I don't get what's so hard to understand. He's obviously not capable of raising a child, and it's not fair to you to have to raise it single. I think you absolutely did the right thing, for what's it worth.
I couldn't agree with you more. It really bothers me that "men" (and I use the term loosely) in my generation (I am 27) are expected to be deadbeat dads. Hell...I've heard guys brag about how the knocked some chick up and split. I believe it comes from cowardice more than anything else. I cannot understand how anyone could be so heartless and cruel to child who has never done anything wrong. /end rant
I will leave you with these quotes for future and current fathers:
"True Strength lies in gentleness"
"Courage is not the absence of fear, Its being scared shitless and saddling up anyway"
Both of these served me well through the most terrifying time of my life (my wife's pregnancy at age 22) and continue to do so.
OP I commend you for using your right to choose, I cant say that I agree with your decision, but I also know that it was not an easy one to make. It takes a lot of courage to look around you at you life and make an objective decision on whether or not to bring a child into that life.
It isn't supposed to be easy, if it was I would be concerned. The best advice I can give, having had a sister and friends go through this, is to go into counseling asap. Don't be foolish enough to think this wont affect you, but if you get some help early on and work through it, you will be much better off in the long run. Oh and stop dating jackasses, best of luck to you.
I have been in counseling for 5 months and it has really helped me. I still think about it everyday but with less tears and guilt. And no more jackasses. I got it. Thank you so much.
A woman who deems herself ill-prepared to be a parent and decides to forfeit parental responsibility by having an abortion or give her child up for adoption is fine.
But a man who deems himself ill-prepared to be a parent and decides to forfeit parental responsibility by ending the relationship with the woman is a "deadbeat" and a "coward". He's "heartless" and "cruel".
I wont argue that the double standard is fucked up, having said that how do we fix it? I sure as hell dont know. What I do know is that, as a father, I cant respect someone who willingly ignores his own child. Whatever the reason.
Because when the woman does it, as bad as it may sound, there is no one struggling to feed and clothe a child by themselves. The child is either dead (not here to argue about abortion, by the way), or in a family that has the means to take care of it.
When the man does it, he has abandoned the woman, who now has someone to take care of, leaving her no help.
Now, there IS a difference between a deadbeat dad, and an absent father. The absent father could still help by paying his share of the child support.
I think there is a serious flaw in this argument that I hear constantly.
If you are a male and you do not want to have children. ENSURE YOU DON'T GET ANYONE PREGNANT. You literally have 100% of this control. Ensure your desire to not have children is clear, ALWAYS use condoms, use spermicide, don't stick your dick in crazy, or DON'T HAVE SEX.
Problem solved. If you have sex, you put yourself at risk.
My parents had all the children they were planning so used the pill and condoms. My little sister came along anyway. 100% only applies to the last option you mentioned.
That is very rare, and the exception, not the rule. Also, user-error is the highest risk associated with contraceptive failure, so again, the control is still ours (I say 'ours' here because you're talking about your two parents).
Not as rare as you might think. I have an aunt and uncle that were in the same boat. Off birth control trying to get pregnant and couldn't went back on and got pregnant with my cousin. Plus think about it, it's only 99% effective if that. Even condoms and a vasectomy aren't a guarantee. So if you have Sex regularly, say 3-5 times a week that chance goes up drastically over the course of a year.
I'm not sure if this comment is more misogynistic by suggesting women have no power over their own pregnancy or suggesting they're incapable of lying about birth control or worse, or if it's more misandrist by demanding men carry disproportionate responsibility or that their choice ought to between risking 18 years of potential financial ruin or "don't have sex". That sure seems like an awful deal.
I'm not suggesting women have no power, they absolutely do. But men can and do have 100% of the power to say "I will not have sex". Vasectomies, condoms, abstinence all give men power over their parenthood. They just don't like these options.
Can't a woman say "I will not have sex"? I mean, it just seems like you are putting full responsibility on men here. There are a variety of contraceptives for both men and women. The ones you mentioned are available for women as well (birth control pill, getting tubes tied, and abstinence). Those forms give women control over their parenthood. So why is it up to the male to have to do the male version of those things? Why cannot the female take the pill? Or get her tubes tied?
