Should men have “financial abortions” rights?

A few weeks ago on Ask Cristen I addressed
the question should cisgender men have a say in abortion to which a lot of guys commenting
said yeah sure, have your abortions as long as guys can have rights to financial abortions.
I don’t know why I put just financial in quotes. In a nutshell, a financial abortion refers
to this idea of being able to give up all parental and financial responsibilities associated
with raising a biological child. In other words, if you want to have the baby, go ahead,
but I will have nothing, not a penny or moment of time, to do with that. And the Ask Cristen commenters who expressed
this desire for an opting out of fatherhood or just paternity in general, usually placed
it in straight relationship scenarios such as a guy telling his girlfriend that he never
ever wanted to be a dad and then she gets pregnant and then she decides to have to child
and then all of the sudden he’s on the hook for child support and being a father that
he never ever wanted to be. And then there were a few guys who said, ‘And what about
women who might poke holes in condoms or lie about being on birth control thus tricking
men into becoming fathers again that they never ever wanted to be. I also wanted to take a moment and lay a little
bit of statistical groundwork when it comes to child support and single-parenting in the
US. In the United States, around twenty-three
million kids live in single-parent homes and of those single-parent homes, around eighty-two
percent of those are headed by a custodial mom. And of those custodial single moms, only
thirty-six percent have never been married. So in a majority of child support cases, these
kids are products of marriage and then divorce not women secretly having babies without men
being involved. At least in 2011, only sixty-three percent
of child support owed was actually paid. Which usually amounts to seventeen percent of a
parent’s income. It’s interesting to compare that then to the annual overall cost of raising
a kid in 2014 which comes up to just under fourteen thousand dollars. Unfortunately there is a statistical grain
of truth to this background financial abortion panic of what’s referred to as reproductive
coercion. Someone getting pregnant without one or the other person’s consent. According
to the 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, eight point seven
percent of men in the United States reported ever having quote, ‘an intimate partner trying
to get pregnant when they did not want to or tried to stop them from using birth control.
And at the same time approximately eight point six percent of women in the United States
similarly reported having an intimate partner who tried to get them pregnant when they did
not want to or refused to use a condom. Which leads to why financial abortions will
probably never be codified into law. In 2007 the Sixth Circuit US Court of Appeals dismissed
a case involving a financial abortion specifically a man who did not want to be legally obligated
to pay child support under Michigan State Law for a child that he had previously informed
a girlfriend that he never wanted because he said, ‘Hey lady I never want to be a dad.’ In its decision to dismiss that case, the
Court said, ‘Dubay’s claim that a man’s right to disclaim fatherhood would be analogous
to a woman’s right to abortion rests upon a false analogy. In the case of a father seeking
to opt out of fatherhood and thereby avoid child support obligation, the child is already
in existence and the state therefore had an important interest in providing for his or
her support.’ There’s something called the UN Convention
on the Child which explicitly states that child support, both financial and emotional
and even just providing basic things like shelter and food are universal rights for

100 Replies to “Should men have “financial abortions” rights?”

  1. Lame, you didnt even make an argument for or against, of course men should have the right, if women do men should

  2. I am The Mother of children concieved in rape and i can tell you:  two wrongs do not make one right, aborting the child would only make me the mother of a dead child and a bad human being like the rapist. the child is not part of the problem, he is your healing and the one Who Will love you always simply for being his Mother.
    A zygote/fetus IS a human being, just in a different stage of development. Life begins at Conception, when a sperm(50% genetic charge) fertilizes a woman's ovum(50% genetic charge), a new, unrepeatable and unique Human Being has come to existence. Abortion is the most coward crime, killing a defenceless child in the womb. It is so Sad, the person who should Love You always(mother) giving her permission for You to be murdered. 

    My grandmother became pregnant when she was a teen and 
    brought forth herself (she was a widow) 6 children, full of courage and love.
    Do not be afraid, God never abandons. 
    Being a mother may be scary now, 
    perhaps because of the situation of your family or country, 
    but then that storm will pass and you will be filled with joy.

  3. You're a moron. None of your statistics correlate to your interpretations. (A) Just because a couple is married doesn't mean one party could not have been "tricked" into having said children. You're starting to sound like someone who says men can't rape their wives. Consent to marriage is not consent to fatherhood. B) Only 8.6% of men reported being 'tricked'. This statistic is predicated on one party KNOWING they were "tricked". Which, given it is an act of deception, is surprisingly high. C) The U.N. means nothing to U.S. domestic law. D) If both parties were given reproductive rights, then ALL children would be planned. To argue against this undermines the feminist and "Planned Parenthood" argument.

