Vasectomy Requirement Part of Virginia Man’s Plea Deal

Funny how this is being foisted yet again onto a male. Seems when sterilization is looked to as some kind of answer to a perceived problem around "the wrong people" reproducing, it's men getting vasectomies (or worse) and not women getting tubal ligations.

Women having kids they can't support and who don't even want the fathers thereof anywhere in their lives: that's fine. No problem, the taxpayer's got ya covered, ma'am. But if a man goes around playing Adam, suddenly it's all about how HE isn't supporting HIS children and so shouldn't be "having" any more. Meanwhile, when it suits them, feminists insist that fathers do not have nearly the claim of rights re their kids because, well, they are not really theirs. After all, who gave birth to the baby? But fathers can be involved in one way, as they're the ones who RAPED the mother (as we all know, heterosexual behavior is tantamount to rape), and this by paying the mother for the damage caused by inflicting a child on her (even though she could have gotten an abortion -- but it's her right to decide whether to do that or not, so in any case, it's no excuse for the rapist-father should she CHOOSE to have the offspring of her RAPIST).

There, isn't this now crystal clear? Makes sense when you look at it from the feminist POV. But be forewarned, it is headache-inducing. =)

Notice the ADA is female, too, but to be fair, if he were a she, he'd probably say the same thing. Wonder if the irony of the "welfare mom" v. "deadbeat dad" hasn't struck her; after all, the only thing that makes welfare moms eligible for more welfare money if they have kids and deadbeat dads ineligible for welfare money if their baby-mommas have a kid is their respective genders. The gov't on the one hand says it wants to "promote responsible fatherhood" while promoting irresponsible motherhood on the other by requiring that a single mother indeed be single if she is also incapable of fully providing financially for her child(ren), and in fact, have set up a system wherein they encourage single moms to have more kids by paying them more as each new baby gets born. It's as if they set up a system specifically to bust up the nuclear family among those least able to handle the stress of losing that kind of social support.

Well, let me be clear, no one of either sex ought to be acting like it's fine to have as many kids as they want and frack it all, who cares we already have over 7 billion humans running around, let's just keep amping it up to see how high a number we can get before the Earth's crust collapses under our weight? Just that if you're going to hold Adam to account for producing too many new residents for the Garden of Eden, you ought to be holding Eve to the same degree of accountability as well, since it does take two to tango.

The feminist view on getting pregnant is that it's something caused solely by the man. The woman has no fault for agreeing to have sex. And it's not simply a risk both parties take on when they have sex. No--it's simply something the man does to the woman. So, too, women blame politicians who don't support giving free contraception to women. It's not her fault she got pregnant; it's the fault of politicians who didn't give her free BC.

The irony, of course, is that the man neither has a right to become a father nor do avoid fatherhood, thanks to Roe v Wade. The woman alone chooses if he becomes a father. But still he is blamed for the woman having a child. And the answer is a vasectomy for him, not a tubal ligation for her, even if she's having 8 kids at a time. And one must ask: why were these women willing to have these children? The likely answer is what Matt points out: welfare.

It's sad that we the people have the made the harsh treatment of men acceptable, even resorting to forced sterilization of men and jail for debt. Such harsh treatment is apparently necessary to get the current system to work.