Gendered Justice - Man Charged with Fetal Homicide Faces Life in Prison

...I was thinking. I was on the fence about posting this-- the biggest filter (but not the only one) I use when deciding to post a submission or not is, and I admit I sometimes get it wrong, sometimes right, sometimes in between, *relevancy*. Is the story or issue being demonstrated more or less directly applicable to MRA issues? As men are half the human population (though the "ten-percenter" feminists surely wish that were not the case) is male, almost anything in the news could be considered a relevant story. However if that is the case, MANN would simply be a live feed RSS site aggregating stories from everywhere and listing them in no particular order. On top of that, new ones would be added so fast you could hardly keep the page fresh in your browser. So a lot of discretion and whittling has to occur.

IMJ, this story reflects a deep ambivalence about the idea of both abortion and men deciding if they are or are not going to become fathers post-conception. A man who does what this one did, assuming he is guilty of doing it, is clearly committing an act of poisoning. He is also trying to exercise the same option that his gf had to decide whether or not to become a parent. And while it is wrong of him to poison someone, it is also wrong that he doesn't have the same rights she has to "just walk away" from parenthood.

Absent a "paper abortion" scheme and knowing full well he stands no chance of setting a new precedent in a court case over the issue, he turns to a criminal act to get what he wants. The ends don't justify the means, though. On top of that, pro-lifers feel that while it's wrong women are aborting, it must be 100x wrong for men to inflict an abortion on a woman. Hence the politics-makes-strange- bedfellows effect with these laws where you see feminists and religious fundamentalists together on the same page. With two such powerful forces backing legislation, is is it any surprise the "fetal homicide" law is enough to get a man (or whomever does the deed-- a crazed woman, as we have seen in other news stories, etc.) potentially in jail for life, while she may end the pregnancy any time into the first trimester and walk away.

This ambivalence and particularly weird outcome is not necessarily exclusive to MRA issues. However in the face of perceived wrongs occuring (abortion, in this case, in the perception of one of these parties), but taking away the power (via political correctness) what is the issue here is the fact that the legislature needs to hold someone up as accountable (in this case women are excluded, this being driven by the feminists), someone has to be made the scapegoat. It is the man, and since he can't be scapegoated in 99.999999999999999% of the situations a woman has an abortion (because of course *she* is exercising *her* freedom of choice), he will be utterly pilloried in the one situation he can be: when he induces an abortion against her will in the woman in an effort to avoid parenthood himself.

This is not a clean and easy scenario. It does point up the readiness though of the two major sides of our cultural war camps (religious fundamentalists vs. radical feminists/ secularists) to agree on one thing and one thing only: if a man can be pilloried for any action that both sides deem to be wrong, he will be unto death. But if a woman can be, don't-- after all, she's just a helpless little ol' woman.

And it is at these two extremes that the general middle, where one can find the sopping-wet misandry that permeates our laws and social norms, is made to look almost benign in comparison, when in fact, it is just another head from the same hydra-- all of them equally deadly.

not the Father's...as things now stand.

A fetus/child has been terminated.
And why? Because the Father was not ready to be a Father.
Had the mother not been ready...well, it is permissable for her to do exactly the same thing.

In this case, if this young man could forsee the future, he'd have been on equal footing by just poisoning the mother to death. The outcome for him would be the same.

And certainly this type of tragedy could be avoided with simple changes to the law to allow men to avoid unwanted parenthood just as women can do today.

oregon dad

a woman asked her boyfriend to "stand on her stomach" to induce a miscarriage. She requested it. He complied.

When the authorities found out, he was prosecuted for fetal murder - against her wishes.

Only a woman can terminate the unborn.

oregon dad

...all they want to, but the truth of the matter is that the majority of women and the feminists will not go for it.

So, if you're not willing to stand up and throwdown for your freedom as a man then get comfortable with the feminists' klan-like tactics. Remember the Women's KKK is the birthplace of modern day feminism thus expecting anything at its base other than klan-like tactics and legislation from feminism is ridiculous.

----------

The Women are at Fault by Matthias Matussek

The man is this story is very, very clearly being politically persecuted, IMO.

Equal Choices for Dads!!!1

Equal Choices for Dads!!!2

Equal Choices for Dads!!!3

"It is the man, and since he can't be scapegoated in 99.999999999999999% of the situations a woman has an abortion (because of course *she* is exercising *her* freedom of choice)..."

I would suspect that a man is often pilloried as a poor or inadequate provider in cases where women unilaterally obtain a divorce. I suspect there may be other rationalizations, or vilifications of men too.

Of course, women have long used, "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." You need only Google that term to find the history of that term as it has been used pillory men.

The murder charge is ridiculous. Prosecute him for spiking the drink, period.

Well there you go, another method for women to add to their endlessly expanding war chest of legal tactics to punish men. All a woman has to do if she wants to put a man away for life is slip herself an RU-486 after becoming pregnant and then claim the man did it (getting rid of the fetus and her man in one fell swoop). The only evidence the court would apparently need is her word and a cup with powdered RU-486 on it as "evidence".

"All preborn children deserve equal protection under the law, without exception," she added. "Ironically, in direct violation of the equal protection clause of the US constitution, if the woman had taken RU-486 by her own hand, there could be no charges."

DigitalHermit, I'm pretty cynical-- but even I didn't consider that. You're right. Now they can frame us on murder charges as well.

Just wondering, does that mean birth was imminent or something? Like when I am 80 y.o., I will be a "pre-dead" man?

-ax

again, let's list these concepts. maybe we are missing something.

woman kills viable fetus. no harm, no foul. it's not considered to be a human being yet. her right.

man kills any fetus. LIFE in prison.

heck, they don't even give life to women for killing a whole family of children. just counseling. then freedom.

fascinating, but not very logical captain.

I'm not starting any arguments about abortion here, I'm just letting y'all know that I am pro-life. However, at the same time I believe that if you were to take away a person's right to choose, it would do more harm than good, because it would be the beginning of the end of democracy (or the delusion of it at least). That being said, I don't agree with what the man did, but at the same time, I don't agree with giving him such a severe punishment just because he has a Y chromosome. Had the roles been reversed and he wanted to keep the child, and the woman didn't want it, she could have done the exact same thing to kill the baby, and nothing would have happened. But now this guy is facing charges of life in jail because he wasn't ready to be a father? That just ain't right. Here's a lesson for all men, just don't have children. Like marriage, it too is a quagmire.

Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!