  4. I don't think anyone else than the pregnant woman can decide whether she'll have the baby or not but the father should have the option to have a financial abortion. It's not rare for women to either trick men into thinking she's on BC, there is no serious/established relationship or there is disagreement on having a child together. Men have no super reliable BC option other than a vasectomy to they should have option of financial abortion. If people want to say that if he's not ready to be a dad, then he shouldn't have sex, that also applies to women and we should then get rid of abortion altogether. It's already hard for men they can't decide on having the child, they should at least be able to opt out.

  5. Even if 'just' 1% of children came from deceit/trickery, that's a lot of people. How many men are tricked into marriage because of an unplanned (at least for the man) pregnancy?! Not everyone can pay child support because if the man's income drops, it takes months if not longer to get a reduced amount if granted at all. Never heard of men sleeping in their car because they can't afford rent due to ridiculously high child support demands?

  6. No, by your reasoning, all abortion should be illegal because 'the child is already in existence'. You can't have it both ways lady! You either allow financial abortion for the man up until abortion is no longer legal (18 weeks, 20 weeks, whatever). If the woman fails to inform the man in time, he shall have the option of financial abortion for maybe two months after being made aware of the pregnancy/child?!

  7. The State sees the idea of male reproductive rights as threat to national security. If men were allowed to have not have children, the birth rate would plummet and later make the concept of nuclear families great again…

  8. What do statistics have to do with rights? You don't look at black rights and point out how usually black people don't get oppressed in one way so it isn't much of a problem. If they are getting oppressed then they should have rights and not get oppressed no matter how often they are being discriminated against!

    I think if the man knows the woman is pregnant when it can still be aborted then he should have full rights to opt out. If a woman is secretly pregnant before the fetus becomes too old to abort or if she waits purposely just before the time when it can't be aborted he should be able to back out. If the father was not told before the point where a fetus can't be aborted and the mother kept it a secret he should have full rights to opt out. Before or when the fetus is too old to abort. Not when it is about to or after it is birthed.

  9. Men absolutely should have a right to opt out of parenthood. It is my money, I should get to decide what I do with it. The argument ends there.

  10. Really intresting commentary back and forth, I read as much as I could but didn't see anyone mentioning that a women's right to choose (which I wholeheartedly support!) gives a potential mother the right to an abortion regardless of how the potential father feels about it (including when the father's wants to have the child). As it now stands (assuming there is legal and accesible abortion) a father has 0 rights but significant responsibilities. That's f**ked up, all responsibilities should come with rights (and vice versa). We don't need more bitter parents resenting their role, we need parents who are glad to be parents and do a kick ass job of raising healthy, loving children!

  11. Well it's 50/50 . You BOTH made it . It's soooo ok for the woman to say I want a baby's and your ganna love and take care of it and give me money !!!! The man doesn't have a single say? You BOTH had sex you BOTH created it so it's only FAIR ! stop being crazy feminists omg

  12. Man and women should both be able to say yes and or no to abortion so they both need to say yes to abortion before hand. As its both there child 50/50

  13. Look at this bitches disproving/condescending face and tone, who the fuck are you to disaprove, fucking feminists, they will kill a child for convenience (I'm pro abortion, but I call a spade a spade) and demand the right to do so but when it comes to men's rights and their choice in the matter then women are like 'hold on, that's too extreme'. Proof feminists don't want equal rights, they want preferential treatment. And stats have nothing to do with it, completely irrelevant to the point, this bitter women is just trying to circumvent the argument,, if you 'choose' to have a child, I should have the right to say fine, but I don't want it, so you raise it yourself. Women want everything, right to choose, but whatever I choose, you will pay for those choices. Fucking disgusting. Feminists are just sickening, man-hating spiteful, angry creatures.

  14. I find it kinda sad that when people againts this idea they only talk about the child support, while the bigger issue here is about giving up the parential rights.
    btw your statics about "most of the children with single mother were borned during a marriage" is really unimportant here since the point of the whole "male abortion" is thag the father can give up the parential rights UNTIL the 18th week of pregnancy, which is latest time when a woman can have abortion. So it's 100% fair.

    p.s : sorry for my english and i'm a girl before you call me misogynist

  15. I really don't understand why guys who don't want kids don't get a vasectomy (and the follow up apt to be sure they shoot blanks) it's under $500, reversible, and just a couple days of healing.

  16. So basically a man can’t do it because the child has a “universal right” but a woman can just dump the child off into the foster care system and give it up for adoption(financial abortion basically) and that’s ok because equality.

