the seahorse is the only male animal that gets knocked up
Dear Em & Lo,
The way I see it, there is simply no such concept as male reproductive rights. If your girl gets pregnant and wants to keep the baby, congratulations, you’re a dad! Pay up, sucker. If you want to keep it but she wants to abort it, tough luck — there goes your progeny. The only thing a dude can do is rubber up and screen for sexual partners with similar values.
We get it, the baby’s growing in the woman’s body, and ownership is 9/10ths of the law. But come on, now. There’s got to be some kind of reasonable compromise. I don’t have an easy answer to this, and I doubt anyone else will either. Men will continue to get a raw deal here. But could you open the topic to discussion?
— Cat Amongst the Pigeons
Consider it done! What do you think, do we need male reproductive rights? And if so, what would they be? Let the debate begin (no throwing things, please) in the comments section below.
I like a lot of what Spes and Nawny have said. I don’t think anyone except the pregnant woman should have any say in whether or not the child is carried to term. As Nawny said, “…the fetus is in the woman’s body. She is the only one that can consent to pregnancy.”
When it comes to parenting, if the child is carried to term, both parents should have equal say. And I do think paying child support is fair if one parent chooses not to be an equal participant in caring for the child.
I agree with Nawny that there should be more options for male birth control. Also, as Spes said in the first comment, if you can have an STD talk with your partner (which you should!), you can have a talk about accidental pregnancy too. If you don’t like what they would do in that situation, you might want to reconsider having sex with them. (but also keep in mind that they could change their mind if the situation actually happened…there’s no guarantee)
FWIW, I’m a woman, and I consider myself a feminist.
I think women already get two choices:
1) Do I consent to pregnancy?
No? Abort, the sooner the better.
Yes? Carry the fetus to full-term and birth.
2) Do I consent to parenting?
No? See if father wants to be a single dad. If he also says no, see if other family members want baby. If not, offer baby up for adoption.
I don’t think men should have any kind of rights over the first question women answer — the fetus is in the woman’s body. She is the only one that can consent to pregnancy.
It seems simply reasonable that men should have the same choice that women do in regards to question two… Assuming that the woman wants to carry the fetus to term, then the man should have the right to answer this question:
Do I consent to parenting?
No? See if mother wants to be a single mom. If she also says no, see if other family members want baby. If not, offer baby up for adoption.
As it stands now, men have far, far fewer choices regarding contraceptives than women do (permanent vasectomy or error-prone condoms). They have very little legal say in what happens with their genetic material once it leaves their body. It seems to me that we, as a culture, have gone from vilifying women who have sex (pregnancy and maternity as punishment!) to vilifying men who have sex (paternity as punishment!).
We need to keep pushing. We need more options for male birth control. We need to see paternity as a bigger issue than child support.
Thank you, ms.
I concur, especially with the part about a father being able to have the child with little trouble, and paperwork, if the mother doesn’t want it. Also, I think it would be a good idea that if a woman wishes to be a part of the child’s life later, then she too, would have to take part of the responsibility for the child’s well-being.
However, a man should not be able to force a woman to carry a child to term, even if he’s willing to take full responsibility of said child after birth, if she’s not wanting to carry it. (Some women, and men too, just simply don’t want their genetic code moving into the next generation.) As you’ve said, it’s her body, she should have the right to control what’s done with it.
Spes – a lovely rebuttal.
I’d say that as soon as we’ve figured out a way to safely remove a viable fetus from a woman’s uterus and attach it to a man’s bladder or something, men can have all the reproductive rights they want. Until then, the still contentious battle for women’s reproductive right is more important.
Now, I do think that if a woman is morally opposed to abortion and wishes to carry the child to term but then intends to put it up for adoption, the male partner, if he so wishes, should have every opportunity to legally adopt his own kid with very little hassle; in this case, the mother might have the same sort of limited visitation privileges (and perhaps have to pay child support?) as a man would traditionally have – since we might as well treat both genders equally, as long as we’re talking about ideals.
Spes is absolutely right about some women not being able to tolerate birth control. I suffer from migraines and any combination method (pills, patch, Nuvaring) makes those migraines more frequent. My husband and I have agreed that we don’t want children but none of the options that are left seem to suit our situation. I’d love to have my tubes tied or have my husband get a vasectomy but since we’re both in our mid-20s it’s nearly impossible to find a doctor who would perform either procedure at this point. I’ve also been trying to convince doctors to let me try Mirena for years but since I’ve never had children they’ve all said no. We are responsible and try to make sure I don’t get pregnant but to say that we’re trying to get pregnant just because I’m not taking birth control is both ignorant and offensive.
As for the question at hand, I have to agree with the general consensus here. It’s difficult to give men reproductive rights without infringing upon women’s reproductive rights and since it’s her body that’s involved in a pregnancy her rights are ultimately more important. If anyone could come up with a solution that would protect both genders’ rights then I’d be all for it but I just don’t see a way to make that happen.
Men do have a working form of birth control-vasectomy and to a degree, condoms. Also, Polaris, chemical birth control is not 100%, just like condoms. According to your logic any man who doesn’t have a vasectomy and has sex with a female is trying to get a girl pregnant. Some women’s bodies don’t tolerate birth control (not a great percent but there are some). Putting all the responsibility on the female is not only wrong and unjust, but also more than a bit cowardly. It takes two to tango, so both parties have to exercise personal responsibility because they both have an equal part in conceiving a child.
Unfortunately, this thread seems to have digressed. How sad.
Maybe male PARENTAL rights would better describe the debate at hand, since a man’s “reproductive” work is complete upon ejaculation, and we all agree that legislating womens’ bodies is bad.
