The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 58 of 58
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Oct. 12, 2001
    Location
    Center of the Universe
    Posts
    7,008

    Default

    clearly what we need is better contraception- right now, men don't have many options. Condoms are about it, and they fail at an alarmingly high rate. Women have more options, but there is still a failure rate.
    The ideal contraceptive would be an easily reversed, minimally invasive sterilization-type procedure- something you could apply to all teenagers, male and female, as they mature, and then no one has to do anything to prevent pregnancy- instead, if you desired a pregnancy, you'd have to go take steps to become fertile.
    No more accidents, no more ethical dilemmas.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Oct. 16, 2008
    Location
    Central Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaturdayNightLive View Post

    Some of the responders here seem to barely think of men as being human (looking at you, Gloria). It's offensive. And many of the arguments being leveled against men would be considered extremely offensive if used against women, as they most often are.
    Offensive? If you want women to stand equal with men, women have to take up the role as the independent strong "equal" partner to their men as well. They can't cry and whine and want to be taken care of like a kept woman and then want to be equal with their keepers.

    A woman exercises her free will to have sex with a man, a man the woman freely know don't want a child. It is HER choice to have a child. It is HER choice to keep the child. And now you want to say it is HIS responsibility to raise the child? You think it is offensive to think of the one night stand as anything other than a sperm donor, or bath water, when all he think of his own sperm is nothing other than that? Give me a break.

    That thinking IS offensive, to the independent men, and degrading to the intelligence of independent women.

    Stop trying to claim to be a feminist when you don't understand what feminist means or what it entails.
    Last edited by Gloria; Apr. 2, 2013 at 11:40 AM.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2010
    Location
    Westford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloria View Post
    Offensive? If you want women to stand equal with men, women have to take up the role as being the independent strong role. They can't cry and whine and then want to be equal. A woman exercises her free will to have sex with a man, a man the woman freely know don't want a child. It is HER choice to have a child. It is HER choice to keep the child. And now you want to say it is HIS responsibility to help raise the child?

    You think it is offensive to think of the one night stand as anything other than a sperm donor, when all he wants is a free sex? Give me a break.

    That IS offensive, to the men, and degrading to the intelligence and independence of women.
    Well, if we want to talk equality and "fair"...there is no such thing as "free sex" for women. Dealing with an unwanted pregnancy where the woman does not want to raise a child, either through abortion or adoption, is a pretty darned big price to pay. Never mind that women are much more susceptible to many venereal diseases (through heterosexual intercourse) than men are...the HIV transmission rate male to female is twice that of female to male.

    Men should not be expecting to have "free sex", at the woman's expense, if something goes wrong.

    I would never degrade men...I love them and I have only sons and no daughters. What I would consider degrading to my boys is to have such low expectations of them that I and they think it's OK for them to expect "free sex". Ugh. Sex, though fun, is serious business, and shouldn't be serious business just for the woman. I expect my boys to be stand up men and NOT go around expecting "free sex" with no consequences.

    The concept of "free sex" without responsiblity is degrading to everyone.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb. 13, 2009
    Posts
    150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaturdayNightLive View Post
    But what if the father feels an obligation to his DNA?
    Like, I don't want to be a father, but I also don't want to know that there is a child of mine somewhere out there...?
    Does he get no say? The child is his, too.
    I don't know, I'm just having a hard time seeing it as something as simple as some of you are making it out to be.
    An obligation to your DNA??
    Really?
    Ok, I don't get that, at all. To make a crude point - Do you have a little memorial service every time you spend a little extra time in the shower?

    Listen, biology is not fair. When I have a child, I literally, physically, HAVE a child.
    You need a DNA test - and even then, it could be your brother's.

    You are struggling with a philosophical concept - she is struggling with all the pain and risk and economics of putting her life and health on the line to deal with growing another human being. And then, if she doesn't give it up for adoption, then raising that little person.
    If you don't want to be a father - That's really easy. You are off the hook bro. You can just say, "It's not mine." and walk and let me tell you - there's really not much she can do about it.

    So let's not talk about equal and fair.

    You can speak to me of heartbreak if you are WITH this woman - when you hold her hair for her as she pukes, when you rub her aching back so she can sleep and then curl around her and feel the baby kick, when you hold her as she cries and rants about being fired from her job for being 30 seconds late back from break or some other made up bullshit when everyone KNOWS it's really because she's 7 months pregnant but they have say it's for something else and then you swallow and tell her that it will be ok, you can make it on your salary, and then go put an ad up to sell that sporty little car that a carseat won't fit in anyway ... if you do all that, and she flakes on you - THEN, I will be your raging tigress of defense that it's your child too.