  17. Of course Liberals won't let men have these types of rights. It would diminish women's ability to control men through the legal system.

  18. I don't care about the 8.6% of women who reported the partner didn't want to use a condom or tried to "trick" them. They have a bunch of ways out of parenthood if they did get pregnant. The men on the other hand have 0.
    I have had girls actually poke holes in my condoms. Thankfully I always checked them before use. I know a guy who had his partner stop the pill without telling him solely to get pregnant without him knowing. He has no way out. There are even cases of men being raped and being on the hook for the pregnancy from that rape. Imagine the outcry if a woman was raped, ordered to pay her rapist money every month for 18 years, and if she failed to do so they would throw her in jail.

  19. I wish I could just kill my mistakes, life would be so much easier. Alas, I'm just a man; society does not afford me such rights.

  20. simply put, i am in favour of this financial abortion
    Men do deserve this choice. it is the right of everyone to CHOOSE to have a child or not. Maybe there will be less single parenting if this goes through, as people will consider their partner as a potential parent more carefully. There is too much thoughtlessness re having children and choosing partners imo

    i am aware that some women get preggers deliberately for financial reasons because currently men have no choice and no legal say in the matter, they have to cough up what they can afford regardless if they are allowed to see their child or not, or want to b a faTHER OR NOT
    As long as this does not mean extra pressure on women to either abort or to keep a child according to the man's choice.
    I think this will make people be more certain of their partners when engaging in unprotected sex and will increase useage in contraception.
    Maybe a halfway house would be an initial one-off fine or fund from biological father, who doesnt want to be father, to make HIM more conscientious about using condoms^^
    -would pay for cost of registering his wishes
    -would help towards initial baby set-up costs for mother

    it is SCARY the amount of men who have refused to wear a condom that i have known personally, who tried to bully/manipulate me into having unprotected sex and i think these guys should feel the consequences for that -there's also STD risks involved in unprotected sex (there were sadly too many times when they got what they wanted because i got a lil too scared to continue saying no, or was worn down too much, or i was tricked/distracted/drunk etc and i was not always very good at being strong n assertive back then). i would argue, at least it felt like, only 20% of men i interacted with in my promiscuous 20s made no protest when i asked or whipped out a condom before i did ask

    That said, i always took responsibility for my own body and was on pill or injection permanently throughout my 20s because i knew i wasnt wanting kids at the time and i was taking no chances
    there was alot more men in my community who had a handful of kids each with different mothers, than mothers with children who each had different dad.
    That said, if u know u dont want kids, or dont want them yet, use fucking protection -thats YOUR responsibility
    Accidents do happen, rape happens, manipulated/forced/bully/drunk sex happens
    It is always a womans' choice to incubate a baby or not and she should keep that choice
    But men need a legal escape too, because condoms do split, she might forget to take pill, or not get doc appt for injection on correct day etc
    yet this shouldnt be an easy way out for irresponsible men who refuse to use protection 'because it feels better'
    The fine/baby fund i suggested would ensure men who choose this option to be more careful about unprotected sex in the future.
    INTERNET – * I am a female feminist who believes men should have the choice of opting out of parenthood within the same time-frame a woman has to make that choice, providing she also has complete legal freedom to make that choice*
    i am a feminist who tries to stand for TRUE equality for EVERYONE

  21. But there are a lot of women that sleep with random guys or otherwise trick a guy into getting them pregnant, so that needs to be taken care of.

  22. Liberal ideology brought this debate up to begin with. They believe life starts when a woman chooses a human life. Fatherhood is removed from conception and only appears when it's time to pay up. If a woman can only choose life, then why acknowledge the responsibility of a father? Men shouldn't be required to pay child support. What goes around comes around. Now the liberals in seeing their flawed ideology, will ask all of us through taxation to pay for every woman's kids. (well we do a lot of this already)

  23. its time for o be able by lao o I don't want baby.if  to have it its ou not me.wome have over 12 forms of birth control and the morning after have non.

