Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mlamlah]

I'm really impressed if you managed to both read my post and comment in just under two minutes.

Also, spirit and idea are two different things.

Urgh, i'm keeping the above for posterity, but i'm sorry for sort of snapping at you, i'm kind of grumpy but that wasn't right of me.

[scriver]

It is true that women were victimized in the past. But I feel that now, with the past and current changes that are happening, women have just as many rights as men do (Regarding, of course, first world countries). Don't believe me? Ask the Australian Prime Minister.

You mean the woman currently most famous for making an impromptu speech against sexism and how she was being treated sexistly? Maybe we should ask her.

Tell me, are you one of those people who would claim there is no racism in the US because a black guy is president?

[Leatra]

Hey, when did this thread became the most popular discussion in the forum again?

Nothing good can come out of this debate. Especially when there is someone who is blindly following his opinion, strawmanning the crap out of everyone and focusing only on the small flaws of an argument rather than trying to deal with the whole argument.

snip

Nonetheless, this was an interesting read and I guess it's what I mostly agree on.

[Graknorke]

Especially when there is someone who is blindly following his opinion, strawmanning the crap out of everyone and focusing only on the small flaws of an argument rather than trying to deal with the whole argument.

Hey, I dropped out somewhere about 2 pages ago

But to be honest, this conversation was never going to go anywhere anyway, because this is the internet where everybody is stubborn.

[Darvi]

because this real life where everybody is stubborn.

Ftfy

[Tack]

Nothing good can come out of this debate. Especially when there is someone who is blindly following his opinion, strawmanning the crap out of everyone and focusing only on the small flaws of an argument rather than trying to deal with the whole argument.

Nonsense. We're ALL doing it!
That's what makes it interesting.

It's entirely relevant. You think it is a coincidence that places where abortion is illegal have bad track records in women's rights?

So you're saying that Abortion, as a personal decision, is power given entirely to women, and removing that right is removing power to only women?

I, myself, think that abortions are a choice between the two prime causes of the embryo. In fact, the only reasons it wouldn't be a choice for both would be selfishness on the part of a woman, or selfishness on a part of a man.
And yes, that includes rape, which is an entirely selfish act. If it was a selfless act, it wouldn't be rape.
And it would be really, really complicated and weird.

However, as that is the main 'sticking point' for abortion, that's the basis of the argument. Yes, it should definitely be possible for rape victims, and I daresay the 'strict procedures' you note in your post would not make it much harder for rape victims to get an abortion. However, people using it as just another form of contraception, well, I daresay that will be harder to get. And that affects males and females alike.

[Neonivek]

Nothing good can come out of this debate.

I don't know... the fact that I have said all the most outragous things I could think of and everyone treated my calmly and rationally (and often ignoring me) has calmed me down plenty and made me feel plenty good.

Apperantly people arn't really all that blind to the scizo nature of society.

HOLY COW! maybe the best thing EVER happened and people can finally understand what I am communicating the vast majority of the time!

Ok... definately not the last part (Only one person has ever been able to stay on my page when I do crazy debating)

[scriver]

So you're saying that Abortion, as a personal decision, is power given entirely to women, and removing that right is removing power to only women?

I, myself, think that abortions are a choice between the two prime causes of the embryo. In fact, the only reasons it wouldn't be a choice for both would be selfishness on the part of a woman, or selfishness on a part of a man.

The man does not have to carry the child for nine months. The woman does. The man does not suffer any of the ails or risks associated with pregnancy. He does not have to feel ill and throw up for weeks. He does not risk chronic back pain or worn-out joints. He does not risk complications with his mammaries. He does not risk internal (or external) rupture and scarring. He does not risk post-gravidity depression. He does not risk miscarriage. He does not risk infertility. He does not risk blood poisoning. He does not risk death.

Therefore, the stake between the mother and the father is not the same. Therefore, he does not have a say beyond what the mother is willing to give him. Therefore, she must have the final word.

[DJ]

The man has to provide for the child for 18 years after it's born, even if never gets to see it. And there's no excuses for failing to make the payments, if he loses his job, gets too sick to work or fails to make the payments for any other reason all of his possessions get auctioned off and he goes to jail. I'd say that's worth at least a little bit of say in the whole matter.

[Frumple]

That... depends pretty heavily on a lot of things. Area, state, whether the mother presses for it, probably other things. Gods know my own didn't pay shit for most of my life and was never tossed in jail for it. Other things, sure, but not that.

... also could use less biased language. Child support generally isn't enough in and of itself to provide fully for the child, so there's still a lot of provisions coming from the remaining parent.

[Neonivek]

The man has to provide for the child for 18 years after it's born, even if never gets to see it. And there's no excuses for failing to make the payments, if he loses his job, gets too sick to work or fails to make the payments for any other reason all of his possessions get auctioned off and he goes to jail. I'd say that's worth at least a little bit of say in the whole matter.

I think we are just refering to the baby... though that is sort of a good point too. A Man is expected to have "No say" and yet carry all the responsibilities.

Though I think society is already catching up to how unfair many of the childcare laws are and how they need to be remade.

the stake between the mother and the father is not the same

And Yet at the same time it is. They both have the very same and very real stake. A Child.

It is this that at times is entirely unrecognised UNLESS in advantages the baby.

It is kind of one of the few times where I have to kinda go "Yes it sucks, it really sucks for women... but you can't go around it. It is your body, but that is also a child we are dealing with and not just some extension of your body". but that is going into personal oppinions and not ones I feel I can infer into society.

At the same time though I can't help empathising with a woman in that possition either. I would certainly hate being a woman in that situation (What the heck I am doing in that situation is beyond me).

It is like a no win.

I actually cannot come to a conclusion Both solutions suck soo much!

You either have a father who actually has no choice in the life or death of his child to the whim of a possibly disinterested party.

Or you have a mother who has her autonomy taken away and her control over her own body gone.

[misko27]

Everytime I read a post in favor of something I want to argue against it.

True neutral

[Neonivek]

Everytime I read a post in favor of something I want to argue against it.

True neutral

That is probably Chaotic Neutral.

[scriver]

I have nothing against an legal option for men to "opt out" from children as soon as they are known to them, if they agree to lose every rights regarding the child for the rest of their lives.

This is all beyond the point of the topic, though, which was why abortion has to do with the rights of women (and their rights to their bodies), and why preventing them for getting abortions is damaging to them a lot more than to men.

[Willfor]

The man has to provide for the child for 18 years after it's born, even if never gets to see it. And there's no excuses for failing to make the payments, if he loses his job, gets too sick to work or fails to make the payments for any other reason all of his possessions get auctioned off and he goes to jail. I'd say that's worth at least a little bit of say in the whole matter.

"I have a problem against a legitimate feminist position because of legally instituted symbol of patriarchy (that men have to be the providers), that the ideal of feminism would abolish."