    Before that, as far as I'm concerned, you have flushed and washed down the drain and wiped off with a towel and left on the bedsheets enough of your DNA that you're really just whining about this one little sperm.

    DNA does NOT make you a father. Being a father makes you a father. A child is yours because you MAKE that child yours - not because you unintentionally contributed a cell.

    If you don't want to contribute a cell - then don't. Supply your own product, be very careful with whom you use said product, or, even better, do as is preached endlessly to women and try to keep it in a relationship.

    No, it's not fair. But the unfairness is so HUGELY to the female in this, that I'm sorry, you're just not going to get much sympathy for your philosophical dilemma. Because - I don't want to be a father, but I also don't want to know that there is a child of mine somewhere out there...? - is a philosophical dilemma and nothing more.
    What if one of my sperm took?
    Is there a God?
    Does an angry unicorn live on the dark side of the moon?


    Whatever you want to keep yourself up with at night - but come morning, really none of it has any effect on your life.

    If one of your sperm fulfilled it's purpose, then, as far as I'm concerned, the women did the right thing, and didn't tell you. I feel that it's the right thing because if you weren't in a committed relationship and trying for a baby, and she decided to keep it - that was her decision, and she shouldn't expect your life to change for her decision.
    Fair or not ~ and don't get me wrong, it's not ~the simple, biological truth of it is that it's only your problem if you choose to make it your problem.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Oct. 16, 2008
    Location
    Central Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canaqua View Post
    Well, if we want to talk equality and "fair"...there is no such thing as "free sex" for women. Dealing with an unwanted pregnancy where the woman does not want to raise a child, either through abortion or adoption, is a pretty darned big price to pay. Never mind that women are much more susceptible to many venereal diseases (through heterosexual intercourse) than men are...the HIV transmission rate male to female is twice that of female to male.

    Men should not be expecting to have "free sex", at the woman's expense, if something goes wrong.

    I would never degrade men...I love them and I have only sons and no daughters. What I would consider degrading to my boys is to have such low expectations of them that I and they think it's OK for them to expect "free sex". Ugh. Sex, though fun, is serious business, and shouldn't be serious business just for the woman. I expect my boys to be stand up men and NOT go around expecting "free sex" with no consequences.

    The concept of "free sex" without responsiblity is degrading to everyone.
    Yes. You are absolutely right. Women "always" bear more risks than men do. And that is why women should always be given more control over what their bodies should or should not do. And if a woman should choose to go through the risks or pregnancy, it is their divine right to do so.

    And no, no boys raised properly should expect free sex, or should treat any women so poorly. I hope your boys will choose to be responsible persons and if for any chance their girl friends get pregnant by them, they will take up the role of being an equal partner to the child's future. However, in the example of that one night stand, that IS a man who expects free sex, and the woman who entered that engagement knows and expect it. Remember, she is the one who wants the child, not the one night stand. And if she should choose to have unprotected sex with said man, is that HER choice or HIS choice to get pregnant? When she does get pregnant, is it the child's best interest to force an ex-boy friend who had history of abuse to be the guardian of the child?
    Last edited by Gloria; Apr. 2, 2013 at 12:02 PM.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2010
    Location
    Westford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloria View Post
    Yes. You are absolutely right. Women "always" bear more risks than men do. And that is why women should always be given more control over what their bodies should or should not do.

    And no, no boys raised properly should expect free sex, or should treat any women so poorly. I hope your boys will choose to be responsible persons and if for any chance their girl friends get pregnant by them, they will take up the role of being an equal partner to the child's future. However, in the example of that one night stand, that IS a man who expects free sex, and the woman who entered that engagement knows and expect it. Remember, she is the one who wants the child, not the one night stand. And if she should choose to have unprotected sex with said man, is that HER choice or HIS choice to get pregnant? When she does get pregnant, is it the child's best interest to force an ex-boy friend who had history of abuse to be the guardian of the child?
    No one can force a man to parent, be the guardian of a child or even see the child at all. If he doesn't want to parent, he does not have to. He CAN walk away, but he'll have to pay child support if the mother or the state enforces it. There really IS no such thing as free sex, as there shouldn't be.