  24. there are 12forms of birth control not counting the morning after pill.a man has non except for a comdom.its time for men by law to say no I don't want a baby and walk away if she has it anyway

  25. "Only 63%% of owed child support was actually paid"…. OK…red herring. Not in the least related to the issue of men having the LEGAL right to opt out of the financial aspects of unwanted fatherhood. You may as well claim rape should be legal because many rapes go unpunished.
    "Of those custodial mom's only 36% have never been married" The use of ONLY is mind numbing. This is a HUGE number of children and cannot be dismissed with an agenda driven use of a dismissal "only". Furthermore, I am quite sure that some of these women have been married and 1 or more kids from other men besides the one she married and divorced. Only by this carefully worded sleight of hand were they able to even get the number down to 36%. Given the nature of things today, I suspect that around 50% of these women have children that were fathered by men whom they never married. And we know that some children born to a married couple were conceived without the father's consent, though a precise percentage is probably difficult to determine.
    The court ruling she gives is flawed. It magically says a child EXISTS but somehow a fetus does not. But I do think it is right in a way on that part. Abortion is a different issue. A far more accurate analogy would be to address the fact that women have the right to surrender a child to the state, no questions asked. The court then says the state has an important interest in providing for the child's support. OK…. Then why is the state perfectly willing to take a surrendered child and NOT demand child support from the mother. With this sentence, the state admits that its primary motivation for such a ruling is to transfer the costs of raising a child to the father because it can. It offers NO justification for this. The bias towards women in this is unmistakable and therefore such laws clearly violate equal protection aspects of the US constitution.

  26. With such double standards from feminists i say, you are a dude, just find a nice lady to get ahold of some RU486 for you, from a doctor, and sprinkle that shit on your woman's ice cream. Problem solved. That or coat hanger. Trip down the stairs, etc.

  27. In such and such year this amount of child support was not paid… Because the MEN didn't want to have the kid in the first place or, the female does not or will not live with the male and so he has to pay for 2 houses? How does that make any, Any sense to anyone at all? If you think I'm joking in the slightest I am not, Id go to prison for the rest of my life before I would be forced to work for a females bad decision.

  28. …………#mgtow
    Its waaaaayyyy fucking safer…
    I aint talking no chances with my ENTIRE life.

  29. All your statistics are irrelevant. So what if the majority of single parent cases are the result of marriage and consented birth- these proposed laws are to give equal rights to the "smaller" number of cases that are different. Ditto to payments not being made- how is that relevant?

    This is like me saying that most people aren't violently murdered during their lifetime, therefore we shouldn't make laws protecting the ones that are.

    These laws wouldn't do shit to change the obligations of men who agreed to raise a child and have since abandoned it- they are designed to give rights to men who never wanted to conceive at all- the same fucking rights women already have. Almost every argument you are makign could be used against women's rights to abort.

    That stupid smirk on your face throughout this video? Christ what a cunt.

  30. Men can get reversible vasectomies safely and temporarily they also have the option to abstain from sex, so no they should never have the right to impregnate someone and then leave their responsibilities with out any consequences. First and for most women do not impregnate men, men impregnate women. Only idiots who have no brains whatsoever would agree with a law like this. Stupid laws like this would lead to more teen pregnancies and lead to more single family homes. This would lead to higher taxes and higher rates of welfare and the people who are dumb enough to agree with these laws would deserve the higher tax rate. No women should be strong armed into having an abortion ( which can lead to permanent infertility or death). The simple fact that he can prevent pregnancy should take this option off the table.

  31. The UN human rights is not US law, so fail. The UN does not hold sway in US courts, only the Constitution does.

  32. this is like the perfect scenario. women get to have their choice for their own body, and men are not financially victimized for it. I do not see a downside to this

  33. Lol a person named flower power is writing stupid things in the comments,I can bet she's just a 30 year old feminist who's gonna die alone. …and ya I totally side with financial abortion everyone who doesn't agree and says that don't have sex if you don't want a child is just retarded… They should die already.

  34. You fail to notice that just as women abortions, male abortion – if legal- would have to take place withing the period a female abortion can take place because the baby is not considered a person yet and because the mother can then decide if she still wants to have the kid….So the father does "financial abortion" when the baby is not a baby, the baby will be a baby only because the mother unilaterally decides to have it. So no, citing children rights is not OK. If anything a mother who decides to bring a child to the world by herself, knowing the father wants nothing to do with the baby, and later fails to provide for the child should be punished because it is she who violated the child rights.

  35. My ex-girlfriend and I broke up. She talked me into "farewell sex," and had poked holes in my condoms. She got pregnant, and used that against me for 20 years.

    We had a hearing in California, where she lied downward about her income in order to get more money. Next, she fought for and got minimal visitation rights for me, which was 8 hours per month, which means more money.

    Where it got sticky was when the Commissioner did not like my temp job income, and disregarded how I had to flee from her due to abuse, and then return about six months later to re-establish myself.

    With this, the Commissioner based my income on what she "felt I should be making as a white man." I had never earned NEAR that close, and struggled for SIX YEARS to finally ear that.

