|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chuckle. What else did anyone expect?
It's almost a unanimous statement...among all [women who have had an abortion] that they felt like they had no choice
Uh huh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 30, @01:24PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I agree Thomas. This guy in her life, whom she can force out of the home at any time she wants, and extract child support from at any time she desires -- this man is "forcing" her to have an abortion? Perhaps in some countries-- say Afghanistan -- men have more choices and women less rights of rufusual and more dependancy. But in our country to claim that a man can "force" an abortion is sheer lunacy.
Just more female self-pity.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL, its quite sad.
These "women's" organizations want equaltiy but already admit that they can't do as well on tests (they need extra points), they can't do the physical activity like men can (firefighter and military), they have no way to defend themselves (women are NEVER violent), and now appearantly they cannot think for themselves (forced into abortion).
What will women do without men to guide their poor, weak, thoughtless brains.
All I have to say is that beyond abortion there are many things that I feel forced I need to do, that if the situation was different, I would not do. You know like: paying taxes, paying bills, go to work, adhering to the speed limit, stopping myself from slapping some idiots...
Must be someone else's fault though, surely it can't be mine... wait that a femmunist answer...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The insanity continues. One of the arguments for abortion was (and still is) that if abortion was not legally available women would forced to have children at the whim of men. It is so infuriating that men are blamed for women not being able to have abortions then blamed for having them. Typical gender feminist politics, blame men (e.g. patriarchy) for any and all problems women have.
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
almost...unanimous statement...among all [women who have had an abortion]...
Wide scale refusal and inability for so many women (the overwhelming majority?) to accept responsibility for their actions: Is this a collective derangement?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 31, @07:56AM EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
Women have abortions cause men make 'em.
Women have sex because men make 'em.
Women are born because a man made their mother pregnant for the sole purpose of making them slaves to the patriarchal order.
Indeed, it's all men's fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Study after study has shown that in many countries of the world, women who have abortions would have continued that pregnancy if circumstances had been different."
How do you study something that never happened?
CABOJS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I imagine that many of these women would rather not have had an abortion, and would have chosen not to had their circumstances been different, say if they'd been better off financially. What does not follow is that this automatically means their circumstances were the bio father's fault, or anyone's fault.
"I would have had the kid if my circumstances had been different" could mean a world of things. It could mean the woman was unmarried and didn't want to have a kid out of wedlock. It could mean she and her husband were broke and couldn't afford a kid; maybe they didn't even have medical insurance to pay for the pregnancy and birth. It could mean she did not want to bring a kid into a failing marriage. It could mean she had health problems. It could mean she feared passing a genetic illness onto the kid. These are only a few possible scenarios.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I understand that people often project into the future to make choices, as well as refering to experience (the past).
This is quite different from saying things like
...
Study after study has shown that certain people would have done things differently had their circumstances been different.
This kind of thinking is quite irrational - you could even describe deciding something based on this thinking as clinically insane.
It even appears to be , at first, self evident.
But it is, to be charitable, no more than just a playful assumption, because we cannot repeat events (turn back the clock) so we cannot create a formal experiment to even consider the idea.
This is the kind of superstitious belief that is defended by the famous call to "common sense".
Usually you hear it phrased something like : " well it is only common sense that if things had been different we would have done things differently "; "it is only common sense that if they were different, that this could have, even would have, been part of the difference".
Things weren't different they were axactly as they happened. They could never have been different because nothing parrallel could have ever occurred in the same time and space to compare it to.
It is a play on words and has no significance outside of play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This makes no sense. These women are making a choice. They are making a choice not to contribute to the 56% of all children who are unplanned/unwanted by at least one parent. They are choosing not to give birth to a mistake that will grow up knowing it is not only unloved, but utterly despised by its father. They are choosing not to believe the claptrap about life being a "beautiful choice." They are making a choice not to utterly ruin their own lives and the lives of the bio fathers by tethering them to some brat who is the result of a booze-soaked sex act that neither "parent" can even REMEMBER participating in.
When will the breedercentrism of this society end? Life is NOT always a beautiful choice. I don't know how anyone can look at that 56% statistic and complain about women getting abortions when they know the sperm donors don't want the brats.
Unwanted pregnancies should be aborted. Period. NO EXCEPTIONS. No one will ever convince me otherwise. These women shouldn't be painted as victims. They should be applauded as responsible enough not to birth a MISTAKE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why of course this is true!
Women only get abortions because men pressure them into doing it. They would never ever get abortions otherwise.
This has been common knowledge for some time now. Just ask the first gender femmunist you see.
Also,
The Procter & Gamble stars and man(sic!) in the moon trademark is a symbol of satanism.
Some people are lured into situations where they wake up in a tub of ice with their kidneys stolen.
The FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION is going to start charging a 5 cent user fee for each e-mail sent and received...................
