Daily Rotten Forum Experience

From: missunderstood [miss understood]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 12:52

"There's such a spectrum of choice that women have -- it's her body, her pregnancy and she has the ultimate right to make decisions," said Mel Feit, director of the men's center. "I'm trying to find a way for a man also to have some say over decisions that affect his life profoundly."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This statement really really made me laugh. He's trying to find a way for a man to not get a woman pregnant?? Here's a thought, now stay with me here, it's probably going to seem bizarre to some of you men out there. If you really don't want to have kids with someone as this guy stated DON'T HAVE UNPROTECTED SEX WITH THEM!! Now I will concede that the woman told him she couldn't have kids, however ultimately it's up to HIM to insure that he doesn't get her pregnant. Here's a newflash for you people out there, people lie!! I know it's shocking isn't it.

Before you start ragging on me about putting all the onus on him to not get her knocked up, he's the one that has a problem with it, so it's HIS problem. He should of keep his willy in his pants, if he did, she wouldn't be stinging him for money for his child.

From: houseof1mcorpses [(1104N.MissionRoad)]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 12:54

Please folks, have your partner spayed or neutered.

From: ro [Ro]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 12:58

The magic word 'he contends.' If every guy I met shouted at me in the face 'no brats!' he wouldnt stick around long enough to see in inside of my lacies. He might say that she knew he didnt want them but he also could have been using sweet words to get her in bed --which he thught couldnt come true -- like 'I wanna have a family with you,' or other sentimental garbage employeed at times.

Side point: forcing sperm donors to pay for annoynously donated batches of sperm, is stupid and insane.

From: protoplatapus [Mainer at large!]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 12:58

Well, first off I think the fact that he was lied to about her inability to have children should be more looked at as fraud. She deliberately lied to him knowing she could have a child. Maybe this is some kind of passive agressive thing among some women... IDK, If I had working male parts, Id be pretty suspicious of any woman that said she couldnt have children to begin with though.

From: cpyder [Josh]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 12:59

OO. nice little thought....

If she could not have kids due to a physical condition. Then she should be grateful that he was able to get her pregnant, and that should be that.

I do have a friend that was basically shooting blanks. He actually managed to get a girl pregnant and she did not want it. He offered to keep the child because he knew that there was possible no other way for him to have one of his own. He basically told her that all she needed to do was have the child and he would do everything else and never bother her again.

The bitch still got the abortion, and the dude is still kid-less. (This is why I have very little love for most chicks I have not met)

Abortion is a decision that NEEDS BOTH PARTIES INVOLVED. If one is not in agreement, the other needs to make the choice if they are willing to care for the child or not, and leave the other person out of it.

From: sbeane [Sawney]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:05

Here is what you can say, man.."I will wear the rubber or jerk off!"

OK, but only if you say "I will wear the sponge or finger-fuck!"

It is absolutely true that according to the law, men have no reproductive rights. I'm sorry ladies - I'm pro-choice, but consensual sex requires two people. It should be that way completely through the entire process, not just during the bang-session. It is not fair to the man that the woman can screw him for the next 18 years - especially in this case where the bitch lied to him. It may be her body, but only until the point before the child is born.

If he wants to be the father figure in this child's life, then he damn well should be made to pay (you can't have it both ways), but fatherhood should not be forced upon him, nor the payments that come with it - any more than sex should be forced upon a woman -- which is not the case in this article.

What's next? Suing anonymous sperm donors for child support? Oh wait, that has already happened, too.

From: cpyder [Josh]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:07

From: sbeane [Sawney]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:05

THANK YOU FOR SUPPORT.

From: kpu [kelley]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:09

I'm just amazed that a 25 year old computer programmer had sex with an actual woman.

From: antinomianist [AERDNA]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:12

I'm totally on the men's side of this. The same thing that happened to this guy happened to my brother: his skanky woman said she was on the pill so "no don't wear anything, I don't like it". Then she got knocked up. Long story short after a long bankrupting child support load of bullshit he killed himself.... (there was more to it than just that but seriously) If she hadn't lied to him, I know he'd still be alive.

From: ro [Ro]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:14

He might not have been lied to, the woman just might have made some kind of assumption since she might have been barebacking for 10 years and never had a scare. Though that would be pretty stupid either way. Just cuz a woman bleeds doesnt mean shes fetile. That said though, you still take percautions even if you supposedly have one less thing to worry about with the trading of body fluids.
I belive that some states force father's of the blob/child to sign a form allowing their wives to have an abortion. i dont think it works that way for none married couples. Besides how can you ever be sure its yours (in the case of paternal abortion rights). Anyone ever check out day time tv, where there are 12 guys the woman swears is 100000% sure is the father to be disappointed each time? With the whole fathers having rights in utero, its the same as abortion - woman's body, woman right, etc.

PS - i meant when sperm donors actually father children with their 'generous' donation and are expected to pay for them.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:16

however ultimately it's up to HIM to insure that he doesn't get her pregnant.

Bull shit. "It's her body". Of course it's the responsibilty of both involved, but if you're going to pin it on one person, it is, without a doubt, her responsibility to look out for her own body above anyone else.

Was she just someone to satisfy HIS needs?

Duh!

WTF is the point of fucking if you're gonna wear a rubber? If you don't trust her, don't fuck her. Thats what hands and porno are for.

From: gargoyle1
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:20

If ya don't want kids, keep yer pecker in yer pants or make damn sure there's some form of birth control in use. You screwed her, she has a kid, it's yours, pay up ya deadbeat assbag.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:34

If ya don't want kids, keep yer pecker in yer pants or make damn sure there's some form of birth control in use. You screwed her, she has a kid, it's yours, pay up ya deadbeat assbag.

Sounds like he threatened to keep it in his pants, so she lied to him to get it out.

From: miturbinizzdherty [Mitur Bin-Izzdherty]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:35

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection

What happened to the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution's Equal Protection Clause? Ooops I forgot, why would I expect justice and fair treatment when divorce laws legalize prostitution.

Vaginamony, n.

Perpetual or long term punitive payments for past use of a vagina.

Vagina, n.

Purse shaped currency receptacle surrounded by relatively worthless mass of emotions.

From: janedoe [jane]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:36

I think he also has a case for fraud against her. She said she couldn't get pregnant and, lo and behold, it turns out she can. I haven't see a case for flagrant false advertising this obvious since Stoner's Pot Palace.

At any rate, I think he makes a valid point. It takes the involvement of two parties for conception to occur, and the two parties are going to have respective parental and financial responsibilities, so why shouldn't the male at least get some say?

I don't think he should be able to tell a woman to abort a child, but if after some sort of legal mediation is held it's determined that the man didn't want to have children and made that clear and the woman wants to continue on with the pregnancy, why should the guy be responsible (financially or otherwise) in the future for her poor decision?