    Still, I did without and paid her $700 per month for 20 years. During this time she would never allow my visitation. The courts would have enforced the payments, had I missed one, by putting me in jail and taking all of my licenses. However, they NEVER enforce visitation.

    I lived up to MY end of it all, but she did not. After 20 year and $168,000, I found out that he NEVER had his own bedroom. This happened because women are NOT held accountable by the State or by the law. Why? Because women are viewed as child-like women who are incapable of taking care of themselves.

    Feminists will never speak up against this, which is why I can never take them seriously. Soft Sexism is real, and they don't care because they benefit from it.

    She used our child to exploit me for money, and to control me and punish me emotionally. This had caused some damage to our son.

    So this is a case of a WOMAN harming a CHILD and a MAN for nothing more than her own financial gain.

    And stop with the "cis" business. I identify as a man, so please respect my feelz. Y'all call yourselves whatever you want, but don't start calling me things that you want, or else you'll get the same treatment right back from me. EQUALITY is a rather ironic thing that some people just don't understand.

  36. Fuck yeah men should have the choice if women are the only ones with any say in having the abortion. If a guy is willing to raise the kid and wants to keep it, and the girl gets an abortion anyways, in no way shape or form should the man have to pay a penny. I sure as fuck wouldn't give a woman money to have an abortion because I would tell her I'll raise the kid alone if she keeps it til birth. I would offer to raise the kid myself without her having to pay child support, so if she still had an abortion, she isn't getting a single penny from me no matter what anyone says. I wouldn't per the woman anything in that case. She can pay to kill her own child, I will play absolutely no part in that

  37. this is not equal to aboirtion. the father to have the right to poison the woman so the fetus dies would be equal to abortion. this is equal to giving the child for adoption, which women already have. abortion has nothing to do with this conversation. if women can give their children for adoption, especially without the consent of the father, then every man should have the same right to give up rights and obligations for the child. and I am not talking about fathers who abandon their already created families. I am talking about the father having the right to give up the child the moment the mother informs him of the existence of a child or pregnancy. there has to be a document that if the man signs it he ether gains or loses rights and obligations for the child. if he signs to be the father, and then leaves, he has to still be responsible for the child. unless there is dna evidence that the child is not his and he did not know about it. it is only fair. if you are a ''feminist'' woman who does not support for men to have the same parental and reproductive rights as women, then either you are not a ''feminist'', or ''feminism'' is not for equality but rather just for women's empowerment without any regard for what happens to men.

  38. This is kind of a pointless video because it talks about the law and statistics and all of that, when this is really a philosophical, moral question. Is it right that for women in countries with legal abortion, consenting to sex is not equal to consenting to raising a child (or supporting one financially), but for men, consenting to sex (and I'm talking about protected, hetero sex) IS consenting to supporting a child? All contraceptive methods are flawed, even with perfect use. A woman has the only choice in what happens after conception happens, and she is making a choice for the father too.

    I am a straight man who never wants to have kids, but who isn't crazy about a vasectomy either. Are people really saying that if I want to remain childless, I must either never have sex, or decide to have an operation to make me sterile? Because in most cases, now in the modern age at least, sex is no longer intimately connected to its reproductive purpose – people have sex for fun, and if they're responsible and use protection and that protection should fail, what options does a man who wants to remain childless really have? ZERO.

    I would never pressure a woman I was involved with to have an abortion. I am totally pro-choice and think abortions are pretty awesome (the last thing the world needs is more kids in Western countries to engage in the conspicuous consumption of resources we are all part of), but a woman's body is her own, and she should have the choice to remain pregnant or not. But if she chooses to continue with her pregnancy and to raise the child, she is forcing her sexual partner to be a father, if only in a financial sense. So when she has sex, she is not consenting to committing any of her future income to the raising of a child – if an accident happens, she always has the option to abort (or give the child up for adoption). But when her male sexual partner has sex, he is implicitly consenting to go along with whatever choice she makes in the event of the contraception failing, and her choice can legally bind him to commit 17% of his future earnings towards a child he never wanted. This is not equality, and this is not feminism.

    Child support was necessary in an age when women depended upon men for everything, when women didn't have an active role in the labor force. Now, women who make this choice should make it knowing that they alone can support their child (and many women are able to do this, no problem). If they aren't able to figure out how to have the child and support it financially, they should abort, or if their moral compass is skewed against this (if they're WRONG about abortion, in other words) they should give the child up for adoption. Relying on another person to live your own dream as a mother is not only immoral, it is profoundly sexist (one of the few areas in which sexism adversely affects men).