  7. #47
    Join Date
    Oct. 16, 2008
    Location
    Central Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,147

    Default

    If a man should be forced to pay child support, he MUST be allowed privileges to the child's life and future, as now he is recognized by law and by moral standard a parent. If it is what the woman wants, I guess she can play that poor me card, and relinquish part of the control for the child to the man. There IS really No free lunch.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,762

    Default

    Everyone has full control over whether or not they have children.

    The different genders just get to exercise this control at different points in the process.

    A man who does not want to have children has options that he can use to 100% prevent having them. Men too can prevent unwanted pregnancies, shocking but true.

    A woman who does not want to have children also has options that she can use to 100% prevent having them, these options just extend over a longer period of time than the man's do, due to the physics of the situation.

    Men and women who DO want to have children can use their life skills, emotional skills, and communication skills to find similarly minded partners.


    While both parties who are necessary to the creation of the child have 100% of the tools at their disposal to prevent a pregnancy, and 100% of the ability to communicate with each other about their respective beliefs BEFORE a pregnancy happens, society generally acts like it is completely the woman's fault for getting pregnant as if this happened by immaculate conception, and then completely her fault for whatever choice she makes whether to have the child that the man doesn't want (when he could have worn a condom) or to not bring the child to term where the man could have communicated his beliefs BEFORE engaging in reproductive activities unprotected with her.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jan. 6, 2013
    Posts
    310

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloria View Post
    If a man should be forced to pay child support, he MUST be allowed privileges to the child's life and future, as now he is recognized by law and by moral standard a parent.
    A man's parenting presence in a child's life may not be in that child's best interest. Paying child support isn't buying a ticket to parenting and there are many good reasons custody or visitation should not be granted, regardless of financial support.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2010
    Location
    Westford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloria View Post
    If a man should be forced to pay child support, he MUST be allowed privileges to the child's life and future, as now he is recognized by law and by moral standard a parent. If it is what the woman wants, I guess she can play that poor me card, and relinquish part of the control for the child to the man. There IS really No free lunch.
    Though in a ideal world that might be the case, it is not true, legally. Visitation/custody and child support are separate issues. Paying child support doesn't guarantee you access to the child and not paying child support doesn't prevent access to the child. They are legally separate. That is why a man can, technically, walk away form a child, leaving nothing behind but some checks. And, why a man who is behind on his child support does not have his visitation taken away.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Apr. 16, 2002
    Location
    ontario, canada
    Posts
    2,429

    Default

    The problem with the question in the OP is that it asks what the 'right' answer is to a question that simply doesn't have a 'right' answer. There are certain biological realities (i.e. the woman gets pregnant, not the man) and practical/legal realities (i.e. the woman gets to decide whether to maintain the pregnancy or not).

    Given the former, I think the latter is appropriate but it does create difficulties all around. There is no 'right' answer, or even much of a compromise, frankly. The realities of unplanned pregnancies aren't exactly a closely guarded secret. We all know that accidental pregnancies happen and that two sex partners might not necessary agree on the way forward. But that is sort of what you sign up for when you have sex.

    If I was a guy, it wouldn't matter that I was told that chances of conception were low or nearly non-existent. There is a pretty easy way to keep the risk to an absolute minimum. If you don't heed the risks, you should be prepared to deal with the consequences even if she said she couldn't get pregnant or she on the pill.

    While both parties who are necessary to the creation of the child have 100% of the tools at their disposal to prevent a pregnancy, and 100% of the ability to communicate with each other about their respective beliefs BEFORE a pregnancy happens, society generally acts like it is completely the woman's fault for getting pregnant as if this happened by immaculate conception, and then completely her fault for whatever choice she makes whether to have the child that the man doesn't want (when he could have worn a condom) or to not bring the child to term where the man could have communicated his beliefs BEFORE engaging in reproductive activities unprotected with her.
    While I definitely agree and think those sorts of conversations are very important, they aren't foolproof because people are, well, human. I don't think that a woman could reasonably commit to an abortion based on a hypotherical situation and not have the right to change her mind. She may think that an abortion would be her decision in the case of an unwanted pregnancy, but ultimately find herself making a different decision if it actually happened. Is that really unfortunate for the man? Yeah, it is, but I don't think there is a solution.



