Let's hear it for the men, the other half of the reproductive process

[Seawytch]

Until it is a man's life and health at risk in a pregnancy...they can sit down and STFU. They can have an opinion, but have no say.

Yeah, when half of your genetic code is at stake, you have a say. Without a man and his sperm, your choice, your agenda, is nonexistent.

When a man can grow a womb and put their health at risk they have a say. Since that is not yet scientifically possible, they have an opinion only.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2011/11/01/he...s-mother/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

 

[TemplarKormac]

You appear to be saying that the man should have control over whether the results of a sexual interaction should lead to a child being born.

Either both of them do or don't want a child when they have sex. If they do, carry it to term. If not, take contraceptive measures. If the man wants the child, the woman's choice is moot. If the woman wants the child and the man doesn't, well she can simply show him the door.

Contraception, abstinence, self restraint. Not complicated.

 

[william the wie]

I think you may be committing suicide by post but that's your business

 

[TemplarKormac]

Until it is a man's life and health at risk in a pregnancy...they can sit down and STFU. They can have an opinion, but have no say.

Yeah, when half of your genetic code is at stake, you have a say. Without a man and his sperm, your choice, your agenda, is nonexistent.

When a man can grow a womb and put their health at risk they have a say. Since that is not yet scientifically possible, they have an opinion only.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2011/11/01/health/multiple-pregnancies-mother/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

Unfortunately for you, you don't get to dictate whether or not a man has a say in the reproductive process.

Until a woman can evolve the ability to reproduce asexually, without the need of male intervention, then men have just as much say. Whether you like it or not.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I think you may be committing suicide by post but that's your business

Huh? Who are you talking to?

 

[BlackFlag]

Is the husband’s life and health at risk by the woman carrying a fetus? Does he have the right to force her to risk those things because he chose not to keep it in his pants?

Your lack of basic understanding of how the human procreative process works is astounding.

Read the very first sentence in my OP again.

If there is no male to fertilize the egg, the egg won't divide. Therefore there will be no fetus, and no risk to life on behalf of the woman.

Women aren't like cars, you can't hotwire them. You need a key to turn the engine. A man.

Simply put.

Cool. Stay a virgin and you won’t have this problem.

Thing is, I am. And, unlike you, I adhere to my morals. If a woman doesn't want to screw me and I don't want to screw her, it's better we don't meet and make a mistake we will BOTH regret.

Curious, what if all the men in the world chose to be virgins?

The human race die. Quickly.

If men who are willing to force women to carry their fetus to term against their will all chose to be virgins, in a few generations we’d have wiped out many of the most violent and oppressive ideologies on Earth.

 

[TemplarKormac]

a) what a ridiculously asinine thread. Yet another misogynistic thread.

Okay Rocket Mouth. You discredited the rest of your post by simply mentioning the word "misogyny".

But go on. It doesn't mean I'll take you seriously.

 

[Seawytch]

Until it is a man's life and health at risk in a pregnancy...they can sit down and STFU. They can have an opinion, but have no say.

Yeah, when half of your genetic code is at stake, you have a say. Without a man and his sperm, your choice, your agenda, is nonexistent.

When a man can grow a womb and put their health at risk they have a say. Since that is not yet scientifically possible, they have an opinion only.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2011/11/01/health/multiple-pregnancies-mother/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

Unfortunately for you, you don't get to dictate whether or not a man has a say in the reproductive process.

Until a woman can evolve the ability to reproduce asexually, without the need of male intervention, then men have just as much say. Whether you like it or not.

You're right, the law does. The law says it's a decision for a woman to make.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Until it is a man's life and health at risk in a pregnancy...they can sit down and STFU. They can have an opinion, but have no say.

Yeah, when half of your genetic code is at stake, you have a say. Without a man and his sperm, your choice, your agenda, is nonexistent.

When a man can grow a womb and put their health at risk they have a say. Since that is not yet scientifically possible, they have an opinion only.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2011/11/01/health/multiple-pregnancies-mother/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

Unfortunately for you, you don't get to dictate whether or not a man has a say in the reproductive process.

Until a woman can evolve the ability to reproduce asexually, without the need of male intervention, then men have just as much say. Whether you like it or not.

You're right, the law does. The law says it's a decision for a woman to make.

The law can be changed, much to your dismay.

The woman made her choice that very night. The results should therefore be out of her control. You seem to forget that there were choices made leading up to the very moment of conception.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Is the husband’s life and health at risk by the woman carrying a fetus? Does he have the right to force her to risk those things because he chose not to keep it in his pants?