I think the reason that no one wants to touch this issue is for fear of having to admit that any single woman choosing to continue on with a pregnancy that resulted from a one night stand, a non-committed relationship, or a partner totally uninterested in children is a fucking idiot with terrible judgment (and her children are likely to follow her example).

I know that sounds harsh but if you don't believe me, try visiting one of the finer public housing projects in your area.

I'm usually not one for advocating "traditional" family values, but I think it's pretty well established that children do better if their parents are married, or failing that, if the parents are in a stable relationship together, or are at least both interested and involved in the child's life. Single parents can do a great job of raising kids, but as soon as a child is raised in a single parent environment all the statistics for suicide, criminality, etc start to go up (as opposed to a two parent family or family where the parents are married).

And no offense but I wouldn't feel too optimistic about this little girl's future. Apparently her mother is a habitual liar who chose to continue with a pregnancy despite the fact that she was choosing to be a single mom and the father was totally uninterested, and the father has to sue the mother because he never wanted his daughter to even exist.

That's lovely.

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:40

Here's a funny story I'd like to share with you Rottener's. While we are on the topic of options for men.

Once upon a time. . . .

In South Carolina lives a dirty girl named Michelle. See one day after months of being a very very promiscuous girl, Michelle gets pregnant and decides to call my husband (we weren't together at the time), and tells him that she is pregnant with his baby. She ends up moving in with his mother and telling all is friends and family that she has his baby. Come to find out. . after a DNA test, the baby is not his, however she still maintains her argument to this day that the baby is his. Even after admitting to him that she had been with numerous other people. She claims the DNA test was wrong and that results were tampered with. Funny enough, his mother has disowned him and is raising this fatherless child. The worst of it, they are telling this child everyday that he is father. Now I ask you, is this child abuse or what? What will happen when the child turns 16 and comes knocking on our door wondering why his "father" wants nothing to do with him.

I know my story does deviate from the present article, however my point is that there are some really rotten females out there, and I think men are entitled to a lot more rights! Rights for Men. . . count me in!!

Check out her myspace page: http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=26692302

She has a picture of her latest victim on her myspace. If I could tell him to run for his life I would. Poor guy.

From: tool [not 'Tool']
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:43

Any dude who actually buys the "I-can't-get-pregnant" line is invited to purchase some oceanfront property that I have in Arizona. It's really cheap.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:45

I have a friend who is tens of thousands behind in his child support, while his now-adult child still thinks a different guy is his father.

From: timmyturtle [tim t turtle]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:50

kick the bitch in he guts, it will only be a case of simple assault. either that or slip some ru486 in her yogurt....or get her really drunk or slip her some roofies and use he old coathanger trick....anythings better than paying for a kid 4 18 yrs and then having it come find u when its 18 and tell u how much it h8s u cuz u werent around....

From: cheshire [Kit Kat]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:54

My ex-girlfriend fed me the same line of how she could not get pregnant due to some physical condition. She said it was okay for us to not use protection. What did I do? I bloody well put a condom on.

In the realm of uninformed medical opinion there is no such beast as "can't."

Addendum: I broke up with her because, among other reasons, I eventually want to have children of my own and so I am not going to form a committed relationship with someone who claims to not be able to have my children. Her response? "Oh well I didn't mean I could NEVER have kids..." Dodged that bullet.

From: teratomarty [Self-made man]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:57

all these money hungry bitches wanting that child support

I can think of way better get-rich-quick scams than getting knocked up and suing for child support. That having been said, yay homosexuality. Also, yay condoms.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 13:58

kick the bitch in he guts, it will only be a case of simple assault.

Around here that's called first degree murder, as it should be.

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:00

Ciao, Canadagirl you women of wisdom. . . what would you prescribe for a situation such as I've described above?

From: chowdapipe [Dr. Nuge]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:11

Who the fuck here really thinks child support goes to the child. Try asking a judge to make the woman accountable for the child support, receipts and any unused support for that month goes into a trust fund FOR THE CHILD! The judge will look at you as if you were speaking jibberish, they don't really fucking care if the money is spent on the child. Father's rights, what planet has those?

From: sexypoetbitch [Denise Rose]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:12

Hey, neoturk...even though we had some words in the past...I would be happy to help you and the other gals get ahold of this skank...this is coming from a woman who supports her son HERSELF and doesn't have to make the sperm donor pay child support...that SC bitch needs to be burned at the stake, after a long assbeating...women like these make the few of us good ones look real bad...sorry for calling you neojerk, the lithium hadn't kicked in yet...and good women should stick together...

From: sexypoetbitch [Denise Rose]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:13

And she needs her pussy stapled shut...

From: sbeane [Sawney]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:16

I can think of way better get-rich-quick scams than getting knocked up and suing for child support.

True, but can you think of a better way to legally screw over an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend? I doubt you could even begin to count all of the situations where child-support (as well as the child involved) has been used as a weapon of revenge against the former partner (by either gender).

From: cobrastrike [cobra]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:20

From: sexypoetbitch [Denise Rose]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 12:42

"Here is what you can say, man.."I will wear the rubber or jerk off!""

You are missing the point. It's not about wearing a condom or jerking off. The point is if a woman has the right to CHOOSE to abort or give up a kid for adoption and thereby relieving herself of all responsibility of the kid, then a man should have the right to CHOOSE wether he wants to pay child support or not and relieve himself of responsibility. It's about time this came up.

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:21

Thanks Denise. . . It's true she makes real women look bad. I wish she would just go away. When I got married my husband's side was completely empty, and I have this hooch to thank for it. She's like the ghost-of-pussy-past (Chris Rock). . . that just won't go away. I wish her actions would be considered slander, since she's walking all over the place telling people this kid is my husband's, even after a DNA test. Talk about looney!

From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:25

Let me get this right. Men want the right to financially opt out of a pregnancy. But men also want to be able to block the woman's ability to get an abortion. It looks like a big "fuck you" to all woman-kind to me, regardless of whether you're pro-choice or pro-life.

There's an easy third solution to this. Nobody ever gets pregnant by accident in the villages full of Amazonian women. Femtopia anyone?

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:29

Why don't they get pregnant by accident?

From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:30

Because the only men in the villages are there in chains and used explicitly for reproductive snu-snu

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:34

Wow! Do they do dishes too?

From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:36

Male slaves are good for dishes. I don't recommend letting them do your laundry though.

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:38

I agree. . . they ALWAYS throw my panties in the dryer and ruin them!

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:41

Give me liberty, or give me death by snu snu!

From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:42

My male slave forgets to check pockets. He washed my cellphone the other day. :-S

From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:42

This where we play women's basketball. No can dunk, but good fundamentals! More fun to watch.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:59

It's not the fundamentals that make womens basketball fun to watch. It's the bouncing boobs.

From: 66scorpio
Date: 9-Mar-2006 15:03

When it comes to how parents are treated vis a vis their kids, the law is completely stacked against men.

Two real-life examples:

1) Woman gets pregnant,does not tell man. Sixteen years later when she is short on cash she sues for child support.

2) Woman commits statutory rape on teenage boy, gets pregnant, has the baby, then sues for child support (and gets it).

The comparison that they are making is this:

Woman gets pregnant, man wants baby but woman doesn't. Woman gets a constitutionally protected abortion because it is HER BODY.

Woman gets pregnant, man doesn't want baby but can't force an abortion because it is HER BODY. Woman has baby where upon it is no longer HER BODY, but HIS CHILD and sues for child support. Man refuses to pay and the government throw HIS BODY in jail. He is released from jail is he takes HIS BODY into work one day every fortnight and hands his wages over to the woman for the next 18 years.

From: todesengel187 [Danzil Kitano]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 15:24

"Give me liberty or give me death by snu-snu."

Fuck that! I'd either try and make a shank, shoestring garrote - or just hang myself with my loincloth.

Or should I just scratch myself to death?

From: ogrotten [rotten og]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 15:36

Rotten girl "Let me get this right. Men want the right to financially opt out of a pregnancy. But men also want to be able to block the woman's ability to get an abortion. It looks like a big "fuck you" to all woman-kind to me, regardless of whether you're pro-choice or pro-life."

Look, if all men wanted abortion to be illegal it would be illegal already. It never would have been legalized in the first place. So lay off the negative stereotypes. I see anti-choice women as well. Remember, we men make the rules around here and everywhere, except when it comes to sex, movie rentals, which buddies we can keep and how late we can hang out playing video games with our bachelor friends.... so get use to it already. Oh yeah, www.nomarriage.com for guys only.

From: nox [Goddess of Night]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 15:45

I would also like to say that since there is a picture of this dumbass I doubt he will ever get laid again.

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 15:45

From: todesengel187 [Danzil Kitano]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 15:24

"Give me liberty or give me death by snu-snu."

Fuck that! I'd either try and make a shank, shoestring garrote - or just hang myself with my loincloth.

Or should I just scratch myself to death?
-----------------------------------------------------
Or you could ferociously bite yourself.

From: missunderstood [miss understood]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:04

Bull shit. "It's her body". Of course it's the responsibilty of both involved, but if you're going to pin it on one person, it is, without a doubt, her responsibility to look out for her own body above anyone else.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You're right it is her responsibility to look after her body, and it's HIS responsibility to look after where he deposits his sperm is it not?? If he didn't want to get her pregnant he shouldn't of been having unprotected sex with her plain and simple, if he hadn't of shot his sperm inside her, she wouldn't be having his baby!

From: niebelung [oregonian]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:07

This idea has been around a while. I have heard it called "virtual abortion." Since the central idea of abortion is to avoid the burden of being a parent the idea of denying it to men is simply bigotry. The idea is that in order to be at risk to be enslaved by a child support decree a man has to be notified in writing within the first trimester. He can then accept the situation or else he would have two weeks to get an "abortion," by going to the courthouse and filing an affadavit to that effect and putting up an amount determined to be the going cost of an abortion in that area. Since of the 150 or so babies being slaughtered every hour only two or three fall into the sacred categories of rape or incest, and the rest are killed simply for the convenience of the woman, this seems like a very fair arrangement.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:17

You're right it is her responsibility to look after her body, and it's HIS responsibility to look after where he deposits his sperm is it not?? If he didn't want to get her pregnant he shouldn't of been having unprotected sex with her plain and simple, if he hadn't of shot his sperm inside her, she wouldn't be having his baby!

Thats why I said Of course it's the responsibility of both involved, not just him, yet I will conceede that, upon backtracking, I seem to have misread your orginal statement. It was, afterall, he who complained about her being pregnant, not the other way around.

Perhaps this could be sovled by pre-sex contracts similar to pre-nups.

From: goodfriday13 [un chien andalou]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:23

Good thing I took the time to read the whole article, not just the blurb-- I thought this was another one of those whiny, self-absorbed douchebags who wants to force his girlfriend to have a baby she doesn't want and calls it "men's reproductive rights". No, what this guy wants makes perfect sense; in fact, I feel rather stupid having not known the opt-out policy he wants wasn't possible in the first place. No one should be forced to saddle responsibility for a child he doesn't want, especially in this case-- never underestimate the degree of scumbaggery some people are capable of, male or female.

I do have a problem with men who promise to help take care of the child, only to scat either just before or right after the child is born. Those are the "deadbeat dads" current legislation should be punishing, not this guy.

From: tucanscrew [three's more fun]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:37

I submitted this story with the Detroit News as the source. That article stated the woman told him that she was unable to have children due to a medical condition AND she was on the pill. In an ongoing relationship with these assumptions I can understand why he didn't choose to use a condom. He will lose, but that doesn't keep her from being a lying bitch. Guys if you can afford child support, you can afford a fake identity. Hey baby, my name is Skip....skip the fuck out if I need to.

This guy says it best...

http://www.starterupsteve.com/swf/Group_X_video.html

From: theotherside [theotherside]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:45

Just adding my 2 cents here and for the record, I am a female.

Personally I believe that should a female find herself pregnant and decide to go ahead with the pregnancy, despite the complete absence of any relationship with the father, or him expressing a VERY strong desire to not have children,
then at the end of the day it is HER choice BUT she should not then ask him to pay for HER decision to keep the child. Yes he could have worn contraception etc.

HOWEVER in the town I live in, there is a LARGE populations of "women" that have PURPOSELY gotten pregnant to men here, because they knew they had large incomes and the way child support works in my country, the guy pays an inordinate amount of money irrespective of the relationship with the wife or the child. (i.e a percentage of his salary. There are 3 year old kids getting 1500 month in child support!) AND it's up to the womans discretion how the money is spent, or if she makes an arrangement with the father to have less paid to her. So you can guess how often that happens. Seriously. Some of these women have INCREDIBLE wardrobes and cars.. yet their kids wear second hand clothes because that's all they can afford. These women have even boasted during their pregnancies how much money they are going to get from the "fathers/sperm donors". Quite a few have even told the male they were on the pill/had the morning after pill and the male wore a condom also in many cases yet miraculously all contraceptive efforts failed and she got pregnant. Of course the guys have all gone the route of DNA testing etc. But the fact of the matter is, the guy is stuck paying for a mistake in judgement on his part, and then a CHOICE this woman made to go it alone with the pregnancy and the kid.

Now personally if I ever get pregnant and go ahead with it, unless I am married/serious relationship I fully intend to support the child myself. At the end of the day it was my decision to not abort and have the baby, not theirs. So why should they pay for something I decide to do FOR myself (and the baby).