    Finally, don't give me the naturalistic fallacy here…just because pregnancy is a natural consequence of sex doesn't mean it SHOULD be, or that this is the RIGHT thing for everyone. Catholics are totally on board with this by the way, and it's crap. We all should be able to engage in as much consensual sex as we want without fear of being responsible for a child who results from our couplings. Sex is awesome, and just because you have sex doesn't mean you are consenting to raising a child, any more than a person who chooses to ride a train is implicitly consenting to their own death in the event of a derailment. We now have the technology to cut the link between sex and pregnancy (and everything that follows pregnancy); those consequences should no longer be part and parcel of what you consent to when you decide to engage in hetero PIV sex.

  39. On one hand girls can give up on child and a man can't, BUT with abortion women are granted choice of kids as well as their bodies, chareers and life. And that's why men should not have that right.

  40. This video outlines what a lot of people seem to miss before they make there position on abortion. That being that there are actually three parties that can be involved in the decision for an abortion: the woman, the State, and the man, in that order. Each has there own prerogative: woman being weather she wants the burden of child bearing and raising that child or not, the State looks into what benefit or cost the child will provide for the state, and the Man weather he wants to provide for the child and go through the process of raising it. I have omitted the child from this perspective because we remove it's humanity until it is born, therefore it can't have a choice (this isn't to say I don't believe it should have a choice).

  41. You're leaving out all the cases where a woman got pregnant and nobody ever found out that it was to tie some dumb schmuck down for the rest of his life, effectively getting a free ride.. Or how about those women who will sleep with a wealthy man and attack him when he takes the condom with him when he leaves..

    This is a bunch of garbage.. I dont care what gender you are, having sex risks pregnancy.. So theres a simple solution.. Stop fucking if you can't support a child.

  42. A funny thing about statistics is that they don't always reflect reality or at least don't reflect reality as a whole.

  43. miscarriages do happen men if financial pregnancy is forced on you there are a lot products available to induce forced labour if a lot of men start doing it how many men will be jailed by the state? after a few thousand they will definitely consider to make this law. time to be a mute spectator and allow feminist to shove stupidity in your throats will not be tolerated anymore

  44. Men should have easy access to surrogate mother should he wants a child when he's ready, a man should also have paper abortion right to abort children if he's not ready to be a father. Just as much rights as women have. That's gender equality.

  45. This kind of law would cause women to be more careful with who they are sleeping with which would overall be a great thing.