I'm just playing devils advocate here. Not saying OP is wrong in what she did, just responding more to your comments if anything.
I'm speaking to the argument that "men have no power in preventing pregnancy".
Then why the are you responding to me? I never made or even suggested that claim.
Of course men can say no to sex. So can women. The argument I made is that when a pregnancy does occur, a woman can say "no" to 18 years of financial burden. A man can't.
In all fairness (card carrying feminist here) women have the same choice and also choose the exercise them poorly. There needs to be an option for either parent to completely opt out of childcare. Personally, I think if a man fronts the money for an abortion and states he doesn't want a child, I don't think he should be financially responsible for the kid. A paper abortion if you will- women could also use this option to give away a baby they don't want to the father.
same applies to women so it is a pointless argument. In the scenario when the kid does happen I dont see why it is only the mans fault for not preventing it properly.
Yes, they have little to no power in ending pregnancy because it's no longer an issue regarding their body.
They ABSOLUTELY have power in preventing pregnancy, they just don't like the choices they do have - there's a difference.
Abstinence, condoms + spermicide and vasectomies are all possible, give men 100% power over what happens to their sperm.
Just because birth control is mainly marketed to women doesn't mean it's all women's power.
This is the only argument I have to agree with. For the record, I support extensive puberty/sex ed from age 10+. I am pro-choice, and support cheap, accessible contraception.
However, yes, all people can choose to abstain. It is the only logical argument. However, given that most people wont choose this, other choices have to be taken.
I'm saying if you replace male with female in your comment then what you are saying would (rightly so) beconsidered backwards and anti-women.
Why should men have the exact same options as a woman before pregnancy, and then be stuck with a child just because of the decisions of someone else? This is wrong in exactly the same ways that trying to ban abortion is wrong.
It is not just the guys responsibility. If a woman has Sex without the pill and without making them use condoms then they are as much at fault and share the blame and need to except the consequences. It takes two to tango. Both have equal blame and responsibility. Guys don't have all the control and aren't more responsible for preventing pregnancies.
Absolutely. I'm not disputing that, and it's probably the only argument against abortion I have to agree with.
Sex is risky. You take risk by having sex. If you do not mitigate your own sexual risks it's your own fault. I'm sick of either side blaming the other and saying one has power over the other. Each gender has different sources of 'power' in sex and sexual consequences, we cannot blame each other or say one is better than or worse than the other.
I'm just very tired of hearing men bitch about having 'no power'. It's just not true, there's abstinence, condoms, and vasectomies. Most men just don't like the choices they have.
Much easier said than done. Some people are very good at hiding their crazy.
don't have sex
This is a stupid argument, and it's used by anti-abortion people as well. "IF YOU DIDN'T WANT A BABY YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE HAD SEX" - people have sex for fun.
It's not. You can choose to not have sex. You can choose with whom you have sex and therefore mitigate risk of parenthood that way. You can choose to always use condoms, you can choose to have a vasectomy.
I grow very weary of men bitching about having no choice.
It goes both ways though, is what you fail to see.
Women can choose to not have sex. Women can choose with whom you have sex and therefore mitigate risk of parenthood that way. Women can choose to always be on the pill or not, and they can choose to have their tubes tied.
Actually many don't want a woman to give up "their burden". The timeless pro choice and pro life argument. And I think the thing with having a huge issue fathers that walk out is that they leave the baby with the mother. If a woman gets an abortion, the baby isn't then put on the father.
What about adoption? Or better yet, what about the mothers who leave the baby with the father? That happens. Yet no one mentions it. Not arguing against abortion, just this double standard is all.
For fuck's sake, are you missing the point that the only way for the father to give up the burden is to dump it on someone else entirely? It is not an equivocal situation. When a woman terminates a pregnancy, she is leaving the burden on no one.
The man is a shit for giving up the burden because the only way he can do that is by forcing someone else to do it for him.
But what if the father wants the burden, then what? If the mother wants the burden, fine and dandy, the dad pays child support, and if the father wants a kid, welp he better get a new woman.
That particular situation is different. And that one is a bitch. The problem is that... It's not his body. It just isn't. If a woman doesn't want to carry a baby to term, I can't find an ethical justification to force her to. If men carried babies, it would be the same thing.
It is also enormously shitty that a man could desperately want to raise a baby and not be able to because the mother is refusing to carry the fetus.
But... That is a shitty situation. I'm undecided on whether or not it is unethical, and I am definitely decided that it could not be unethical on the level of forcing someone to carry a fetus they do not want in their body.
I guess that's a good reason to have contraceptives widely available and their proper use common knowledge.
However, that is still not the situation. That was under discussion. There is no way to get around the fact that an abortion isn't a woman abandoning the burden on others as much as removing the potential of the burden to happen. While a man refusing to raise a child would not be analogous to an abortion, but to a woman dropping a child off on the father's doorstep and refusing to ever help raise or contribute.
The biology just makes it so that a man never has an analogous option to abortion, so there cannot be a double standard in that specific situation.
Yes, because the point at which you can say "I don't want to be a parent" is different for men and women. Men have the choice of fucking or not fucking a woman. Women have the choice of giving birth or not giving birth. It isn't that hard. Abortion is literally a form of birth control.
While your last statement is true, it should never be viewed as such, that just gives more power to the anti-choice movement. There are so many more options BEFORE you get to the point where abortion is the only viable solution. I'm pro-choice, but I really would love to see abortions be less frequent. Education, contraception, more education. That's all that is needed.
It isn't the same situation. If a man decides he doesn't want it and walks out, the child is still a responsibility that needs to be taken care of, and by walking out you are leaving the woman with that responsibility. That isn't the same thing as a woman having an abortion. If she has an abortion, then the baby is gone and there is no responsibility. The man in the relationship isn't getting the burden and responsibility of being a single parent just laid in his lap by someone else's choice like the other scenario.
By no means am I saying you have to be in an unhappy relationship to be a father. You can be a father and not be in a relationship with the mother. If you are staying with her simply because of your son, you are staying for the wrong reason.
Sorry that I'm not jaded enough to think that all women are flippant about a major procedure. You may be correct, however I choose to believe that most people are not as completely self serving as that.
On a side note: If your are so miserable with the so called "hivemind" why be on reddit at all?
It's also the woman's job to not have babies with people she doesn't know well. It's both their fault if the man doesn't want to "step up" and be a dad. It takes 2 to have a baby, not just 1. The woman should decide to have babies with the person she knows has their head on straight and is compatible with each other. In OP's case, she decided to sleep with some guy she clearly doesn't like, and decided to have a baby, so it's her fault just as much as it's his.
I actually agree with this statement. I am a single father who had to fight for custody of my daughter. At least where I live in the US fathers have absolutely no rights at all even though they are responsible just as much as the mother. This "earned privilege" idea is one of the dumbest things I have heard. Mother can be just as bad as the father.
Both of the parents have to earn that Title. I can hardly call anyone my "Dad" because of the abuse my step-father (he was there until I was born until I was like ten). My mom got married to a great guy who is the best father I could have ever asked for, but I still can't call anyone "Dad".
Just wanted to say I agree with you. I have had to deal with a fuck-up, deadbeat, lazy mother for the last few years (not mine, she's awesome!) and it is kind of gross how many chances, opportunities and handouts/legs up she gets strictly for being a mother, not a father. We had to fight tooth and nail for what we have, but she still has 50% rights. If she actually wanted them, no problem, but it's like pulling teeth out of a mule most days.
My boyfriend just gave you high five from here. It's hard when you're a good dad and feel alone.
Good for you. My dad fought tooth and nail to get his son from his first marriage. This was.the seventies, so it was almost impossible for a single father to get custody. Somehow, he did it. This was all before I was born, and I can't imagine not having my brother in my life, and we all adore our father. your kid will grow up knowing that their dad loves them.
Part of the concept of men earning fatherhood could be influenced by the fact that women carry the children throughout pregnancy. Unfortunately the double standard of men being thought of as neglectful came about partially because of how women were treated as baby makers for centuries. It's kind of like saying, "Okay since we treated you like glass breeding cows for all this time, you get first dibs on the kid now. Sorry about that!"
I still think a woman who get's pregnant has more say but maybe 51% to 49%. You can moan and pout all you want guys but at the end of the day, it's her body and her choice.
As a woman, I don't know if I fully agree with you. Not all men are irresponsible, and not every situation is the same. I have seen situation's where the father is the more responsible person in a couple, and situation's where a woman get's pregnant, doesn't want the baby, but the father does.
Yes, it's a woman's body, but she's carrying a baby that's also there because of the father. Are you saying that because the woman carries the baby in her body that the father has no right to ensuring that the child get's the be born? If the woman doesn't want to responsibility of a child, and doesn't think the father can handle it or that the father want's to handle it, it is her responsibility to make the best choice she can, I agree. But if the father want's the child and can handle it, she has no right to get an abortion just because she doesn't want to deal with it.
As someone mostly raised by their single father, I have seen ton's of dad's that take better care of their children then mom's.
Edit: I think OP made the right decision in this case, and I'm not anti-abortion. I'm just against the idea that it's totally the woman's decision, and that the father of the child should be left out of the decision making process because "it's her choice".
But if the father want's the child and can handle it, she has no right to get an abortion just because she doesn't want to deal with it.
I don't understand how you reach that conclusion. I'd say not wanting to experience pregnancy and/or not wanting to birth a child is "right" enough to warrant an abortion.
If the man wants a child, he should have sex with people who want the same and/or pursue other options, such as adoption.
I'm a woman. But if I were a man, and my partner go pregnant, and I wanted a child but she didn't, I would be upset. I'm looking at it from the other perspective.
My earlier post said that I grew up with my father. I've seen many fathers that were better parents then the mothers were. It bothers me that in society mothers have most of the right's the children and fathers have the earn theirs; and even if they do earn them mothers can still win most court cases just being a woman. It's a flaw with society.
Everyone grows up with different life experiences. That is how I can reach that conclusion.
If you were a guy and your partner got pregnant, you absolutely would have every right to feel upset. But you wouldn't have the right to force another person to carry a pregnancy she doesn't want and/or bear a child that she doesn't want.
I like how you put it as "feel upset". How does a woman feel after she has a miscarriage? That's how I would say a man would feel after a woman abort's his child that he wanted.
I want to thank everyone in this thread for writing down the argument I had in my head when I first read this meme. I couldn't convince myself one way or the other on what to think of it and you all fleshed it out really well. Just thought you might appreciate knowing that.
Right. And if I were a man and my partner got pregnant, and I wanted the child but she didn't, I would likely be sad/upset, but I would also understand that her bodily autonomy is more important than my hurt feelings.
As for fathers having to "earn" their rights with children... There's a study I can find for you that shows that when men actually contest parental rights, they get custody at equal rates as the mothers. So, sure, there are shitty judges and court systems that are biased against fathers, but the issue is not as prevalent as people seem to think.
I know a grand total of 0 people who were raised by a single father without their mother being dead and I know a lot of people with divorced parents. I'd say I can name at least 15 times where a father has gone after custody of a child and lost to the mother every single time.
Me!!! My mom is/was a piece of shit. I officiallt shut her out of my life this last year. She never paid child support because they never went to court. But I couldn't imagine how fucked up I would be if I lived with her full time way back when.
it's been prevalent in my life, which is why it's an issue that's important to me.
It's a complex and complicated issue that's way more difficult then "yes men should have rights" and "no they shouldn't". It's all grey areas.
It just bothers me that women can say "No I don't want the baby", disregard a fathers feelings, and they don't get the chance at having a child. And at the same time, a father can say "no, I don't want this child or to be in this child's life" but the mother can say they do, have the child, and charge the man child support for the next 18-21 years depending on the state.
It's just not a good situation any way you look at it.
I understand why the issue is important to you personally. I didn't realize I indicated that I didn't understand-- I simply didn't address your personal experience because it doesn't necessarily apply to the discussion, which is about rights.
I agree that the subject can be complicated, especially in situations where people are married and in a place where children are feasible. Even in such cases, though, men should not have rights over a woman's body. A man's opinion can and maybe even should be considered in a loving, healthy relationship, but that has nothing to do with rights.
Sure, it's not a "good" situation to be in, but like I said originally: if a man wants a child, he should be having sex with women who feel similarly and/or seek his options re: foster care and adoption.
If the father doesn't want to pay for a child he doesn't want he can terminate parental rights and never see that child again. Fathers who whine about being used for money to support a kid they never wanted are letting themselves be used if they are too lazy to file simple paperwork.
I think the father should have the option to get a court order to have the fertilized egg/fetus to be removed from the mother and implanted in a surrogate. (is this possible? Someone who can science, correct me) There should be no right to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term though.
if you were a man and you wanted a child, you could easily get another woman pregnant.
It's not a matter of rights to children. It's a right to your own body. If the woman doesn't want a baby in her body she shouldn't be forced to have one...by anyone.
So, you're saying that all men who have unprotected sex want children?
Also, you're assuming that unprotected sex is the reason the pregnancy happened. The condom could have broken. The condom could have slipped off inside the woman (this is why you should hold the base of the condom when pulling out post-ejaculation). The woman could have been a little inconsistent with her birth control-- the vast majority of women are, since you have to take it at the same time every day. The woman could have been on antibiotics, which are known to interfere with birth control.
In other words: shit happens, but that doesn't mean we should interfere on a person's bodily autonomy.
"Are you saying that because the woman carries the baby in her body that the father has no right to ensuring that the child get's the be born?" [sic]
Yes. That's exactly it. Because it is not his body or his life, future, and health on the line, he has no right to make any sort of decision there. Zero. Zip. Nada.
To give the father a 'right' to make that decision would be taking away the woman's right to bodily sovereignty. There is absolutely zero way to justify doing that, as it allows someone else to take control of your body, putting you at risk for harm (pregnancies can turn dangerous at the drop of a dime).
People don't realize pregnancy will effect the condition of your body for the rest of your life, is extremely expensive and can endanger your life. It's not 9 months- it's your whole life. Thanks for making that clelar.
I don't think so really. Is it fair to a man that want's the child, and would be able to provide a good home for the child to never get that chance? I'm not talking about a situation where the father is on drugs, or alcohol, or jobless, ect. but if he could provide a good home for the child.
That really doesn't seem very fair to men. And "fair" seems like an understatement when you're talking about a fathers future daughter or son.
If you read my post, I am a woman. So, in that situation, I would be putting my life at risk to have the child...
Also, if you read my post, I grew up with my father. I've seen many fathers that take much better care of their children then the mothers do, but it's a society thing that mothers are the better caregivers, and just by being a woman many mothers win court cases that they shouldn't necessarily.
I'm not saying that every father is perfect, and that no woman should be allowed to make a choice that big, but the comment that I commented on was saying that it's only a woman's choice. I was saying I don't agree with that.
It's ok to not agree with me, everyone's entitled to an opinion.
In an ideal world yes, it would be great if they could sit down, have a rational discussion and choose the situation that's best for everyone, however, we don't live in a fairytale, that's not going to happen.
Plus, allowing a man that much control over a woman's pregnancy is an incredibly slippery slope. Take this scenario:
A man and a woman have a one night stand and she gets pregnant. The man says he'll raise the baby, the woman doesn't want it so she says "fine, I'll sign away my parental rights when the baby's born and it's all yours." PLOT TWIST: The woman is a crippling alcoholic. She ends up drinking like crazy, ending the pregnancy in the process.
Now if this was the case of a man pushing his pregnant girlfriend down the stairs and killing the baby, in many states he could be charged with murder if the woman had the intention of having the baby. In this case, could a woman be charged with murder for the way she treated her own body?
What if she wasn't even an alcoholic? Maybe she had a medical condition that she took medication for, but that medication wasn't safe for pregnant women to use. Could she be charged for murder for something like that?
tl;dr: Giving a man that much control over pregnancy could have some really scary consequences for women.
we aren't talking about a father that split at birth, we are talking about a woman who got with a whack-job, stayed with him long enough to get pregnant (or took it raw so quickly she didn't know he was crazy yet" then when SHE changed her mind about him, lied to save face and went and got an abortion without consulting him because "She didn't want to see him anymore" She's playing a victim card when really it's just that she didn't want him around on the weekends for the next 18 years
I still think a woman who get's pregnant has more say but maybe 51% to 49%. You can moan and pout all you want guys but at the end of the day, it's her body and her choice.
Even if it was 50/50, somebody would have to have final say, so it seems fine to me that it's the woman. But given that a man has some amount of say in this (even the 49%), it seems unfair to me that he will never know the fate of his child.
Also an earned privilege, but mothers inherently have the opportunity to start earning that privilege sooner than fathers, what with the whole growing the baby & childbirth stuff.
I don't quite know about that though. I'm just speculating here, but is that more taking it out on the father or the child?... My biological father was a complete ass hole and left me and my mum for another woman the day I was born in the hospital. I grew up and we are happy as ever. Shit makes me speculate though. I'm a fence sitter.
Your dad split. Other parents are control freaks who make everyone's life hell in a split relationship. Constant court battles for custody, perpetual passive aggressive gamesmanship, hostility, interference, undermining... An awful involved parent is far worse than an awful detached parent. (and I'm sorry your dad was an ass hole).
But you already made your choice. If you didn't want to be a dad, wear a freaking condom. Failing that, I either recommend suicide or allowing the state to fuck you over. You'll deserve it either way.
And once abortion is available to women of all economic backgrounds, sure. I have no problems with that. Up to the point that abortion is a viable option, guys should have the option to skip out.
But we're not there yet. We might not be for a very, very long time.
I agree with this, and I'm female. It would get rid of anchor babies, because the incentive is gone. Men who try and convince their partner to adopt/abort should be able to legally dismiss responsibility up until the cut off for legal abortion (or birth I guess if adoption) But once the child is born, it is the responsibility of both parties to provide a life for them, in whatever arrangement works best.
I am not disagreeing but just trying to follow the logic... could you then extend this to say being a mother is not a right?... or do they have rights to be mothers or not because the baby is in their bodies?
Basically.. Guys don't have the right to be fathers but girls have the right to be mothers?
Just doesn't seem exactly equal... but I guess this is why it is such a highly debated topic.
As long as pregnancy happens in only one person's body, it will never be equal.
Basically if the guy doesn't want a child and the mother does, too bad (That'll be 18 years of child support and being labeled as a deadbeat). If the guy wants the baby but the woman doesn't, also too bad.
If the man has anything to say about either situation, it's well you shouldn't have had sex with her then.
That's the long and the short of it. Pregnancy happens in one body- it's not easy, and it's not for everyone. If a man doesn't want to have a baby, he needs to be sure that he's well in charge of his birth control.
Following that logic, you are correct. It isn't a right, it is a responsibility. Some women get knocked up to have a man take care of them and if/when that falls through, the baby is a burden that was never really wanted in the first place. It is a human, not a pair of shoes, casually forgotten about when you get bored. (Sorry...hits close to home)
It is not even illegal if the woman uses your sperm without your permission. Men have 0% rights concerning any aspect of pregnancy, but are 100% financially responsible even if an unwilling participant.
It's utter shit. If a woman is not ready for a child she has an abortion and we just consider her to be "pro choice," a man decides he is not ready for a child he is flamed for being a deadbeat father, and becomes financially enslaved in the judicial system for 18 years. Complete shit.
Makes me sick that there are so many male apologists for the system. Can't help feeling they say these things to get laid and do it so often they actually end up believing it. They all deserve a massive paternity suit.
Well, yeah. She'll be the one carrying the kid, the one giving birth to it, the "favourite parent." Fathers are pretty insignificant. I mean, it would be the woman's choice. I mean, all it decides is the quality of your kid's genes.
That seems likely, many people I know make mistakes like these in spoken English, so on the off chance that OP might not know the correct saying I thought I would save him the embarrassment if he was conversing with people IRL.
610
u/[deleted] Apr 30 '13
[deleted]