  12. #52
    Join Date
    Oct. 16, 2008
    Location
    Central Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canaqua View Post
    Though in a ideal world that might be the case, it is not true, legally. Visitation/custody and child support are separate issues. Paying child support doesn't guarantee you access to the child and not paying child support doesn't prevent access to the child. They are legally separate. That is why a man can, technically, walk away form a child, leaving nothing behind but some checks. And, why a man who is behind on his child support does not have his visitation taken away.
    I know, and that is perfectly acceptable and sensible if the dad turned out to be an a$$ "after" he become a dad. I mean, if he had agreed to be a parent, he does not get to wiggle out just because he later on decides not to like it. For example, if the man turns out to be, say, abusive, he morally and legally is and should be responsible for the child, and that means no visitation right to protect the child while paying for all the support he is liable to.

    But this is not the case for that one night stand though. Remember, in this scenario, the woman make the decision; the man does not; therefore, the woman should be responsible for her own decision.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Apr. 1, 2013
    Posts
    24

    Default

    I've found this discussion that I inspired super interesting actually. I did want to clarify a couple things about my own situation, if it makes a difference.

    1) One night stand has actually been a long distance relationship of sorts for about 5 years. Has been constantly "i want to marry you and have kids with you" for those five years until oops.

    2)I have already offered repeatedly no contact, no rights, no child support. I believed this could not happen, and so did ONS, however he was fully aware that I was not on any form of BC and chose to not put on the condoms by the foot of the bed because he does not like them.

    3) ONS finds my offer unacceptable. The only thing that will satisfy him is if I "get rid of it". He has tried bullying, begging, general nastiness and threats. At this point I have told him not to talk to me anymore. I am not trying to trap anyone into being a parent-but although I am pro choice politically, I cannot and will not chose to kill what I truly believe is my baby.



  14. #54
    Join Date
    Jun. 15, 2010
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NMRN View Post

    I believed this could not happen, and so did ONS, however he was fully aware that I was not on any form of BC and chose to not put on the condoms by the foot of the bed because he does not like them.
    Isn't the other side of that statement that you consented to sex even though you knew he was not wearing a condom and you were not on birth control?


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #55
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,762

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GraceLikeRain View Post
    Isn't the other side of that statement that you consented to sex even though you knew he was not wearing a condom and you were not on birth control?

    Right....and she is choosing to keep the child.

    If the ONS wanted to exercise full control over whether or not a child would result from the union, he had a window of opportunity in which to do that.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Apr. 13, 2008
    Posts
    1,046

    Default

    Reading through most of this thread, made me so happy to have chosen to use a donor. Total control, total responsibility. It is harder on some days to not be able to "tap out" but so glad I dont have to negotiate parenthood with someone else. I do think 2 parent families of whatever gender are probably best, but a donor- no legal complications no drama over child support, visitation, rights, and not having to explain that to a child that you do have a father, he chooses not to see you... is right for my family.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  17. #57
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2010
    Location
    Westford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    Right....and she is choosing to keep the child.

    If the ONS wanted to exercise full control over whether or not a child would result from the union, he had a window of opportunity in which to do that.
    Exactly. ONS missed his one opportunity to have control over this situation. He doesn't like condoms? Well, boooohoooooo. IMO, OP is being very generous, offering to cut him entirely loose and not even seek child support. He should consider himself fortunate and sign whatever paperwork will absolve him of having to take any responsibility for his mistake, many guys who knock someone up unintentionally don't get a "do over". If it's so important to him that his DNA not be out there somewhere, he should have exercised more care over distributing his DNA around.

    Only a fool says "never" to a possible conception...unless the guy has no testicles or the woman has had a hysterectomy or is well-established, medically, as being past menopause.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Jul. 13, 2008
    Posts
    2,841

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverotter View Post
    An obligation to your DNA?? Really?
    Ok, I don't get that, at all. To make a crude point - Do you have a little memorial service every time you spend a little extra time in the shower?
    F****, Riverotter



Similar Threads

  1. Reproductive vet recommendation in NE Ct?
    By rememberthenight in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Feb. 20, 2012, 07:22 AM
  2. sticky + sticky = slippery :sigh:
    By scubed in forum Eventing
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Oct. 5, 2011, 08:55 AM
  3. Reproductive tract question
    By Molly Malone in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: May. 22, 2011, 11:19 AM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: Feb. 7, 2011, 03:55 PM
  5. Basic Reproductive biology question
    By vineyridge in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: Jul. 30, 2010, 07:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness