, if the baby popped into existence a few moments after conception, would you still be arguing for paper abortions? We live with the consequences of our choices. Don't like it? Get a vasectomy or don't have sex.

However, that doesn't happen. And as it stand, you're only suggesting serious consequences for one sex; men.

But I'll make you a deal. You actually answer my question, and I'll answer your's.

I did answer your question. The fact you don't like the answer is neither here nor there.

Yes, only serious consequences for the men. After all, women don't have to give birth and never have to pay anything towards the upbringing of the child.

[Aurora Novus]

You really want to make the argument that fatherhood carries the same social stigma as unmarried motherhood?

And of course you, once again, dance around the point of the post.

[Ostroeuropa]

Which doesn't answer my question at all. You're still avoiding. Because whether or not it was intended, and wheyher or not you want to see things that way, abortion gives the mother the ability to determine whether or not she wants to be a mother. Post-conception.

Why don't you want men to have that same capability? Women have it. Why don't you want men to have it?




However, that doesn't happen. And as it stand, you're only suggesting serious consequences for one sex; men.

But I'll make you a deal. You actually answer my question, and I'll answer your's.

I did answer your question. The fact you don't like the answer is neither here nor there.

Yes, only serious consequences for the men. After all, women don't have to give birth and never have to pay anything towards the upbringing of the child.

Only if they WANT to, which is the whole point.

[Gauthier]

You really want to make the argument that fatherhood carries the same social stigma as unmarried motherhood? Being a deadbeat dad maybe....

Which you're trying to perpetuate by the use of the term deadbeat dad.

Because clearly being a deadbeat father carries more career and social-impairing status than being an unwed mother. *nod nod*

[Llamalandia]

Gee, Misters Prime and Alternate Universe Fartsniffage, it doesn't seem fair to say that just because you don't use a condom, you should get smacked with involuntary obligations so serious. I mean, we're talking serious life-changing consequences, especially considering the knock-on effects of social stigmatization & crap like that.

You really want to make the argument that fatherhood carries the same social stigma as unmarried motherhood? Being a deadbeat dad maybe....

In general there getting pretty darn close these days, I think the only real exception is that teen motherhood is still more stigmatized than teen "fatherhood", but like for unwed adults who are financially secure, it's not as big a deal, especially since the two wars recently, I mean no buddy wants to give a single mom crap only to be told her husband died in Iraq or something.

[Seriong]

There's a trend I've seen, that people don't recognize the psychological trauma following an abortion. It isn't merely an afternoon activity, it's something that messes people up.
To someone that wants a child, losing it is harm, look at the effects of false pregnancies.

Hoping that you'll have a child and not having one =/= choosing to end a pregnancy. The former is involuntary, the latter is voluntary.

I should have been more clear. He's saying that if the child is aborted, then no harm is done to either party, regardless of their opinion on the matter. In the case of a father wanting a child however, it would be the former.
Besides, the point still stands, that even voluntary abortions aren't casual occasions.

[Fartsniffage]

You know what? Fuck unwilling fathers. The guys have the options to prevent the conception of the child, they didn't take them. Once the child is born then it requires money to survive in a capitalist society and that is the responsibility of the parents, both of them.

If MRAs really want this to stop then they should shut the fuck up about paper abortions and start fighting for free child care, higher pay for women, health insurance in part time job (stupid fucking US) and getting rid of at will employment so the mothers of these children can earn enough that they don't need the fathers income to raise the kid.

Oh really I can say the same about women and abortion then because after all women had those exact same options to a kid motherhood and have since now demanded a new right to kill a fetus be recognized. Look I'm not strong prolife but give me a freaking break, feminists need to be consistent or just admit they only really care about advancing women's rights at which point unfortunately one can then justify the existence of mra's to fight for men's rights.

Feminism is already fighting for the rights and privileges I mentioned. It's why it exists, because women don't get a fair shake of the stick in current society, mostly because they are the ones to bear children. Jesus.

They're not fighting for them on behalf of men because men already have them.

[Geilinor]

Hoping that you'll have a child and not having one =/= choosing to end a pregnancy. The former is involuntary, the latter is voluntary.

I should have been more clear. He's saying that if the child is aborted, then no harm is done to either party, regardless of their opinion on the matter. In the case of a father wanting a child however, it would be the former.
Besides, the point still stands, that even voluntary abortions aren't casual occasions.

A father renouncing all his future rights to the child would not be a casual decision.

[Ostroeuropa]

Which you're trying to perpetuate by the use of the term deadbeat dad.

Because clearly being a deadbeat father carries more career and social-impairing status than being an unwed mother. *nod nod*

I'm against both stigmas.

[Gauthier]

Which are the rights given to men in the traditional roles you're itching for them to follow. Again, what makes you different from the MRAs?

These aren't rights that I want given to men, they're obligations, duties. If the MRAs had their way, men wouldn't have to be men, they'd have the option of being man-children.

The MRAs get their way if both genders follow Traditional Roles like you've decreed. Where's the difference?

[Llamalandia]

Which you're trying to perpetuate by the use of the term deadbeat dad.

Because clearly being a deadbeat father carries more career and social-impairing status than being an unwed mother. *nod nod*

Possibly, but the mother had an out not available to the father, hence she chose to be a single mother, a single father was forced into that role, at least in the generic type of cases were talking about here.

[Ostroeuropa]

These aren't rights that I want given to men, they're obligations, duties. If the MRAs had their way, men wouldn't have to be men, they'd have the option of being man-children.

The MRAs get their way if both genders follow Traditional Roles like you've decreed. Where's the difference?

The pro-masculine MRAs do, yes. The anti-masculine MRAs would be horrified.

[Aurora Novus]

I did answer your question. The fact you don't like the answer is neither here nor there.

You provided an answer alright, but not one that answers my question. Saying "I don't see pre/post-conception" is not a coherent answer. Unless you're rejecting the process of reproduction whereby a sperm fertilizes an egg, what you're saying is gibberish. Reproduction happens, not all at once, but over time. There are stages in this process detailed in any High School level Health textbook. We're discussing something legally that can be done after a specific stage.

What you did wasn't answer my question. You avoided it.

Yes, only serious consequences for the men. After all, women don't have to give birth and never have to pay anything towards the upbringing of the child.

No, but then again, women get to make that choice for themselves. What you are proposing is that women get to also make that choice for men as well.

So I'll ask you again. Given that women can, whether intended or not, make the choice to be mothers post-conception, why do you not want men to have this right as well? Why do you want women to be able to control men's parental status?