Your lack of basic understanding of how the human procreative process works is astounding.

Read the very first sentence in my OP again.

If there is no male to fertilize the egg, the egg won't divide. Therefore there will be no fetus, and no risk to life on behalf of the woman.

Women aren't like cars, you can't hotwire them. You need a key to turn the engine. A man.

Simply put.

Cool. Stay a virgin and you won’t have this problem.

Thing is, I am. And, unlike you, I adhere to my morals. If a woman doesn't want to screw me and I don't want to screw her, it's better we don't meet and make a mistake we will BOTH regret.

Curious, what if all the men in the world chose to be virgins?

The human race would die. Quickly.

If men who are willing to force women to carry their fetus to term against their will all chose to be virgins, in a few generations we’d have wiped out many of the most violent and oppressive ideologies on Earth.

That's not what I asked. All men, regardless of ideology or alignment.

 

[McRocket]

]In the absolute biological sense taking away all of the accoutrements of modern civilization going down through the millennia since ancient times, the man was the deciding factor. He found a mate having desirable qualities and selected her for insemination. The woman was absolutely dependent on the man. He provided the cave, he hunted the animals for food, he fought off others who would harm or take her. She became pregnant and had his child. The woman was carrier and incubator. Abortion was not an option.

We live in a totally artificial construct of modern society now where women choose the man, perhaps no man at all and just get a test tube, or get an abortion. Now such masculine advances without the female's "permission" is called "rape." And we give the woman a choice whether to carry the child or to abort it like yesterday's lunch. And of course, the man's wishes or desires are not factored into the abortion at all, because that would in effect be admitting that the child is really his and the girl a mere carrier rather than consider it part of "her body."

Oh what a tangled web we weave in turning 5 million years of evolution and tradition on its head and calling it "civilization."

Holy crap...what a flood of unadulterated anger at women along with a call for their status to be changed to that of virtual sub-humans.

You don't just hate women...you want their rights to be taken away. You clearly long for the day's when women had no power, no say and were virtual slaves.

Yup...you are one sick dude...your 'woman' (if you have one) must be one pathetic ***** with zero self-esteem to want to spend her life with a guy who CLEARLY sees women as sub-human.
(and don't bother with the 'I have a gorgeous, brilliant wife who is strong-willed and adores me' crap - no one with a properly working brain and over 10 will believe you.) More likely, you are old, divorced (or in a crap marriage) and VERY bitter that women don't submit like they did at one time.

And hello dufus? A 'girl' is NOT a female adult. It's a child - a woman UNDER 18 (in America).

'girl

NOUN

• 1A female child.'

girl | Definition of girl in English by Oxford Dictionaries


I KNEW there was something sick about you. And you just proved me 100% right. You DESPISE female equality with men. ABSOLUTELY HATE IT.

 

[BlackFlag]

Is the husband’s life and health at risk by the woman carrying a fetus? Does he have the right to force her to risk those things because he chose not to keep it in his pants?

Your lack of basic understanding of how the human procreative process works is astounding.

Read the very first sentence in my OP again.

If there is no male to fertilize the egg, the egg won't divide. Therefore there will be no fetus, and no risk to life on behalf of the woman.

Women aren't like cars, you can't hotwire them. You need a key to turn the engine. A man.

Simply put.

Cool. Stay a virgin and you won’t have this problem.

Thing is, I am. And, unlike you, I adhere to my morals. If a woman doesn't want to screw me and I don't want to screw her, it's better we don't meet and make a mistake we will BOTH regret.

Curious, what if all the men in the world chose to be virgins?

The human race would die. Quickly.

If men who are willing to force women to carry their fetus to term against their will all chose to be virgins, in a few generations we’d have wiped out many of the most violent and oppressive ideologies on Earth.

That's not what I asked. All men, regardless of ideology or alignment.

I assumed that was a rhetorical question. What if a secret lizard civiliation rises from the ground and kills us all?

My question’s more fun but we can do yours if you want.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Your lack of basic understanding of how the human procreative process works is astounding.

Read the very first sentence in my OP again.

If there is no male to fertilize the egg, the egg won't divide. Therefore there will be no fetus, and no risk to life on behalf of the woman.

Women aren't like cars, you can't hotwire them. You need a key to turn the engine. A man.

Simply put.

Cool. Stay a virgin and you won’t have this problem.