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 30, @04:28PM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
While I agree with all of the comments posted here, I wish to point out something important: From what I gathered from the article, the women blaming men for abortions are not left-wing, liberal, gender feminists. They're conservatives. They're pro-life. They're right-wing. This leads me to a disturbing idea: Is it possible that the men's movement has something to fear besides gender feminists?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 30, @04:38PM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
While I agree with all of the comments posted here, I wish to point out something important: From what I gathered from the article, the women blaming men for abortions are not left-wing, liberal, gender feminists. They're conservatives. They're pro-life. They're right-wing. This leads me to a disturbing idea: Is it possible that the men's movement has something to fear besides gender feminists?
Well, technically all we have to fear is fear itsself, to quote F.D.R.
However, yes, we do have other females who won't be all agaga about the mens movement as it is currently made up up.
A. Any females that like to take money from males for whatever reason. What? Pay for my dates sometimes?! Shocking. Share child care costs? Work? Yes, this group will raise a real hissy fit, and often uses "victim feminism" to farther its real pecuniary goals. On the good side, this group assures the USA is never too unfriendly to revenue producing businesses.
B. Some (though not all ) conservative women. Most will probably be fundamentalists of one stripe or another. This group never liked the feminist movement -- even when it was about equal treatment-- and they hate it now even more. They want "real men" who see their purpose in life as nothing but protecting their women and children.
On some, but not all issues, these women will come down very hard on us.
So yes, sometimes it will probably be the case that the majority of females is against us, even if part of the reason is misunderstanding.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday February 02, @02:32AM EST (#31)
|
|
|
|
|
One reason the men's movement (and anyone who values individual freedom) should fear the Religionists is precisely because they oppose legal abortion.
Even though women can choose not to have abortions and the law forces men into unwanted fatherhood in those situations, the availablility of abortion for women is still a tremendous benefit for men. When a woman gets an abortion and the father wanted her to--a man benefits.
Should men badger and pressure women into having abortions? Absolutely! Until "paper abortions for men" are legal and men can choose to deny parental rights and responsibilities when they encouraged and offered to pay for an abortion, they will have to and should continue to pressure women into having them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible that the men's movement has something to fear besides gender feminists?
Absolutely. This point struck me as well. In general, conservative women are no more inclined to care about the welfare of men and boys than are left-wing women. They just have different, general self-interests and priorities. This is as true as the fact that the Republican party cares little or no more about the welfare of men and boys than does the Democratic party.
A few individual women have broken from the hatred and lies, but it would be very foolish to expect decency and honesty from any of the above groups (conservative, liberal, Repubican, Democrat) when it comes to men's rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas
As a conservative woman, I can tell you that you have much more to fear from the liberal feminists than the conservatives. Since conservatives tend to be religious, they are less likely to consider willfully promoting lies to be a virtue. With education, they can be converted to the cause.
starrgirl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible that the men's movement has something to fear besides gender feminists?
The men's movement has everything to fear from leftist/liberals and right-wing zealots. Yep. Neither Dems. nor Reps. are good for us in the long run. Dems believe women are an oppressed class and men are oppressors. Reps. believe women are a delicate class and men are expendable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can tell you right now that conservatives will never, ever, ever, not in a million years, agree to eliminate child support. In fact, many of them aren't just against abortion, they're against *birth control.* They are so breedercentric it's not even funny. They think we were all put here for one reason: to whelp litters. Who do you think ran all those mega-disgusting "Life is a Beautiful Choice" ads a couple of years back? It sure wasn't a drove of Democrats.
In addition, many conservatives are "traditionalists." That's a nice way of saying they think women are entitled to just plain not work *just because* women can whelp. Being as many of them are also against birth control, it follows that they expect husbands to work 90 hours a week to support the tribes whelped by their wives.
I often find myself agreeing with conservatives on economic issues, but that's about the only area in which I agree with them. Whenever I saw those "Life is a Beautiful Choice" spots, I had to stop myself from getting out a baseball bat and smashing the TV. Yeah, it's really beautiful to have a kid you can't afford, that your spouse doesn't want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL,
Shouldn't you be busy squirting out a baby instead of posting here!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Right-wing left-wing - far too generous a label to give to these people. They are turkies - and so virtually wingless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 30, @09:37PM EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible that the men's movement has something to fear besides gender feminists?
There was a proposed bill last year in the state of New Hampshire to establish a commission on the status of men (HB587). This bill was discussed here on MANN. It passed the New Hampshire House of Representatives but was shelved in the state's senate. Out of curiosity, I computed how different groups of politicians voted on the bill.
Of the state's 397 representatives, 256 were Republican, 140 were Democrat, and 1 was Libertarian. By name recognition, 270 were men (200 Republican), 118 were women (49 Republican), and 9 were of unknown sex (i.e., is Chris a man or a woman).