Too many women use having a kid as a way to hold onto a guy who isn't interested in them for 18yrs or so, or else as a cash cow. Personally I think if you can afford to have the baby, you can afford to raise it. An abortion/pill/contraception/saying NO is ALOT cheaper than raising a kid.

But again, this is just my opinion. And everyone is welcome to their own.

From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:49

Why don't we just try to eliminate the problem of unplanned pregnancy instead of trying to wrangle out all these dumb issues that arise because people are evil and contraceptive technology is primitive? I'm still waiting on an oral contraceptive for men that makes *them* hormonal, bloated, gain weight and grow extra hair.

From: ninken [ninken]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 17:16

Here is my point of veiw ( badger berrate and launch nuclear devices at me all you want i got a shelter) It takes 2, they both fucked , they both pay , i mean if she didnt want the child then why the hell would she lie about having some god awful disease that leaves her more barren than the sahara? and if that is the case why doesnt the guy have enough damned common sense in his skull to say "well if she has a STD why dont i wear a condomn?". simple. they both fuckered up they both should pay no one should use a child as a pawn or get rich quik scheme.and if they put the child up for adoption why dont they both pay child support to the family adopting? Goddamn people . jeez think before you fuck.

From: tucanscrew [three's more fun]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 17:23

From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:49

Why don't we just try to eliminate the problem of unplanned pregnancy instead of trying to wrangle out all these dumb issues that arise because people are evil and contraceptive technology is primitive? I'm still waiting on an oral contraceptive for men that makes *them* hormonal, bloated, gain weight and grow extra hair.
==================
There is already a fertility drug that makes men bloat, gain weight and suffer temporary blindness. It's called beer.

From: jetboi [jetto boi]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 17:27

1. "Men's rights movement?" Vomit. The women's rights movement began because women have never received equal treatment either legally or socially in the United States. That's because men have had all the power (and we have a binary gender system wherein "male" and "female" are considered to be the only and opposing options -- different rant). Women are starting to gain power, for sure, but they still aren't equal. When we all learn to share power, we'll be good. Men aren't discriminated against in legally enforced ways, so a "men's rights movement" is redundant. Also whiny.

2. Keep it in your damn pants or wear a condom. If the condom breaks and y'all don't want a kid, split the cost of the morning-after pill or, in the worst case, an abortion.

3. If this lawsuit worked, then women would go back to being treated as child-bearing chattel, because it would be legal for a man to force a woman to bear a child against her will.

4. The guy bringing the suit looks like a closet case and talks like a wuss. He didn't have to believe her when she said she couldn't have kids. I don't stick it in anybody without a condom, because I don't want diseases as bad as I don't want babies. Also, how many zillions of times have women believed the same bullshit line and ended up with a kid? (Course, they're dumb for believing the line too, but it is ironic that dude's bitching about it like it's the first time somebody ever lied about sex.)

From: jetboi [jetto boi]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 17:29

PS: Good one, Tucan... tho I think Rottengirl was asking for the *opposite* of a fertility drug!

From: 2muchfun [Wulfgar the having too much fun]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 18:00

Equality for women?

You mean something like the wife being 'expected' to support the husband?

A divorced father having a real chance at custody - even at shared custody?

Visitation orders being enforced with the same ferocity as child support decrees?

Alimony not to exceed 1/4 the length of the marriage and not exceeding 1/4 of the paying spouse's actual current income [after taxes]?

Equality of the sexes is a great idea but men shouldn't look for it any time soon.

From: aeon [aeon]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 18:26

first off, i just feel bad for the kid. the kid got the short end of the deal, having been born to a combination of a trifling mother and a spineless father.

that said, i do feel it's equality to allow men to opt-out of children they didn't want to create. the burden will always fall on females, because we have the ultimate say of whether or not a pregnancy, planned or unplanned, surprise or not, ends in the birth of a child.

sure, i think he should have known better than to trust her, but that doesn't really change the issue of equality. people might say, "but it's not fair for the kid!". it's not fair for the man in the situation, either.

i see nothing wrong with a woman being held accountable for birthing and choosing to keep a child fathered by a man who has maintained that he wants nothing to do with it. it's not oppressing women, it's holding them accountable for the choices they make. if they choose life, and their men don't, too bad. maybe they shouldn't have had unprotected sex so easily.

now provided women will always be afforded unfettered access to abortion, as well as protection from prosecution under "safe haven" laws, men should be afforded the same protections. just as no woman should be forced to participate in a pregnancy she does not desire to keep, no man should be forced to pay for a child he did not want to create.

if they overturn roe vs wade, sorry guys, you're all fucked. don't say i didn't warn you.

From: tool [not 'Tool']
Date: 9-Mar-2006 18:42

From: jetboi [jetto boi]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 17:27

4. The guy bringing the suit looks like a closet case and talks like a wuss. He didn't have to believe her when she said she couldn't have kids. I don't stick it in anybody without a condom, because I don't want diseases as bad as I don't want babies. Also, how many zillions of times have women believed the same bullshit line and ended up with a kid? (Course, they're dumb for believing the line too, but it is ironic that dude's bitching about it like it's the first time somebody ever lied about sex.)

-----------------------------------------

It's the first time that anybody's lied to him about sex

From: louisthedamned [Jon Doe of Dil]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 19:24

1. "Men's rights movement?" Vomit. The women's rights movement began because women have never received equal treatment either legally or socially in the United States. That's because men have had all the power (and we have a binary gender system wherein "male" and "female" are considered to be the only and opposing options -- different rant). Women are starting to gain power, for sure, but they still aren't equal. When we all learn to share power, we'll be good. Men aren't discriminated against in legally enforced ways, so a "men's rights movement" is redundant. Also whiny.

I must say this thread shows remarkable increase in common sense compared to the last major one on the topic. Seems the men are standing up for their own reproductive rights, and some of the women are standing with them. I commend these women for this display of decency.

I will not go so far as to argue that we have never had problems in terms of gender equality, but society has come a long way since the hey-day of the civil rights movement in the 1960's. For the most part, this is a good thing. Women are free to hold jobs in many fields and outside of the home, to pursue higher education, or even start their own businesses. Sexual harassment laws, while taken to crazy extremes sometimes, are a good idea overall. However, the right of the woman to have an abortion without the fathers consent is a step too far. The Constitution, as currently interpreted, allows for the woman to escape the consequences of sex while not granting the same right to father. She can abort the child if he wants it, regardless of his ability to care for the child. However, even if he wants an abortion hes still stuck paying child support for eighteen years. He should have kept his deck in his pants yes, but at the same time she should have kept or legs closes. Responsibility must be shared, and that includes respectability for a pregnancy.

2. Keep it in your damn pants or wear a condom. If the condom breaks and y'all don't want a kid, split the cost of the morning-after pill or, in the worst case, an abortion.

If they both agree, its really that simple, and the problem is solved.

3. If this lawsuit worked, then women would go back to being treated as child-bearing chattel, because it would be legal for a man to force a woman to bear a child against her will.

This is no more unethical than denying the father his say in the life of his child. These things should be decided by courts in case of disagreement, and if shes told to carry the baby to term, so be it

4. The guy bringing the suit looks like a closet case and talks like a wuss. He didn't have to believe her when she said she couldn't have kids. I don't stick it in anybody without a condom, because I don't want diseases as bad as I don't want babies. Also, how many zillions of times have women believed the same bullshit line and ended up with a kid? (Course, they're dumb for believing the line too, but it is ironic that dude's bitching about it like it's the first time somebody ever lied about sex.)

What does it matter what he looks like? This is a serious discussion about a serious topic.
I'm not sure I'm reading this second part right. You are implying that when she lies to him about not be able to have kids, gets pregnant, will not abort, he should be on the line for eighteen years of child support? Hmmmmm... you complain about male sexism, but you obviously harbor your own hatreds.

If women are serious about achieving true equality, they should not complain so much about this. It seems as far is abortion is concerned, many only want to be equal when its easier for them.

From: thegreatsg [ShenlonG]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 19:38

all the people who say "either jerk off or keep it in your pants" what the fuck is wrong with you?? it takes 2 to tango, the man isint the only one responsible for the creation, the woman probably lied on purpose for money, and dont go yelling it's unture, women are virtuious and pure beings, cause thats bullshit, gold diggers have been doing this trick for years,and 1980's michael jackson was a wise man (i cant believe no one has posted this yet)

She was more like a beauty queen from a movie scene
I said don't mind, but what do you mean I am the one
Who will dance on the floor in the round
She said I am the one, who will dance on the floor in the round

She told me her name was Billie Jean, as she caused a scene
Then every head turned with eyes that dreamed of being the one
Who will dance on the floor in the round

People always told me be careful of what you do
And don't go around breaking young girls' hearts
And mother always told me be careful of who you love
And be careful of what you do 'cause the lie becomes the truth

Billie Jean is not my lover
She's just a girl who claims that I am the one
But the kid is not my son
She says I am the one, but the kid is not my son

For forty days and for forty nights
The law was on her side
But who can stand when she's in demand
Her schemes and plans
'Cause we danced on the floor in the round
So take my strong advice, just remember to always think twice
(Do think twice)

She told my baby we'd danced till three, then she looked at me
Then showed a photo my baby cried his eyes were like mine (oh, no!)
'Cause we danced on the floor in the round, baby

People always told me be careful of what you do
And don't go around breaking young girls' hearts
She came and stood right by me
Then the smell of sweet perfume
This happened much too soon
She called me to her room

Billie Jean is not my lover
She's just a girl who claims that I am the one
But the kid is not my son

Billie Jean is not my lover
She's just a girl who claims that I am the one
But the kid is not my son
She says I am the one, but the kid is not my son

She says I am the one, but the kid is not my son
Billie Jean is not my lover
She's just a girl who claims that I am the one
But the kid is not my son
She says I am the one, but the kid is not my son

She says I am the one, but the kid is not my son
She says I am the one

From: daveythedumbass [Davey the Dumbass]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 21:20

All you femenist idiots saying he should leave his cum at home, shut the fuck up and bitch about her being a slut who doesn't like rubbers. It's her body, her vag, her egg, and her consent to put her finances at risk.

If she doesn't like abortion and doesn't like adoption, at most it's 1/8 his problem, not half.

From: ciaochowbella [I didn't do it and I wasn't there when it happened]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 21:58

Neko, in the situation involving the perfidious Michelle, keep a copy of the DNA test to show this poor kid when it's old enough to understand and gently explain to him/her that Mommy is deranged and a gold digger.

This gentleman is going about this all wrong. He should be pushing for a reliable form of male contraceptive instead of whining about believing this cunt's lies. Yes, some women lie....but if men had a truly reliable form of BC, this would be a non-issue.

Frankly, if he didn't want a kid, he should have worn a condom. Condoms fail about 17% of the time....better odds than without. If you are fucking raw, you are asking for it.

From: athenstexman [Ron]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 22:32

Snu snu me to death, after I cook and do the dishes.
And you are right, I suck at laundry.

From: fockinshite [fockinshite]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 22:35

For all the cunts saying " his fault for not jerking off" shouldn't you fight against abortion then because it is HER FAULT FOR HAVING SEX, WHY THE FUCK DOES SHE get an "out" but "he made that choice" so he should live with it? Fuckers like that should die of their own worthless hypocracy. FUCK YOU.
for those of you not full of shit, have a nice day.

From: louisthedamned [Jon Doe of Dil]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 22:53

you too fockinshite

From: skeevymcgee [Skeevy Mcgee]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 23:22

Here's an irony for you. So many of women that say "men should keep it in their pants if they don't want a child," probably fancy themselves as feminists. But lets read between those lines of thought. This view lays the responsibility of safe sex at the feet of men, and completely discounts the idea that women can always refuse to have unsafe sex. So what does that imply? That women, when they get horny, become too irrational to think straight enough to insist on condom usage? Is it up to the rational-minded man to pull himself together and decide to use protection? Or are women just to meek an unempowered to make such a demand on a man?

Sounds like a rather unfeminist argument to make. Not to mention the fact that "Keep it in your pants," is a pithy little soundbyte that shows the deep thinking skills displayed by the average Jerry Springer audience member.

From: 596silverblue [596silverblue]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 00:49

Hmmm... I dated a girl for 3 years who COULD NOT GET PREGNANT. There are real medical conditions, and it happens. I believed her, we never had a kid despite no protection other than her condition.

When some of you say, "It's his fault for believing her," what you're actually saying is, "Women are lying bitches - fucker beware!" (or something like that). That's a hell of a way to view half the population, isn't it? Even if it is true!

From: creepyguy [in the shadows]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 01:25

This sort of thing should be on a case by case basis in my opinion.If there is reasonable cause to believe a woman tells a man she is either fixed,incapable or on birth control and lied she needs to forfeit all financial obligations to him.Most people in this forum are fairly astute so why should this be a black or white issue?

From: pithyquote [Jennica]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 01:49

I love how he has his little kitty in the picture showing his sensitive side.

I wish I could comment about this, but really a woman should protect herself and the life she could possibly bring into the world. But if a guy is with a woman for a year, had protected sex but something happened to where she got pregnant.. Why can't she get child support? But I've never gotten myself in that position to even need to have a good argument about it.

