Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#6 - Womens Study Major (06/18/2013) [-]
A pro choice isnt a woman who doesnt want to look after a child. She doesnt want to be pregnant, resulting in a child. Although, as a pro choice woman myself I do think there should be a time limit given during a pregnancy in which a man must make the decision to stay or leave. If he stays after this designated time then he is equally responsible for the child emotionally financially and everything else. However, if he chooses not to be involved he is not listed as the father and has no say what so ever in the childs upbringing. He has no financial or other obligations. I think this time limit should be up to 3 weeks before an abortion is no longer a choice as the father opting out for example may change the womans view on continuing the pregnancy.
#274 to #6 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
I think if a guy IS in a committed relationship with a woman, and they have been dating/married for a long enough period of time, the guy should have a say in what happens to the baby, and whether it is aborted or not. I know that isn't exactly a popular idea among women, but believe it or not, guys have feelings too.
#23 to #6 - thedumbledore has deleted their comment [-]
#83 to #23 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
Three weeks before abortion is no longer a choice is usually a set time in law. Usually anywhere from 21w6d to 24 weeks is the latest an abortion can legally be performed. Discovery of the pregnancy is mostly irrelevant in the time frame as the end date has the importance.
#10 to #6 - originalanonymous (06/18/2013) [-]
I agree as long as i don't have to pay alimony.
#272 to #10 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
You are getting alimony and child support mixed up. Alimony is from divorce, not from having a kid.
User avatar #7 to #6 - articulate (06/18/2013) [-]
I agree, anyone care to explain why they do not?
#16 to #7 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
Women don't get paid as much as men. It's harder for them to raise a child on their own, specially on maternity leave after recovering from birth. It takes a sperm AND an egg to make a baby. If he fathered it he should take some care of it.

Otherwise why couldn't she choose to keep the baby but not raise it and dump it on him with the same rules of no obligations?
User avatar #19 to #16 - articulate (06/19/2013) [-]
If the mans says, "I do not want to have this child" while an abortion is still possible, but the woman does not, by choice, have one then why should it still be his responsibility? If they were so unlucky as for her to become pregnant then it's not his fault. If she was willing to have unprotected sex then they should have talked about what to do if she got pregnant and if not, well, that's just stupidity on her part for allowing it. If he raped her and did not use a condom then he should be forced to pay to raise the child.
My father never sent my mother a dime and she raised me and my sister just fine.
#201 to #19 - coolgabe (06/19/2013) [-]
If I put my quarter into a gumball machine, is the gumball mine or the machines?
#282 to #201 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
That analogy is so bs in all ways. Who's to say that she wanted your damn quarter or that she doesn't also have to provide a quarter for the gumball to pop out, except that she also has to turn the switch for you and she has a chance of being ****** over by your inserting the quarter while you can walk away scot-free to another machine. Since when was she an object full of rewards for your choosing at any time.
User avatar #32 to #19 - brockyboi (06/19/2013) [-]
I agree with some of that, but you're still putting too much on the burden woman. You only claim that the woman was the one stupid enough to have unprotected sex, but the guy would have made the same choice. I really haven't made up my mind on the matter, but it would be pretty bad to get someone pregnant, and then get upset when the woman makes a choice with her body that the guy may not agree with.
#254 to #32 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
birthcontrol pills are not 100% effective plus the fact that there are hardly any birthcontrol methods for men except for condom or vasectomy.
User avatar #47 to #32 - skaffanl (06/19/2013) [-]
And that is why there is more burden for the woman. If a man says "I do not want to have this child" and the woman wants it the baby will probably be born. If a woman says "I do not want to have this child" and the man wants it the baby will probably be aborted. So if there is no equal choice then why should there be equal burden?
#136 to #47 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
Equal burden? How so? In the end it is her body, if she doesn't want to have to grow a baby inside of her for 9 months and then go through child birth, that is her choice to do so with her own body.
#156 to #136 - Womens Study Major (06/19/2013) [-]
Sure, it's her choice, but why can't a man just leave in that case, and not be forced into paying for something he never wanted? that the woman in the relationship basicly forced upon him?
User avatar #379 to #156 - paintmered (06/19/2013) [-]
The man having sex and knowing the possible consequences is enough for him to have equal burden.
User avatar #429 to #379 - guymandude (06/19/2013) [-]
His point is that the woman also knows the consequences of having sex. Yet if the woman doesn't want the burden of a child, then she can terminate the pregnancy no matter what. Whereas if the man doesn't want to deal with that burden, society basically says "tough tits" and he is forced to handle it anyway - his decision has absolutely no weight on whether or not the woman gets an abortion.

And you are right, women have to handle the physical ramifications of having a baby - something a man will never have to deal with. However, I think what everyone is getting at is after the pregnancy, when the kid is actually born. Both parents share the burden of raising a child, yet only one has a say in whether or not it is born, and the other just has to deal with it. And as opposed to pregnancy, raising a child is an issue that affects a person for the rest of their goddamn life.
User avatar #441 to #429 - paintmered (06/19/2013) [-]
Let's say the woman wants the baby but the man does not. Should she be forced to kill the thing that's in her own body because the person that had sex with her and knew that sex can lead to babies decided that he doesn't want to deal with the consequences?

Of course women have the final say, after the guy cums in the woman his reproductive duties are done. He can't take the sperm out. After coitus the woman has both parts required for the baby. The man's commitment is locked in. The woman only has the privilege of aborting because she is able to. It's really about biology, not gender equality.
User avatar #448 to #441 - guymandude (06/19/2013) [-]
First, once again I will say that the woman is (or better be) completely aware of the consequences of sex. People have to stop this concept that every woman who is accidentally impregnated is the most innocent soul in the world that had no knowledge of what sex could result in, and had no part in the decision to have sex. Because that implies that every single woman who is accidentally impregnated is a victim of some form of rape and didn't want to have sex.

Second, you keep saying that a nine month task that one parent has to deal with (that is very difficult, I won't say it isn't) entitles that person to make decisions for the other parent that will affect both of them for their entire lives.

Third, sperm isn't the only part of the equation in reproduction. How can you say that the man is making a commitment to be a father for the rest of his life by his sperm, yet the mother, who contributed the egg, can decide what her commitment is?

 Friends (0)