Overall, 182 (46%) voted yes, 145 (37%) voted no, 69 (17%) didn't vote, and 1 person voted present.
46% of men voted yes, 37% voted no, 17% didn't vote. 43% of women voted yes, 36% voted no, and 20% didn't vote.
47% of Republicans voted yes, 38% voted no, and 15% didn't vote. 44% of Democrats voted yes, 34% voted no, and 21% didn't vote.
I found the most interesting aspect to be the gender distribution among the political parties. The most supportive group was Republican women (49% yes, 28% no, and 22% didn't vote), followed closely by Democrat men (48% yes, 28% no, 25% didn't vote), followed by Republican men (45% yes, 41% no, 14% didn't vote), and last by Democrat women (39% yes, 42% no, and 19% didn't vote).
In summary, the bill to establish a commission on the status of men was most favored by Republican women and Democrat men, slightly favored by Republican men, and opposed by Democrat women.
I don't know what to make of these results, but I found them interesting.
Shawn Larsen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 31, @12:06AM EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
I think this whole thing goes back to the notion that, when a woman gets pregnant unexpectedly, it's always the man's fault. This notion is far older than NOW, so it really doesn't surprise me that most of these women blamed the men for their condition, no matter what their political/moral bias.
There really does seem to be a deep-seated and broad-based notion that women are not responsible for their own actions, and this notion is held more widely by women, older, conservative women, than men of any persuasion.
Frank H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
____"I think this whole thing goes back to the notion that, when a woman gets pregnant unexpectedly, it's always the man's fault."
Huh? I believe it's the other way around. Women are always blamed unilaterally for unintended/unexected pregnancy. Hardly anyone speaks of it as being a 50/50 responsibiity which is what I rant about all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Women are always blamed unilaterally for unintended/unexpected pregnancy.
Gee, I guess I just imagined all that 'deadbeat dads' crap then. How terrible it must be to be a woman. Your body is your own and it's your choice as to what you do with it, so abortion becomes your 'right' not your 'privilege', but then when you choose what to do with your body by having sex with some guy he's fifty percent responsible for the consequences. No wonder you're all so messed up in the head!
The attempt by pro-life groups to blame men for abortion is nothing but an attempt to translate their old rhetoric into a form that will be received more favourably by those it is intended to influence. It gets women off the hook because they can be made to look like victims (again), it panders to feminists and their tedious patriarchy obsessions, and it dovetails nicely with the borderline-psychotic vilification of fathers that seems to have gripped various parts of government and the legal system. Darn it! If only those men wouldn't make women pregnant (there is no female contraception, as you know), and if only they'd work themselves to death to support any choice that a woman might want to make (denying choice to women is sexist, therefor we must do whatever it takes to enable them to make any choice they want to make, without consequence for themselves).
Some women's spastic unwillingness to take any responsibility for anything that happens in their lives is becoming really boring. There's another article on this site at the moment about the lack of women in high-powered positions (see 'The Other Side of the Pay-Gap Story' on the Home page). One of its most telling observations reads:
Men accept the game as offered and play it without attributing its difficulty to their gender. Women decide that if there are bad things about their work environment, it must be because of their gender.
Thirty years of feminist indoctrination have convinced you all that you are, essentially, perfect. Since you are perfect, nothing bad or upsetting or difficult can have anything to do with you. It must all be the fault of those knuckle-dragging, animalistic men (the ones who created everything you take for granted - and you do take everything for granted).
Yup, so it's all men's fault again. Oh, we'll say it's fifty-fifty, but all that means in practice is that whenever anyone tries to point out how a woman could have taken responsibility for something which affects her we'll say that the man could have done this or that and deduce that the situation is his fault. After all, if you feel upset (and don't some women just love to feel upset) it must be someone else's fault. Oh, and in case you're concerned that I said 'something which affects her' instead of 'something that affects her and him', I'll just point out that nobody much cares about anything that affects him. The issue is only raised when somebody wants to blame someone for something. Like now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 31, @11:19AM EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
Well, lets be a little fair , Uberganger.
At least part of this "its always the mans fault " goes back to the times when men were the only ones with rights and women were valued ( as they still are by some people and socities) only if they were virgins.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Men are never going to feel that they have the same burden to prevent unwanted pregnancies as do women. This is due to simple biology. Pregnancy happens to a woman's body, not a man's. Because the fetus grows inside the woman, she is more likely to feel an attachment to it. The man is more likely to see the fetus not as a part of him but as an extension of the woman.
That is why many men say, "Just get an abortion." To them it's just a simple medical procedure, no big deal, no harder than getting a mole removed. This is not due to a fault of the male gender, but again to the simple biological fact that the pregnancy is not happening to the male's body. OF COURSE he doesn't see it as a big deal.
We will never force 50-50 responsibility. The onus to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and to abort when one occurs, will always fall upon the female. That's just the way it is. That's one of the reasons why I think it's absurd that a teenage girl can choose to have an abortion or choose to keep an unwanted kid, but she cannot choose to get a tubal ligation that will prevent her from ever becoming involved in an unwanted pregnancy, or ever becoming involved in one again. Since the female carries the onus of preventing mistaken conception, she should have the choice to accept this onus (by not having her tubes cut) or decline it (by having herself sterilized). If a pubescent girl wants a tubal ligation and she has the money to pay for it, neither her parents nor the gov't should have the right to stop her.
Conversely underage boys should have the right to get vasectomies if they so choose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!
OK I needed a little cathartic scream there.
Claire in general I enjoy reading your posts and the female insight you bring to this site but in this case I am offended. Your attitude is, in my opinion, why men are not seen as equal parents.
You said, "Men are never going to feel that they have the same burden to prevent unwanted pregnancies as do women. This is due to simple biology. Pregnancy happens to a woman's body, not a man's." Up to this point I more or less agree with you. The biological risks of pregnancy are all taken by the female. Noone can argue that point. It is your next comments I take great offense to, "Because the fetus grows inside the woman, she is more likely to feel an attachment to it. The man is more likely to see the fetus not as a part of him but as an extension of the woman." This view of the fetus being an extension of the female body is the hidden problem behind men's battle with child custody and being seen as equal parents. I will tell you right now that most men do bond with their child although I do think it is in a slightly more spiritual sense than women do. But to even suggest that this bond is less real than the woman has is offensive and irritating. My bond with my child is no less real now that any woman's is. My bond with her before she was born was no less real than my wife's was. This feeling that a woman's bond with her child is "more real" is at the core of why fathers are seen as secondary caretakers. Until we rid ourselves of this myth men will always be pushed out the door when it comes to family issues.
On a side note about women's issues. It is society's assumption that women somehow have a special natural maternal bond with their child. Many mothers do NOT have this bond before birth. (There are several excellent studies and books on this.) This bond can develop over time and often does but many women because they do not feel some special connection with their baby at birth often feel depressed or failures as mothers. (note: fathers too can feel this way.)
The issue here is that men are often held 100%accountable for their actions in pegnancies but women's responsiblity is often shifted to the male when a problem arises because of gender-politics.
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good post Tony. I agree with you about the gatekeeping mentality in reproduction.
I would like to point out that BOTH radical pro-Choice and radical pro-Life share this "women as gatekeeper's" of reproduction and childrearing mentality. Its ironic that the two opposing sides share this mentality.
Nothing will change for the better on the abortion front until we challenge this construct. Men and women are equally obligated and equally entitled in the reproductive realm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At present women do have the legal perogative to have an abortion. (I am opposed to abortion but that is beside the point). I do not think that after-the-fact legal remedy absolves men (or women) of responsibility to prevent conception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 30, @05:24PM EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
a surprise?
Men are the cause of all problems of the world.
You didn't know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course women consider the father when making such a huge choice. The lie has been that women make reproductive decisions all alone in a dark room with no considerations other than her own feelings. Some pro-Choice persons seem to imply women make a decision to abort on a flimsy whim, with barely a second thought.
The attitude of the father is a huge influence. In fact most abortions (I think it like 80% are a joint decision between the father and mother). Being a joint decision maker does not imply "blame" or "coercion". That's a logical leap I would not make.
I'm sure there are situations where a woman is coerced or strong-armed into aborting. As there are likely cases of the opposite, women coercing a man who doesn't want his child aborted. I'm not convinced this study objectively looks at the difference between coercion and joint decision making.
Even so, I'm glad this article is being published. It's about time. I'm so tired of people incorrectly stating men don't have a say in abortion decisions. The facts don't support that myth.
I found this website interviewing a man who did a study and wrote a book about men and abortion:
http://www.vix.com/menmag/abortion.htm
EXCERPT: "I think a major finding that developed as we analyzed the results of the one thousand questionnaires was the deep involvement of the men. Eighty-four percent of the men felt that they had been a full partner in resolving an unwanted and ill-timed pregnancy. That's contrary to the impression one gets from the media or from feminist literature which continues to exaggerate this as a solo challenge, as something that the woman alone wrestles with and decides."
The only thing I have to squabble with the author is that it is not just "feminists" (boy those evil feminists are blamed for everything) who perpetrate the notion of woman making unilateral decisions on abortion. Most pro-Life persons I've encountered also proclaim that women make the decision all alone. This is so that they have clear unencumbered scapegoat. It is easier to demonize women who abort if they can pschologically wash the blood of men's hands entirely by claiming men have nothing to do with abortion. [In the blame/shame game, it's all about women and always has been.]
In reality, abortion is most often a joint decision.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