Thing is, I am. And, unlike you, I adhere to my morals. If a woman doesn't want to screw me and I don't want to screw her, it's better we don't meet and make a mistake we will BOTH regret.

Curious, what if all the men in the world chose to be virgins?

The human race would die. Quickly.

If men who are willing to force women to carry their fetus to term against their will all chose to be virgins, in a few generations we’d have wiped out many of the most violent and oppressive ideologies on Earth.

That's not what I asked. All men, regardless of ideology or alignment.

I assumed that was a rhetorical question. What if a secret lizard civiliation rises from the ground and kills us all?

My question’s more fun but we can do yours if you want.

I DON'T ASK RHETORICAL QUESTIONS.

Since you can't seem to come up with a cogent reply to my question, this exchange is meaningless.

 

[BlindBoo]

Without the male spermatezoa, all of the females of our species wouldn't have a choice to make. No sperm, no fertilized egg, no pregnancy, no choice to make. No us.

No offense, but speaking on behalf of all the men in the world, we seem to be the catalyst for that choice, IE, we are just as critical to human procreation as the woman is.

Therefore, I contend, men have an equal say in the reproductive process and the decision whether or not the fully healthy woman he inseminated should have an abortion.

Think about it. The man wants the child, but for some reason the woman doesn't. Why is the choice to arbitrarily exterminate the growing life in the womb exclusively hers?

The entire "pro choice" argument is misandrous (sexist toward men). That's the bottom line. That's my opinion. If you don't like it, comment or put me on your ignore list. I'm a free thinker, not a conformist.

If you follow me solely because you assume I agree with you politically, you are no more of a kindred spirit to me than the vacuum of space is to the prospects of life.

That's it, that's all.

In the absolute biological sense taking away all of the accoutrements of modern civilization going down through the millennia since ancient times, the man was the deciding factor. He found a mate having desirable qualities and selected her for insemination. The woman was absolutely dependent on the man. He provided the cave, he hunted the animals for food, he fought off others who would harm or take her. She became pregnant and had his child. The woman was carrier and incubator. Abortion was not an option.

We live in a totally artificial construct of modern society now where women choose the man, perhaps no man at all and just get a test tube, or get an abortion. Now such masculine advances without the female's "permission" is called "rape." And we give the woman a choice whether to carry the child or to abort it like yesterday's lunch. And of course, the man's wishes or desires are not factored into the abortion at all, because that would in effect be admitting that the child is really his and the girl a mere carrier rather than consider it part of "her body."

Oh what a tangled web we weave in turning 5 million years of evolution and tradition on its head and calling it "civilization."

Science has also nullified many natural childhood diseases and conditions that contributed to high infant mortality rates. We don't need to have so many children anymore. The decision to have and raise a child should be done collectively between the two parents. If you're out spreading your seed to any willing recipient, should you really have a say? It's not like we're in the primeval forest and you can drag her off to your cave anymore.

 

[BlackFlag]

Cool. Stay a virgin and you won’t have this problem.

Thing is, I am. And, unlike you, I adhere to my morals. If a woman doesn't want to screw me and I don't want to screw her, it's better we don't meet and make a mistake we will BOTH regret.

Curious, what if all the men in the world chose to be virgins?

The human race would die. Quickly.

If men who are willing to force women to carry their fetus to term against their will all chose to be virgins, in a few generations we’d have wiped out many of the most violent and oppressive ideologies on Earth.

That's not what I asked. All men, regardless of ideology or alignment.

I assumed that was a rhetorical question. What if a secret lizard civiliation rises from the ground and kills us all?

My question’s more fun but we can do yours if you want.

I DON'T ASK RHETORICAL QUESTIONS.

Since you can't seem to come up with a cogent reply to my question, this exchange is meaningless.

If men all stopped having sex without a system of sperm donation in place to replace it, some women might be able to steal sperm from men for a while, but the population of humans would drop dramatically. Now let’s see where you’re going with this.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Thing is, I am. And, unlike you, I adhere to my morals. If a woman doesn't want to screw me and I don't want to screw her, it's better we don't meet and make a mistake we will BOTH regret.

Curious, what if all the men in the world chose to be virgins?

The human race would die. Quickly.

If men who are willing to force women to carry their fetus to term against their will all chose to be virgins, in a few generations we’d have wiped out many of the most violent and oppressive ideologies on Earth.

That's not what I asked. All men, regardless of ideology or alignment.

I assumed that was a rhetorical question. What if a secret lizard civiliation rises from the ground and kills us all?

My question’s more fun but we can do yours if you want.

I DON'T ASK RHETORICAL QUESTIONS.

Since you can't seem to come up with a cogent reply to my question, this exchange is meaningless.

If men all stopped having sex without a system of sperm donation in place to replace it, some women might be able to steal sperm from men for a while, but the population of humans would drop dramatically. Now let’s see where you’re going with this.

So now, instead of it being a choice, it would be a necessity? Now life is important?

Intriguing.

Funny how your views change based on what scenario the woman is faced with.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Science has also nullified many natural childhood diseases and conditions that contributed to high infant mortality rates. We don't need to have so many children anymore.

What are you suggesting?

That we resort to eugenics?

 

[Jackson]

Think about it. The man wants the child, but for some reason the woman doesn't. Why is the choice to arbitrarily exterminate the growing life in the womb exclusively hers?

Responsible men won't put themselves in that position to begin with.

Uh, what is that supposed to mean?

Why is it solely up to the man to be 'responsible'? Do male and females have the same capacity for better judgement?

I have said it before. It takes two to create a baby...a mother and a father, What SHOULD TAKE PLACE:

Two engage in sex, hence the pregnancy begins. If the father wants the child and the mother does not, she can sign a contract giving all rights to the father and NO REPSPONSIBILITIES to the mother. Likewise if the mother wants the child and the father does not the contract is written that the mother carries the responsibility for the child as well as expenses.

If BotH agree that the child is not wanted by either, the pregnancy should continue and the child is found a home by Protective agencies. If both want the baby....CONGRATULATIONS!

 

[BlackFlag]

If men who are willing to force women to carry their fetus to term against their will all chose to be virgins, in a few generations we’d have wiped out many of the most violent and oppressive ideologies on Earth.

That's not what I asked. All men, regardless of ideology or alignment.

I assumed that was a rhetorical question. What if a secret lizard civiliation rises from the ground and kills us all?

My question’s more fun but we can do yours if you want.

I DON'T ASK RHETORICAL QUESTIONS.

Since you can't seem to come up with a cogent reply to my question, this exchange is meaningless.

If men all stopped having sex without a system of sperm donation in place to replace it, some women might be able to steal sperm from men for a while, but the population of humans would drop dramatically. Now let’s see where you’re going with this.

So now, instead of it being a choice, it would be a necessity? Now life is important?

Intriguing.

Funny how your views change based on what scenario the woman is faced with.

I’d keep having sex. I’d be more in demand than I ever dreamed. So feel free to convince as many dudes as you can to choose celibacy.

 

[OldLady]

Without the male spermatezoa, all of the females of our species wouldn't have a choice to make. No sperm, no fertilized egg, no pregnancy, no choice to make. No us.

No offense, but speaking on behalf of all the men in the world, we seem to be the catalyst for that choice, IE, we are just as critical to human procreation as the woman is.

Therefore, I contend, men have an equal say in the reproductive process and the decision whether or not the fully healthy woman he inseminated should have an abortion.

Think about it. The man wants the child, but for some reason the woman doesn't. Why is the choice to arbitrarily exterminate the growing life in the womb exclusively hers?

The entire "pro choice" argument is misandrous (sexist toward men). That's the bottom line. That's my opinion. If you don't like it, comment or put me on your ignore list. I'm a free thinker, not a conformist.

If you follow me solely because you assume I agree with you politically, you are no more of a kindred spirit to me than the vacuum of space is to the prospects of life.

That's it, that's all.

I agree men should have an equal say. If a woman says she does not want the baby, and the man does, he is absolutely within his rights to take that baby home from the hospital and raise it himself, with the woman signing away her rights and never seeing the baby again.
That is part of the reason--a good part of the reason, I believe--that women find pro-lifers to be taking away their freedom and their right to direct their own lives. Being a mother in this society means that YOU will be the primary caregiver and it will completely change your life, narrow your choices and probably, if you do not have a partner, put you in poverty.

Is the husband’s life and health at risk by the woman carrying a fetus? Does he have the right to force her to risk those things because he chose not to keep it in his pants?

A husband who would insist a woman carry through with a high risk pregnancy against her wishes is not much of a husband. I know a lot of women who risk their lives to have a baby, and that is their choice, I guess, although it's pretty hard on those who love her and care about her.

You make it sound as if a woman's health is always at risk though, which isn't the case. It might be annoying and uncomfortable, but most pregnancies do not do any damage.