From: twinkiemaster [twinkiemaster]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 03:53

This is a simple argument. If you believe in equal rights and the rights of the woman not to be a mother against her will then you must support a man's right not to be a father against his will. If you dont' believe that it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which of those 2 premises you dont' believe. If shes pregnant and doesnt' want the baby and I do... I'm screwed. If I want the baby and she doesn't... I'm screwed. Is that your simple vision of equity? Women have gone to great lengths to see that a man has no legal say about the pregnancy. So if we actually have the audacity to take it that way... we're deadbeats. If it's a womans choice... it should be a womans responsibility.
Women claim "equality" only when it suits them. Quite your fucking whining.

From: hatshepsut76 [tara]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 04:11

Let's tackle the fraud charges so many of you have mentioned. The woman APPARENTLY said she was unable to have children. I know three women who's gynocologist's told them the same thing. All three women happened to get pregnant years after this diagnosis when they expected never to be able to have children. I suspect most of you who've made this argument on here are men, and men are notorious for not understanding the intricacies of the female reproductive system. As for premis of the actual lawsuit, the law didcates that when a man's semen leaves a man's body during the act of sexual intimacy, it is deemed a 'gift' and the woman may do with it what she will. Case law illustrates this where numerous women have injected themselves with the semen they 'collected' while preforming oral on a man. Now, this I do not condone. But understand that by allowing this to pass into law opens the floodgates for all men to renounce not only their rights as a father, but their financial responsibility to offspring. In effect, this means all men would have the right to renounce responsibility whenever they choose, regardless of the circumstances which resulted in the pregnancy. So you love a woman, she gets pregnant, everything is wonderful. Then the relationship turns sour. He goes to court and signs the little document and suddenly the woman is caring for the baby all on her own, because Johnny has found another woman and doesn't want to be tied down.
Equal rights is not the issue here. If you are not responsible enough to care for a child should one be conceived, you should not be having sex. It is a 'by-product' of sex and there are consequences to such an activity.

From: muttley
Date: 10-Mar-2006 05:13

maybe if/when the male birth control pill comes out i'll try it. do the old switcheroo and tell the gal i love her with all my heart and want to get married and have kids as soon as possible while tossing stale cookies for a few months and then dumping her. if she can lie and say she can't get pregnant i can lie and say i'm a sperm machine.
nah, i wouldn't do it. i've never gone bareback and maybe never will while single.

From: spreadmycheeks [line up roun' l'block to suck my cock]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 05:49

Suppose he wins this case. Imagine all the new cases that will sprout immediately. When you're paying $500 a month, who wants to wait any longer? Get the ball rolling, men!

From: gypsydances [gypsy]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 06:41

Now this is going to bring up a different point so I better "duck" however, I knew someone a while back who was trying to get pregnant so she could get AFDC (aid for dependent children). An easy way for her to get a monthly income, which she spent very little on the actual child, most of went for her recreation.
Which brings me to this, the father, once he found out he was the father, turned right around and took the baby from her after he found out where his child support was going. He is one of the men who CARED for this child and insisted on being part of the girls life. It didn't take him long to see what was gong on, he put an end to it, (had to proove neglect, the whole thing). Now the girl lives with him. His family also loves her so in this case she lucked out. But what if the father wouldnt have cared? Then where would the child have been. By the way, she was another one who lied, and said she was on the pill.
It does go both ways, but on this one point the men have a handicap...women can SEE a rubber on a guy if they say "no don't want a kid" men cant SEE the pill, if that is the type of control she claims. Insist on rubbers no matter what the case seems to be men, they might not be 100% but the odds are more in your favor. Women should do the same thing, think of STD. If you want to play sexually, at least take the precations that are out there.

From: jamesleblanc [James]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 06:56

So, this woman ultimately gets to make the decision that affects three lives forever. That seems a bit unfair, especially since this guy didn't willingly give her that choice. Hey, I'm pro-choice, certainly, but really, if she makes a decision that she wants to keep this child, why does the guy who have no authority what so ever have to suffer. Being politically correct means not discriminating because of race, colour, religion, sex, etc...

Man = no choice, wait in bushes and see.
Woman = ruin everything you want to, you have the choice and it's everybody else's fault anyway

He won't win, but if he was Dutch, he would.

From: wolfear [Othello]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 07:34

Ok so this arguement is split pretty evenly between men and women. All women say keep it in your pants or wear a rubber. Ladies here is what it come down to. If you go out w/ a guy and get knocked up and then sometime in the first trimester you decide that you don't want to further his bloodline it's over. You go out and get an abortion. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that there was a court case about 10 years ago where a man got a woman pregnant and took her to court to prevent her from having an abortion. Guess what the judge decided it was her body and that he really had no say. So here is the way I see it. If a guy gets a girl pregnant he should have the option (in the first trimester)to opt out of the pregnancy. If the woman doesn't want an abortion or to put it up for adoption then the man should be able to refuse to be held responsible.

Ladies you can have it both ways. Saying "It's my body, my baby and my choice" in the same breath that you say "it takes 2 to tango". Deal w/ it. You want equality here you go.

From: louisthedamned [Jon Doe of Dil]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 07:49

Ive never seen Frr post a message to the best of my knowledge, but I must admit this article is making clear many of the arguments I was making weeks ago. When the father has the same right to walk away as the mother, or a say in whether or not she can abort the child, then, and only then, will some measure of equality be achieved. If political correctness gets the way, then just ban abortion and be done with it. This way neither of them have a say, and at least a balance of power is achieved.

From: cpyder [Josh]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 08:34

**
From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 14:25

Let me get this right. Men want the right to financially opt out of a pregnancy. But men also want to be able to block the woman's ability to get an abortion. It looks like a big "fuck you" to all woman-kind to me, regardless of whether you're pro-choice or pro-life.

There's an easy third solution to this. Nobody ever gets pregnant by accident in the villages full of Amazonian women. Femtopia anyone?

_______

Umm thats basically what we have at almost every university. Its on an average of 7 girls to every guy. And for some odd reason, the sale of the morning after pill at university's health and wellness centers is skyrocketing.

Also, its not "men" that are trying to block women's rights to abortion... its the bible thumpers, male and female bible thumpers.

__________________

**
From: rottengirl [bring on the spankings]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 16:49

Why don't we just try to eliminate the problem of unplanned pregnancy instead of trying to wrangle out all these dumb issues that arise because people are evil and contraceptive technology is primitive? I'm still waiting on an oral contraceptive for men that makes *them* hormonal, bloated, gain weight and grow extra hair.

_____

I am waiting for my vasectomy, I am actually made my appointment a month ago... just had to postpone it because I need to help my dad move. Screw contraceptives, I just want the cord snipped.