  46. I for one am a firm supporter of a man’s right to legal paternal surrender. Some people call it financial abortion, but I would rather not call it that, because it sometimes causes people to make the mistake of thinking that this is about a man being able to force a woman to get an abortion. That is not the case. What I am advocating for is a man being able to opt out of financial responsibility to a child, in the event that the mother chooses to keep the baby and the father wants nothing to do with the child. This is similar to what a woman can do to a newborn baby. A woman can give her newborn baby to a safe haven. Essentially, both men and women should, and I emphasize should, have a right to walk away from a child with whom they want nothing to do. I have heard some of the stupidest most fallacious arguments in favor of the claim that the way reproductive rights currently works is fair. I am going to take some of these arguments and refute them.
    First ridiculous argument
    Some versions of this argument include, “it takes two to tango”, “he should have kept it in his pants” and “he had his choice when he decided to have sex.” None of these things seem to apply when discussing women and their right to abort unwanted pregnancies or drop babies off at safe havens. Women have a variety of options both before and after the child is born, to opt out of motherhood. These same people who call men dead beats for not wanting to be fathers and say that any man who does not want such a responsibility should keep it in his pants will go crazy when conservative Christians argue against abortion by saying that women should keep their legs closed if they do not want to be mothers. What it comes down to is, nobody can force a woman to become a mother, that is a choice that she has. Therefore, I find it distasteful that we as a society are willing to force such an unwanted responsibility on men. The claim that men have an equal responsibility to prevent pregnancy is just illogical. Here is a hypothetical for you. Let’s say that I am allergic to peanuts, I am NOT actually allergic to peanuts, this is just a hypothetical. If I eat some peanuts, then I will go to the hospital, get some adrenaline and maybe stay there for a few days in critical condition until I hopefully recover. This is my cross to bear. This is the risk with which I live every day. Because this affects my body, it is my responsibility to mitigate that risk. The buck stops with me. If I go to a restaurant, it is my responsibility to decide not to order something, if I have no way of knowing weather or not that thing contains peanuts or peanut oil. If I ask the waiter and he says that he cannot say definitively weather or not that cheesecake contains peanut oil, then it is my responsibility to decide that I am NOT going to order that cheesecake. I hold myself responsible for that, not the waiter. When I go to a restaurant, I would not expect that the waiter will go out of his way to tell me which desserts contain peanut oil and which ones don’t, because this is my issue, not his. The waiter is NOT obligated to ask every single customer if he or she is allergic to peanuts, based on the possibility that one of them could be be allergic to peanuts. It is my responsibility, because it is my body. While it may not be fair that I have that burden and other people do not, that is just how it worked out for me biologically. I may not have chosen this allergy, but it is not like anyone else chose it for me. Because it is my body, it is incumbent upon me to mitigate the risks involved. If I eat a chocolate bar without having any way of knowing weather or not there are peanuts in it and I get sick, that is my fault. Therefore, it is really quite illogical to insist that there is an equal responsibility on men to prevent a physical state that only affects women. Men are, however, obligated to abide by women’s wishes. The man should abide by the limit on the level of risk that the woman is willing to tolerate. However, she should really be the one to determine what level of risk she is willing to accept and ensure that all parties are doing their job in mitigating the risks. Not only is men being expected to have the same responsibility to prevent pregnancy as women unreasonable, it is just plain unworkable. Women have more effective non-permanent options than men do. Men’s only non-permanent birth control option is a condom. The condom is entirely visible to her. She can know for a fact if he is wearing a condom or not. The most effective means of birth control for women are NOT visible to men. He has no way of knowing weather or not she is taking the pill properly or at all. The way that reproductive rights currently works, a woman can essentially trap a man with a baby. She can lie and say that she is on birth control when she is not, get pregnant against the man’s wishes and sue him for child support. The only 100% effective way to prevent pregnancy, other than a hysterectomy, is abstinence. That is an option that is available for both men and women, yet somehow it is considered reasonable that preventing pregnancy by means of abstinence is a responsibility of any man who wish not be a father while a woman who would rather not be a mother has no such responsibility. For those of you who are about to bring up the what about vasectomies argument, vasectomies are NOT always reversible:
    Also, Vasectomies also are NOT 100% effective in preventing pregnancy:
    A hysterectomy is completely effective in preventing pregnancy, even though it is not reversible. Bottom line, the woman has more meaningful ability than the man to ascertain what the risks are. That might sound unfair, but it is just nature.

  47. Seems like you got cut off, you did not discuss in utero financial abortion the woman has the ability to abort the child and therefore since it is not in existence it no longer has the right to the UN mandate of support. also you failed to mention that the US has not ratified the UN rights of the child, it’s one of the two countries in the world that hasn’t

  48. You severely failed to address this question! Should they be allowed to opt out? You spouted stats but no opinion. Are you aware that 90% of abortions are for birth control purposes? Surely you know this as fact! Abortion relieves a woman’s financial burden and responsibility. The question remains, on unborn children where the father’s rights on not assuming responsibility? Your quoted court case was about children on the ground, what about in the womb? You copped out on this one as I knew you would!

  49. With rights come responsibilities. If women alone should have the right to decide if a child is aborted or not, they alone should bear the responsibility for that decision, assuming the father opposes.

  50. Men 'western' were being foolish for a long time….giving freaking females rights unilaterally just out of sympathy….now that modern females have shown their colors…it's time to put them back in place, and get shit right….

  51. Men must have the decision to have a child or not….and even if he opts out of it, he has the right to see the child 'his flesh' by law…it should be a law.

  52. Women have like 10 fucktrillion birth control options in 2018. If a woman wants to have the child that's a conscious decision & one that only she has the legal right to make. So why are men held responsible for a woman's decisions by default?

  53. Just wanted to say, it would helpful if you a) cited the sources for your stats and b) made sure to show the cumulative nature of the stats: (82%*36% = 29.5% of single moms have never been married)

  54. The high unpaid child support statistic shows that you can't force a man to be a father. Moreover, even if he pays the money. It doesn't mean he's actually a loving and involved father. The child still loses.

