Financial abortion
- Thread starter Tsuyu
- Start date
That was more a general statement on how because of the woman is the one to, well, get pregnant, she is granted leverage over the man in today's society.
Well, any society that is civilized that is.
Well, any society that is civilized that is.
No. I do not agree with that viewpoint.
I'm saying that abortion is not a cold and objective decision made - there is a great deal of emotion involved, one way or the other, hence all the raging you get on talkshows and in debates about the topic. Because I don't think there are many people out there who have never once given much thought to an abortion at some point when it's affected them - it may not be at the time but eventually, it hits people. How can it not?
To discuss whether the man has the "right" to abort like the woman does cannot exclude certain factors such as these. The subject is too complicated to make it a simple black and white thing.
Just my opinion, of course.
Just like there are women who take abortion lightly, there are men who would take financial abortion lightly. However, just as there are women who take actual abortion seriously, there are men who would take financial abortion seriously and have a hard time making a decision.
Or are we all douchebags who'd take the first opportunity we can to abandon her without a second thought?
Or are we all douchebags who'd take the first opportunity we can to abandon her without a second thought?
I think we're missing each other here - I'm not talking about people who these take things lightly. I'm talking about how I personally do not think the two are comparable enough for me to consider them as such.
And does it matter when both the father and mother are bound by the same obligations and responsibilities when the child plops out?
I feel like I am repeating myself here...
In the Western world the father is just assumed to fall into the father role. Else he is a deadbeat, good-for-nothing dad. He has no choice once the bun is in the oven; it is all on the mother's plate at that point. Now, irregardless of individual view on abortion, most countries allow it so for the sake of this discussion we have to consider it an valid way for the mother to opt out. The father is, at a lack of better words, at the mercy of the mother because he can't force her to an abortion and unless she undergoes one the child is of course born - with him as the father.
If we as a society has elected to allow mothers to opt out, either via the morning after pill or an abortion, the same choice should be extended to the father.
In the Western world the father is just assumed to fall into the father role. Else he is a deadbeat, good-for-nothing dad. He has no choice once the bun is in the oven; it is all on the mother's plate at that point. Now, irregardless of individual view on abortion, most countries allow it so for the sake of this discussion we have to consider it an valid way for the mother to opt out. The father is, at a lack of better words, at the mercy of the mother because he can't force her to an abortion and unless she undergoes one the child is of course born - with him as the father.
If we as a society has elected to allow mothers to opt out, either via the morning after pill or an abortion, the same choice should be extended to the father.
Because you're against "regular" abortion?
Then that's cool, because I wouldn't expect nor make any demands of you to be for it.
However, if one was to support "regular" abortion and oppose this.... Hm...
Then that's cool, because I wouldn't expect nor make any demands of you to be for it.
However, if one was to support "regular" abortion and oppose this.... Hm...
I am against abortion although I'm with Tyloric on this and would never judge a person for having one. I am against the whole emerging culture of "blame someone else" that has infected the Western world in recent years - we're got a myriad of ways to get out of our responsibilities and then bemoan the fact that "kids today are such so and so's" or they "have no sense of obligation/morality/responsibility".
Life isn't always easy and things happen to make it harder sometimes - you can either face up to it or lay the blame at someone else's door and run away. But that's an entirely different discussion and I don't want to derail this into something else.
I suppose I can kind of see the comparison however I would wonder whether the father's "right" to abort would place a further strain on a fragile economy because if the mother chooses to keep a baby, who is going to afford it? We don't all have stellar careers with tonnes of childcare and loads of cash - would the state be therefore paying for the man to exercise his right to financially abort and the woman's right to have her child?
Life isn't always easy and things happen to make it harder sometimes - you can either face up to it or lay the blame at someone else's door and run away. But that's an entirely different discussion and I don't want to derail this into something else.
I suppose I can kind of see the comparison however I would wonder whether the father's "right" to abort would place a further strain on a fragile economy because if the mother chooses to keep a baby, who is going to afford it? We don't all have stellar careers with tonnes of childcare and loads of cash - would the state be therefore paying for the man to exercise his right to financially abort and the woman's right to have her child?
That's something the mother should've thought of, innit?
"Can I support a child?"
I feel dirty for saying this, because it is cliché answer often used by "the other side" when I get in these sort of discussion, but "There's always adoption".
"Can I support a child?"
I feel dirty for saying this, because it is cliché answer often used by "the other side" when I get in these sort of discussion, but "There's always adoption".
However, financial abortion wouldn't create equal rights anyway.
Assuming the father doesn't want the child:
The mother - no child or single parent
The father - no child or no obligation
I understand what you're saying because it's the most usual thought after "oh shizzle what do I do now??" That's when sometimes instincts, morals, personal values etc can come into play and whether a baby is financially viable or not, the decision to continue with a pregnancy overrides the practical.
Even with the best of intentions, a pregnancy can happen. Similarly, the woman can be financially fine and then things can happen which are beyond her control and she can no longer afford the costs of a child - but it could be too late by then.
Adoption is a hard decision to make and not without its own stigma attached. It's why I always say there is no such thing as an easy option in unplanned pregnancy/unwanted pregnancy - unless you are one of the lucky few (and I mean few) who get no effects from being pregnant, everything is as it was before and you just get fatter, you are likely to develop some very strong feelings one way or the other during pregnancy. And with the hormone changes, you are more affected by your emotions than you would normally be and therefore not in a particularly good place to make serious decisions.
When I was pregnant by accident with Jessica, I hated it. I hated her. I hated my crap life and how everything was racing out of control. The only reason I did not abort was because I was too afraid to and figured I'd be able to reach some sort of resolve once it was time to give birth. I had her and hated her on sight. I didn't want anything to do with her but something - call it what you like - prevented me from signing on the dotted line to give her to someone else. It makes no sense, I know, but that's just how it was. I didn't love her - or even like her - until she was about 2 years old (but that's a whole 'nother story).
I remember talking about it with another mother at a centre I used to have to attend when J was small and she put it like this, "I don't want my baby but I don't want anyone else to have her either. Why? I don't know - I guess I don't want someone else to have the good stuff when I've gone through all the crap parts for no reason. I might love her one day and I don't want to regret that". I'll admit that sounds a bit off but it made perfect sense to me at the time.
Also, kids are effing expensive beggars regardless of whether you have the cash or not - I can't recall the current stats but if you looked at them, you'd never have kids at all because it seems so financially impossible unless you're a bajillionaire.
I do think that regular abortion and financial abortion are comparable, and I understand that Tsuyu is saying that if the woman can opt out against the man's will, then the man should be able to do the same. That does make sense, but let's look at it from a different angle. I don't think the woman should always just be able to get an abortion against the man's will, and if that were to be the way things worked, the man shouldn't always have the right to financially abort the baby against the woman's will.
I don't know how it works in other countries but to my knowledge here in the UK, if a woman wants to claim benefits as a single parent she either has to consent to the CSA locating the father and trying to get money out of him, give a very good reason why the father should not be involved or take a dock in benefit pay. I have no idea if this system actually works because I got out of it by having several professionals add to my case that Jessica's father wasn't to be contacted for safety reasons...but the CSA is well-known to be one almighty screw-up of an invention anyway. There is also the case of when a couple split but agree privately on how they will handle the finances without getting anyone else involved - because many don't declare this amount but still claim full benefits as a single parent, you then get the issue of taking more from the social pot than is required or risk losing a chunk if you come clean and own up.
On the subject of the man's involvement with the decision to abort a baby - I think that the whole idea of how "it should just be the woman's choice" is something that needs reviewing. Whilst it seems the less controversial option to say it's up to the woman, it doesn't necessarily make it right or fair. Yes, it's her body but the baby could be growing in a toaster and still belong just as much to the man. Sometimes I feel we spend too much time demanding our "rights" and less time acknowledging our responsibilities.
On the subject of the man's involvement with the decision to abort a baby - I think that the whole idea of how "it should just be the woman's choice" is something that needs reviewing. Whilst it seems the less controversial option to say it's up to the woman, it doesn't necessarily make it right or fair. Yes, it's her body but the baby could be growing in a toaster and still belong just as much to the man. Sometimes I feel we spend too much time demanding our "rights" and less time acknowledging our responsibilities.
Skotekal
Sheeple President
Apparently you can still get a girl pregnant through anal sex, at least that's what they told me in sex ed class.
..Unless the semen somehow leaves from the anus and into the vagina, there's no possible way for that to happen.
Anyway, lets try to keep on topic please.