___________________

**

From: hatshepsut76 [tara]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 04:11

Equal rights is not the issue here. If you are not responsible enough to care for a child should one be conceived, you should not be having sex. It is a 'by-product' of sex and there are consequences to such an activity.

____

You had a good thing going there till you said that. Before I start anything with a chick she knows damn well that I am not interested in her bullshit.
Min point, SEX IS FOR PLEASURE..... love making is for making a little one that you will love. So get it through your bible brain, sex is not for the sole purpose of offspring. If it were, the Playboy Mansion would have been Satan's headquarters 10 years ago.

Which is why I try to find the smart ones... smart with less vindictiveness. Cause if the lady is smart she would be well understanding of the simple fact that, at our age (18-25), there is no real logic behind having a child. I know damn well that I am not going to be able to support a family at this point in my life. I can handle financial support, not the issue, but the support that matters...... actually being there for the family I would want to create. Why would anyone force a child to be raised as a cash cow? (as someone here so eloquently put)

As someone already commended some of the ladies for stating that they agree that men should have some sort of rights..... MUAH, you are rare beings and should be bowed to and praised with just the mention of your names. But as rare as you are, you are out numbered by extremely vindictive and cynical females who only want whats best for them and delude themselves with thoughts of a child persuading the guy to fall in love with them, that or that the child will somehow fill that void of being loved..... then the postpartum depression kicks in.

Either way, guys will be at the short end of the stick for some time to come.

Just on a note, i will try to find the article, but there is already a test in the going for a male contraceptive in Europe.... its supposed to stop the production of sperm and not inhibit testosterone... YAY, soon ladies, soon.

From: tigertears [t]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 09:45

It seems that everybody is missing the point here.When a woman gets pregnant she HAS to deal with it,whether it's having an abortion,giving it up for adoption,or keeping it.All of these options are extremely painful emotionally and physically,with the least of her problems the financial ones.There is absolutely NO WAY for a woman to "opt-out" of DEALING with the pregnancy.People who have never been through this have NO idea what it entails.The fact that the woman is ulitmately responsible for making the decision is a double-edged sword.Choosing what to do about an unwanted pregnancy is the absolute worst thing imaginable and if you have never been it that position then you cannot possibly comprehend it.The way I see it,EITHER WAY the men get to opt-out just by virtue of not having the emotional and physical strain of being pregnant in the first place.

From: 66scorpio
Date: 10-Mar-2006 10:00

From: jetboi [jetto boi]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 17:27

1. "Men's rights movement?" Vomit. The women's rights movement began because women have never received equal treatment either legally or socially in the United States.

------

Some time around the beginning of the 20th century, the life expectancy for women surpassed that of men. I would argue that equality was achieved at that point. Since then the gap widened until women got an extra 7 years on average. Only now, a century later, is that gap closing again as women begin to take on the responsibilities, risks and stresses that men have accepted for centuries.

You can go on a whine about what men had or have that women didn't or still don't. For the last 25 years or so, feminists have been arguing that equality doesn't mean treating people the same. But they only do that to get more rights for women and fewer responsibilites. Sure, women earn $0.72 for every $1 that men do, but women control $4 of consumer spending for every $1 that men do.

------

2. Keep it in your damn pants or wear a condom. If the condom breaks and y'all don't want a kid, split the cost of the morning-after pill or, in the worst case, an abortion.

-----

As mentioned, women should keep their pants on too if they don't want a kid. However, women have an extra "out" that men do not have. Men cannot force women to become mothers but women can force men to become fathers, after all other factors and mutual choices are taken into account.

----

3. If this lawsuit worked, then women would go back to being treated as child-bearing chattel, because it would be legal for a man to force a woman to bear a child against her will.

----

That's nonsense. You are in the wrong thread. Go to South Dakota and make that argument.

----

From: 2muchfun [Wulfgar the having too much fun]
Date: 9-Mar-2006 18:00

Alimony not to exceed 1/4 the length of the marriage and not exceeding 1/4 of the paying spouse's actual current income [after taxes]?

----

In Canada there is a draft proposal regarding alimony that basically works like this:

Length of alimony = length of marriage x 1/2 to x1
Amount of alimony = 1.5% to 2% of the difference in income x length of marriage.

If there are kids it gets more complicated.

From: skyeyez9 [Marie]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 10:45

Doctors told my neighbor she was infertile, so they never used birth control......and she now has twin girls.

From: catcrys [Crystal]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 11:44

Unless she has had the baby oven (uterus) removed, there's no such thing as "absolutely cannot get pregnant". Never trust a woman who says she can't get pregnant, cause the only basis she has for it is that she hasn't yet.

Women have as much responsibility in getting pregnant - in cases of consensual sex, there is no case sort of duress involved in the option of not using a condom. Just don't have sex. "But it doesn't feel as good" Yea well neither does being pregnant for 9 months.

In an ideal world with honest people, I would agree with the idea in the article. But we don't live there. We'll have guys with kids umpteen years old reneging, claiming they never wanted it in the first place, etc.

This just brings more merit to the Department for Pregnancy that I will create when I rule the world. Everyone is tied (tubes) at birth. To have a child, you must petition. Multitudes of tests will be involved. Then, there will be no questions concerning this. Abortions will be mandatory for any unapproved pregnancies. And believe you me, in my world, it will be enforced.

From: titznazz [M.I.L.F.]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 11:56

I know it's been said over and over, but I agree that whether a woman says she's infertile or not, there is still STD's, AIDS, hepatitis, all that shit. Say she doesn't get pregnant, but certainly spread's the wealth and joy of gonorreah. Let's see some man try to opt-out of that. I think both party's are responsible until both can compromise. There are some women out there who prefer to raise children alone (Madonna started out that way and was quite happy, Jodie Foster, too). Otherwise, he needs to contribute something. My brother was nailed the same way with his current wife. It pissed off our family because we knew her motives from the starting block and even warned him numerous times. He went for it anyway. She wanted (and is getting) a free ride. He's no idiot (just horny). He fell for her tricks and now he must be responsible for them.

I think it's stupid gold-digging bitches that mess it up for anybody else with a legitimate "mistake" (for lack of a better word).

From: mikki630 [Satan's Crotchless Panties]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 12:02

Ahhhh...pictured with the only pussy he'll ever have again...hehehe

From: nox [Goddess of Night]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 12:21

I have a question if she was "unable to have children" why would she be on birth control?

From: buzz0432 [Alex]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 12:41

I�ve got news for you, kiddies! It takes two to tango!

What makes you so sure she wasn�t just using him for her pleasure? If she didn�t want a kid she has the option to use a female condom or birth-control or, even more effective, the right to say �no.� Everybody here is is quick to say �he should have kept it in his pants� but no one has bothered to point out that she should have kept her pants on.

They both made the choice to do what was necessary to make a baby -- it was her responsibility as much as his.