  55. It is wrong for the father to be forced to pay child support for a child he did not originally want.
    However , I believe what has happened here is, is that society has prioritised the child’s needs over the fathers. As a child is more likely to need the money then a man. If that makes sense

    So by the months woman has the right to abort man must have r8 to abort too.
    If single mom has the r8 to offer baby for adoption & pay nth & not rear it either so should biological father have. equality baby equality

  57. Here you go, a solution for everyone: If two people decide to have sex there is always a chance of getting pregnant. Both parties are aware of this from the get go. If you choose to have sex then you acknowledge the possible outcomes and have accepted these outcomes when intercourse begins . If there is a chance to get pregnant then choices need to be made. 1. Don't have sex. 2. Use of protection 3. DISCUSS AHEAD OF TIME THE POSSIBILITY OF GETTING PREGNANT!!! If a man ejaculates in a woman then he has accepted she may get pregnant… PERIOD. If the woman lets the man penetrate her without a condom then she too has accepted that she may become pregnant… PERIOD. If two people decide to have sex, even with protection, they have acknowledged there could be a pregnancy because it is clearly stated that birth control of whatever type is not always effective… PERIOD. IF YOU CHOOSE TO HAVE SEX, YOU COULD GET PREGNANT OR CAUSE A PREGNANCY. Therefore, if a woman gets pregnant from willing intercourse and wants an abortion, she needs to get written permission from the man she had sex with. At this point the man can say ok, get the abortion or no, I want this child to which she will then birth the child and then give the child to the man to raise. If she decides she wants the child she needs to tell the man she had sex with that she is keeping the child and he should be able to say no, get an abortion or accept that I will not support the birth or raising of this child. OR… They can raise the child together.

  58. Equal rights. Even if a man is married to a women it doesn't mean he wanted to have a child with her. Say you have marriage problems and then suddenly the women gets pregnant even though she was supposedly on birth control. She can choose whether or not to have that child, men should have that same right.

  59. If the guy did not want to be a father he should have kept it in his pants. There should be bo excuse as the purpose of sex is to procreate.

  60. Just want to comment this. They asked what will happen if a woman poked holes or tricked a man into pregnancy not how often it happens. Cause sorry to burst your bubble but with the statistics low it still fucking happens.

  61. Wait! Hold up! You completely tapped danced around the subject! So basically a child has univeral human rights for food, shelter and medicine, ie is a human being and the biological father is on the hook for providing those resources regardless if he wants to be involved or not, UNLESS the mother wants to abort, then it's just a clump of cells!
    Like, what the actual fuck! The mental gymnastics ya gatta do just to make sense out of all of this!

  62. a messege for women,equality is a cruel master.women want equality till its not to there advantage.

  63. 3:27
    so before the child is born, is it an existing child that the father is the father of? And therefore abortions are not "none of anyone else's business? My body, my choice?"

    Does a man become a Father and get rights and responsibilities upon birth or conception?

  64. How can the court say while the child is unborn women abortion is FINE but man MUST pay child support if the child is already in existence? Yeah, who ONLY chose to bring the child into existence? He didn't!

  65. Progressivism is the belief that women who don't want to be pregnant can't keep their legs closed long enough to save up for birth control, but men who don't want to be fathers can keep it in their pants for their entire life.

  66. Progressives claim to support "male abortion" but they just say that to cover their asses. It will be a million years before you see a single liberals on the entire planet march for "a man's right to choose."

  67. No. My husband didnt want to have another child, or what he thought would be his second child, so he was told his then one night stand was on the depo shot. She even told his friends, and so on, she asked him not to wear a condom, and said not to worry she was getting her depo shot regularly, he had made it clear again he was not looking for a relationship or child, but they slept together, and she still insisted she was on the depo shot. My husband is pro life and would not want any of his children aborted, and also has no problem paying child support, but she had lied about her use of birth control, she was 14 weeks late getting her shot up to date, and then told him a week or two later after getting a blood test that she was in fact pregnant…He was confused because she was supposedly on the best birth control. So, he decided to try and do the right thing and he tried staying with her, but a week in she realized she doesnt clean up after herself, she doesnt work, she isnt contributing and then the EDD came out and he was also now convinced it was NOT his child since the due date was 8 months after the first time they slept together, not 9. He broke up with her, and she moved away across country, she proceeded to tell her family and friends that he and her were together for a long period of time and planned the pregnancy. He wanted nothing to do with her, he didnt plan on getting her pregnant, she tried trapping him. Why dont men get protected from these kinds of situations? If a man purposely pokes a hole in a condom itnis a punishable offence, but a woman could lie about being on birth control and get paid for it too! He has 3 kids with me now. and pays 123 bucks a month for a child he cant even see because the state and the mom wont let him. He has no problem paying child support. But if people are going to be pro choice, they need to be pro choice for both side or else they look more pro abortion and antiman

  68. Why does this woman present the question and then convolute basic reasoning with a bunch of bs like statistics and percentages?
    If a woman can abort then men should have a choice too. Bottom line.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *