From a Jezebel post on Kourtney Kardashian deciding not to have an abortion:
And it’s never the time for a man to “push” his girlfriend into either a pregnancy or an abortion.
Okay, “push” may be the operative word here, but it seems to me like this says a man never has any role in the abortion issue. Yes, it is the woman’s body, and she has the ultimate decision, but it seems to me that in the average situation the man should have some input. He should be able to at least make his case to the woman about what he feels should happen. It is, after all, partly his doing.
Partly his doing, OK, but whether we’re talking childcare or abortion, dealing with material consequences of pregnancy land overwhelmingly on the woman. Dudes can make their case all they want, but women are not obliged to listen to them.
Push is definitely the operative word. No pushing!
Input, yes
Decision making power? No.
unless the man has devised a method of carrying the child himself.
If you’re in a relationship with the girl, a calm conversation should happen so you know what’s going to happen. But no, you don’t have any role in the ultimate decision the woman makes.
Of course the man has a role in the decision. Does he want the child? If so, is he willing and able to support her and the child, financially, emotionally, and physically?
And of course she’s not obliged to listen to him. However, if it is a healthy relationship then I would hope that they would listen to each other before a decision is made.
No role?
His role is to pay for whatever.
The man’s role is going to vary with the relationship. Input is a very slippery way of saying control. I think it’s got to be the woman’s call all the way.
ideally, if it’s a relatively healthy relationship the two might find themselves in than the woman would be open to at least hearing the mans views. But in no way does that man have a right to be heard. He doesnt even have a right to be informed of it.
Indeed, if the man and woman in question were in anything less than a healthy relationship, I would encourage her to not inform of the situation at al, until after her mind has been made up either way.
Chris Rock covered this issue:
The Abortion Issue (NSFW)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjW4i67YC04&feature=PlayList&p=8852BB991DBC2007&index=8
He should be able to at least make his case to the woman about what he feels should happen.
As far as I know, there’s no law preventing a man from doing that.
Men: it’s her body, her decision. Don’t like it? Then keep your dick in your pants.
Well, the right to have an abortion is predicated on the health issue. If women didn’t undergo a significant physical burden and significant risk during pregnancy, the right to an abortion would rest on shakier ground.
So, in that sense, legally speaking, a man shouldn’t have any say.
In the human sense, yes, a man should have some role in making the decision in a healthy relationship, if there’s *any* chance the woman might want to continue the pregnancy. (If there’s simply no chance she’ll want to continue, then his input is moot. Philosophers can argue about whether it’s appropriate for him to be told beforehand or not.)
But I intentionally chose to use a question begging term like “healthy relationship”. If she’s unwilling to discuss the issue with him, when there’s a chance his input might matter, doesn’t that show there’s something wrong with the relationship?
(NB: it could be that there’s something wrong with one member of the relationship… but that obviously has an effect on the overall health of the relationship.)
If you fuck a woman and she gets pregnant, whatever she says goes. If you don’t like it, guess what? Fucked the wrong woman.
Did Wilbur just promote abstinence?
No, Wilbur just promoted taking responsibility for one’s dick, which is a very different thing from abstinence-only.
“he doesn’t even have a right to be informed of it”
–Wait, what? You’re basically arguing that a woman has a right to deprive a man of any parental rights whatsoever. This seems a bit extreme to me. Get pregnant by a guy, have the kid without disclosing the identity of the father, and the father never knows and never has an opportunity to form a relationship with his child.
I agree the father has no legal right to be informed of the pregnancy, but his moral right to be so informed, absent some indication of an abusive nature or other disqualifier, seems pretty absolute and clear cut to me.
Fixed!
Uh, we’re talking about not having to tell the father you’re planning on having an abortion (or not) until it’s too late for him, if he takes the news badly, to do anything about it.
We’re NOT talking about whether she ought to keep him in the dark forever.
It’s still not all that ethically “clean” to keep the guy in the dark until it’s too late for him to have any input on the decision whether to terminate the pregnancy. In addition to “if you don’t like it, keep your dick in your pants”, how about “if you don’t think you’d be comfortable telling this guy he knocked you up and now you’re getting an abortion, don’t sleep with him”?
Fine Wilbur, but I would ask why the same responsibility-taking doesn’t also extend to the woman: Don’t like pregnancy? Then keep your
dickVoodoo Punanny in your pants.Or, shorter version, “if this isn’t a guy you’d feel ok discussing an abortion decision with, either don’t sleep with him, or make 1000% certain your protection is working when you do.”
That’s good advice too, SF, but doesn’t change the fact that it’s her body and her choice. By choosing to engage in sex a woman does not cede control of what goes on beneath her skin to anyone else.
It does my heart good to hear you caring and compassionate liberals making a case against child support.
Let’s say we start with the elimination of withholding Income Tax Refunds from putative Dads. It IS none of their business, right?
And, Wilbur, she can keep her legs closed , and avoid the issue that way.
It’s her decision all the way, eh? And when she’s your wife, and you’re the father, who changes the baby and feeds it in the middle of the night? NOW?
You guys sound ridiculous – and like none of you have ever had children.
“It’s her body, and her choice”
And a baby dies — so selfish, it makes my skin crawl. You should be ashamed, were it possible.
And a baby dies — so selfish, it makes my skin crawl. You should be ashamed, were it possible.
I like my babies like Frank’s brain: single-celled, or potentially undifferentiated.
(This is a reference to the fact that an early embryo is a mass of undifferentiated cells, for which there is no basis for granting the title “baby”.)
Let’s say we start with the elimination of withholding Income Tax Refunds from putative Dads. It IS none of their business, right?
No, the baby’s welfare is as much their responsibility as it is the mother’s, but it is still the mother’s decision whether she will subject herself to the threats and pains of pregnancy. If a woman chooses to bear a child then refuses to contribute to his/her care and upkeep then her wages should be garnished as well.
If men were able to get pregnant I’d also insist that it was absolutely their choice whether to carry babies to term. Who knows? Maybe someday they will.
And, Wilbur, she can keep her legs closed , and avoid the issue that way.
Yes she can, but if she doesn’t she still retains all the rights over what goes on in her body that she was endowed by her creator with.
It’s her decision all the way, eh?
Up until the point that the baby is born, absolutely.
And when she’s your wife, and you’re the father, who changes the baby and feeds it in the middle of the night? NOW?
Golly, Frank, what’s your damage? After the baby is born, both parents should participate in its care, but that does not effect whether the woman is the decider when it comes to bearing the child to term.
You guys sound ridiculous – and like none of you have ever had children.
Hate to get personal, but you started it – you sound like someone whose children hate him.
And a baby dies — so selfish, it makes my skin crawl.
I wish your compassion for the unborn extended to the born. But like many right-wingers you fetishize the fetus to give yourselves moral cover for pursuing the most blatently self-interested polices, ones that promote war, poverty, and despoliation of the environment, in the process condemning millions of _born_ homo sapiens to miserable deaths.
SaveFarris: Fine Wilbur, but I would ask why the same responsibility-taking doesn’t also extend to the woman: Don’t like pregnancy? Then keep your
dickVoodoo Punanny in your pants.Oh, god. I’m agreeing with Farris.
(And who are these four guys on horses riding up the road?)
Frank DiSalle: “It’s her body, and her choice”
And a baby dies
Because choice always equals abortion.
Wingnut logic, ladies and gents.
Wilber, I Love You…..will you marry me?
Thanks Connie, but you’ll have to talk to my clan chief, and bring lots of cows.