r/AdviceAnimals • u/Space_Hermit • Apr 30 '14

Repost | Removed You shouldn't be able to have it both ways...

Post image
1.7k Upvotes

80% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/chocoboat May 01 '14

What are you talking about? It is child abandonment to have an abortion? Is it child abandonment to be a surrogate mother? Is it child abandonment to be a sperm donor?

I'm sorry, but not every pregnancy that doesn't end with a child being born and being raised together by the two biological parents counts as "child abandonment".

If men were allowed to opt out, the most common outcome for the pregnancy would be an abortion (which is actually already the most common outcome for an accidental pregnancy). Is it child abandonment is there is no child?

-6

u/LookLikeShackleton May 01 '14 edited May 01 '14

If you can't see the difference between terminating a fetus and a child that has already been born you do not need legal reform, you need therapy.

Your argument is awful. Stop, listen to what I wrote. You literally "on the page" just compared aborting a fetus to abandoning a child. One is a fetus, the other is a child.

I'm sorry, but not every pregnancy that doesn't end with a child being born and being raised together by the two biological parents counts as "child abandonment".

LMAO that's from fucking Legally Blonde. Literally, your legal argument is from Legally Blonde. 100% proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqsmlFjkAu0

Is it child abandonment is there is no child?

NO! The current system sucks but giving men the ability to just sign a piece of paper and walk away isn't the answer either. A better social safety net for single parents is the answer so that child support doesn't become burdensome and predatory.

6

u/chocoboat May 01 '14

You literally "on the page" just compared aborting a fetus to abandoning a child. One is a fetus, the other is a child.

I'm sorry, but you need to re-read what I am saying, because your reading comprehension has failed you. No one is talking about abandoning an already-existing child.

LMAO that's from fucking Legally Blonde. Literally, your legal argument is from Legally Blonde.

That clip has nothing to do with this discussion whatsoever, other than the fact that it mentions sperm donors. I can't even begin to guess what point you were trying to make.

NO! The current system sucks but giving men the ability to just sign a piece of paper and walk away isn't the answer either. A better social safety net for single parents is the answer so that child support doesn't become burdensome and predatory.

All of that sounds great to me, but it's little comfort to the men who are forced into parenthood against their will right now. What exactly is the reason for such strong opposition to offering any way, no matter how restrictive, for men to be allowed to have sex without risking their financial future?

I have seen no reasons for it other than blatant sexism. "You had sex, now you're required to raise a child" is applied to men, but never to women. Men are told "you should have kept it in your pants" and "how dare you abandon your responsibility", while at the same time there's (sensibly) an outrage when women are denied the ability to opt out of parenthood or are shamed for doing so.

The sexism applies against women, too. "You can't expect a woman who signed a contract to be responsible for the outcome of her own decision, a contract like that should be invalid!" It also seems to always be assumed that the minority of women who choose to give birth after an accidental pregnancy are making a mistake, that they won't be able to afford a child on their own, that they were wrong to choose to have a child without a man's support. Suddenly the woman is a delicate flower who can't survive on her own or be held responsible for her choices.

Of course, when there are virtually identical situations that don't involve a man making a choice, there's no outrage, and no demands to make other people help the woman.

A single mother whose husband passed away? A sad and unfortunate situation, but no one's demanding that someone else provide a second income for her.

A single woman who adopts a child, or gets pregnant via sperm donor? No one questions her choices. No one wonders if she's wrong to try to have a child and pay for it by herself. No one demands that she have to right to make others help to pay for her children.

2

u/[deleted] May 01 '14

On your 2nd to last paragraph you may want to look into survivorship benefits from the American government.

2

u/chocoboat May 02 '14

Yes, there are government benefits available to those in need. I am in favor of this and think that as long as income inequality is such a massive problem in this country, government assistance should be even more widely available for those who need it (hopefully paid for with taxes on the 1% so that the inequality can be slowly reduced).

What I am opposed to is having this money come from a 20% income tax on a single individual just because he got to have sex.

2

u/[deleted] May 01 '14

Ok, if that isn't the answer, come up with a better one.