Once she got pregnant however, the man�s options are nil. If she wants an abortion and he doesn�t want her to have one, all of the sudden �it�s her body� and he no longer has any say. If he want�s an abortion and she doesn�t, he has no options; �it�s her body.� I say, if the woman wants the child and the man doesn�t he should have the option of paying for an abortion (or the equivalent fee) and opting out.

Unless he raped her (which is a whole different subject) both of them have a responsibility. If the woman desires to have �all the control,� then she should take �all the responsibility� and support the child herself.

From: spookyland71 [spooky land]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 20:54

i am a mother, and am anti- abortion. i hate the fact that there are women out there that use abortion as birth control. i hear all those stupid arguments about, it's my body, my choice. but in the same breath they don't want to be the ones to provide all of the birth control. they want the man to provide birth control as well. i feel both parties should contribute to providing birth control. BUT when there is a pregnancy, the man has just as much right as the woman to make the choice as to whether or not to keep the baby.if the woman does not want the baby, then she should let the father keep it or give it up for adoption. so what if the woman has to get stretch marks and morning sickness. that is what happens when you get pregnant. if you do not want the baby, then buy a toy or keep your legs crossed. pregnancy is not an illness, but those who say abortion is for womens health is crazy. abortion is murder. rape and incest victims can get the morning after pill. if the mothers life is in danger, then do what you can to save both. with medical technology today i'm sure that is a thing of the past, or will be soon.that is my opinion.

From: zman1 [Zman1]
Date: 10-Mar-2006 21:23

It's not fair period. Women get more say. I should be aborted which would prevent me from causing the murders of people. <<<big brother that was a joke.

From: nekoturk [Amy]
Date: 11-Mar-2006 09:01

spooky land

abortion is murder. rape and incest victims can get the morning after pill.
-----------------------------------------------------
What about the whores. . . can we get some justice for them too?
Morning After Pills and Abortions for all!

From: angryyoungpoor [Negative Creep]
Date: 11-Mar-2006 14:22

�It seems that everybody is missing the point here.When a woman gets pregnant she HAS to deal with it,whether it's having an abortion,giving it up for adoption,or keeping it.All of these options are extremely painful emotionally and physically,with the least of her problems the financial ones.There is absolutely NO WAY for a woman to "opt-out" of DEALING with the pregnancy.People who have never been through this have NO idea what it entails.The fact that the woman is ulitmately responsible for making the decision is a double-edged sword.Choosing what to do about an unwanted pregnancy is the absolute worst thing imaginable and if you have never been it that position then you cannot possibly comprehend it.The way I see it,EITHER WAY the men get to opt-out just by virtue of not having the emotional and physical strain of being pregnant in the first place.�

Exactly. The Woman As Flowerpot Fallcy. This so-called �making it equal� actually isn�t. The fact that men shoot the sperm and then women carry the embryo - and therefore the dangers and duties that brings - for 9 months (if things go well) and then delivers a baby. There is nothing on the man�s side that correlates biologically. It is just so ingrained into our heads that reproductive duties fall on the woman that we forget that biologically, there is a moment where the seed shoots from the man and into the women. THAT is where his body comes into play, THAT is his choice, THAT is something a woman should have NO SAY in what he does with it. That is where a man should think, �do I want to pay this child-support were we to get divorced?� and not until it is passed to her own body.

Men should take responsibility in their physical contribution when they shoot the sperm - get dejuiced, wear a condom, pull-out, though unfortunately the burden of responsibility was placed on a woman as far as other contraceptives that tinker with biology in the past and now pharmaceutical companies don�t want to waste money on what they think men won�t buy, so no BC pill for you (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060224/hl_afp/afplifestylehealth_060224153518). Women with BC pills (since it was unfairly placed on her even though the male shoots the seed), or condoms, or an abortion. But men shouldn�t wait until the woman is pregnant and it is in her body. She didn�t force you either way to shoot it into her body (which you didn�t have to do) and she still let it in and deals with the responsibility of either aborting the fetus or raising the child, you can�t have a word on if she wants to keep the child (which she doesn�t have to do) and you therefore have to deal with the responsibility. You already made your choice. I find it jarring that first women have to bear the burden of reproduction responsibility but then get cut-off when what is *actually* solely their physical choice may inconvenience a man who, in the first place, didn�t have the responsibility she did even though none of this could happen unless he shot his load. If men want things to change? Don�t take away the only means women have to guarantee that their baby will be taken care of even if the man says, �never mind�, show the medical community that you guys are indeed keen on a BC pill. So finally men, too, will equally have to recognize the same responsibility women do in the first place.

Now, I�m aware of the fact that contraception doesn�t always work (and that people are deceitful; that happens on both side and is a matter for the courts, not a red-herring to distract from male responsibility), but when �accidents happen�, the woman faces responsibility which ever way, too. And if she keeps it, it becomes about the baby, not the woman. OR the man.

But first and foremost, of course, the couple should talk and understand each other. Something that seems to be missing.

On men dying first: it isn't just physical, it's emotional. Men are taught to not express their feelings and that contributes to why they die first. It is up to men to change the way they view masculinity if they want to improve it, not to tell women they achived equality since they live longer. But this is yet another thing MRAs (Men's Rights Activists) hold against feminists and expect them to fix for them.

From: 66scorpio
Date: 11-Mar-2006 21:06

"There is nothing on the man�s side that correlates biologically."

So what? As feminists have pointed out for years, equality does not mean being or treated the same.

"there is a moment where the seed shoots from the man and into the women. THAT is where his body comes into play, THAT is his choice, THAT is something a woman should have NO SAY in what he does with it."

So rape is ok?

The point is that men and women have the same choices regarding sex and contraception. However, when there is an unplanned pregnancy, then only the woman has choices and she gets to impose those on the man, whether to deny him fatherhood or the force it.

And the crap about "unles you have experienced this...blah blah blah": that is just an excuse to avoid a full discussion on the merits. It is also irrelevant because there is no suggestion in the context of this particular lawsuit that the man is trying to interfere with the woman's right to choose. This is about men being able to decide if they want the woman's choice to be a mother to affect them.

"On men dying first: it isn't just physical, it's emotional. Men are taught to not express their feelings and that contributes to why they die first. It is up to men to change the way they view masculinity if they want to improve it."

That's part of the double standard western society sets: men should change the way they do things so that women can be equal, and men should change the way they do things for men to catch back up.

Part of the reason men die first is that they are 3 to 4 times as likely to commit suicide. One of the ways women "express their feelings" that men usually don't is attempted suicides to get attention. Society - that is, both men and women - put way more pressure on men than on women. Women have more choices about career and family than men do. Men have more responsibilites than women and sometimes when they can't meet them, they kill themselves, or died trying (like taking dangerous work that women don't do).