First what is frmale birth control for, women that do not wont to get pregnet so any women that is not using birth control is trying to get pregnet so there are no ooops and a condom is not a form of birth control read the package it states that rigth on it qnd you can still get her pergnet with one on. Untell men have a working form of birth control like women do men should not be held responecible. But as long as childern are worth money in the form of child support there are going to be women that use childern as income producing propity and have them for the money I know I am in mess myself right now and 75000 a year is nothing compaired to some women out the with child support and wefare checks. I know one women that has 12 childern and make over 200,000 dollars a year in child support and she is on goverment programs. P.S. There is a articel out there about how much we are spending on the war as compaired to our welfare system but i hope you have a good heart cause you will not believe it.
Hey, I sympathize with the OP, but let’s not forget that FEMALE reproductive rights are still under constant attack in this country. Just because Roe v Wade is still law does not mean that all women have access to safe and affordable abortions. Plan B is still routinely denied to women across the country, and there are plenty of members of Congress who would gladly make birth control illegal if they could (and in the meantime they just deny its funding it poor women). Abortion and female reproductive rights are on the line right now in the health care debate – it is imperative for all people who believe in choice to take action now before a bill is passed that doesn’t include funding for abortion and birth control. Once women truly have control over medical decisions involving their bodies, I will gladly donate time and effort to the cause of male reproductive rights.
You can argue for these quote “male reproductive rights” when they don’t involve taking over my body. not before. til then, uh, yeah, rubber up and screen for partners with your values. Nobody owes you 100% consequence free sex. get that through your head.
I am currently living this dillema (minus the alcohol, but plus her mental and emotional instability) through my boyfriend and his EX (girlfriend of only 6 months). HE fathered her 3rd illegitimate child. The first was with a boyfriend while he was in college and she was only 18. He did not want the baby and wanted to focus on his future. She did and had her first child. Since that time, he’s paid his dues but has nothing to do with his daughter. Just last year his new wife found where some of his check (as an Engineer) is going and was none too thrilled. The second illegitimate child was through a second boyfriend of a few months. He SAID he wanted to take care of her and her previous child but was not up to the task aside from having a decent steady paycheck to offer. And then we come to my current boyfriend. 6 years ago he briefly got involved with her and OOPS AGAIN. He does his part AND THEN SOME for his daughter and even then sometimes for the others because he’s the only one who gives a damn and she apparently cant’ get her personal life together! STOP THE INSANITY, people! I do put blame where it belongs. If my current boyfriend didn’t want children, he should have used a condom, but his EX…c’mon…three oops?? She has taken it to the bank and then some! she got her present job through the fact she is a single mom and has 3 seperate child support checks to give her a grand total yearly income of approx. $75,000 and lives in deluxe luxury apartments. Mean while she plays games in allowing my current boyfriend to see his daughter and always tries to rope the other 2 in so they have a father. She dates and screws (luckily she had her tubes tied after the third) and currently is in a court battle with her own mother where her sanity is (finally) under scrutiny.(I certainly have shortened this soap opera story for easier digestion). Maybe there is some justice and I just have yet to see it. For someone like me who doesn’t have children, this has been quite the eye-opener!
Oh, I certainly can agree with you, Johhny. There should be some sort of opt out clause for a man if a woman insists on having the baby against his wishes. If a woman knows that the father doesn’t want the child to be brought to term, and yet follows through with the pregnancy, then let her do so with the understanding that she has FULL responsibility for the child once it’s born, and he has no rights to the child AT ALL. If at a later date the father has a change of heart and wishes to see his child, then he should assume part of the responsibility for that child AT THAT POINT. I can’t honestly say that I would negatively judge a guy who didn’t want to have a baby, and the female didn’t care and so had it anyway, if he opts out of being a part of the child’s life–it wasn’t his choice. Sure, it’s his sperm, but at that point it’s not really his child. If the woman has a problem with this, then she should consider alternative options to carrying it to term.
However, I do NOT agree with a guy being a part of the child’s life, or getting the girl pregnant under false pretenses, and not taking responsibility for the child. I also don’t agree with a guy who doesn’t wear a condom and then when the girl gets pregnant refuses to help with the child.
Withdrawal doesn’t work; wrap it up or don’t jump in. And for the girls, condoms aren’t 100%, and neither is he, so take up some personal responsibility and have some form of backup birth control. Male reproductive rights don’t have to be an issue, if everyone does their part.
Alright, I’ll get off of my soap box now.
RE: the first comment
I think court injunctions forcing women to take one course of action or another with their bodies is obviously out of the question.
But once the kid is born, that’s where dads get screwed: sky-high child care, limited visitation rights, almost certainly no custody rights even if the mom is a total screw-up…
Maybe there should be a legal opt-out clause for dads who favor abortion and want nothing to do with the situation?
Of course, if such a choice existed, I would look down on and judge negatively guys who took it. Abandoning a kid is a shitty thing for a father to do. But so is selfishly having a kid in bad circumstances (no money, uninvolved dad, drunk screw-up mom…). I also judge mothers for that.
I think it may become dangerous confusing “male reproductive rights” with “the man has the say in the relationship.” Little can be done when the baby has not been born yet, because a woman does have a right over what happens to her body. But after the kid’s born? Often in this country, men are still put on the back-burner when it comes to rights to see their (knowingly conceived, and not from a sperm bank) children, or have much say in their lives. Just something else to think about; born progeny is as much a factor of reproduction as unborn progeny.
“The only thing a dude can do is rubber up and screen for sexual partners with similar values.”
Sounds about right (and really, shouldn’t that be the case anyway?).
Anything else would get too complicated and then the legal battles would begin in earnest. It cuts too close to restricting and censuring a woman’s rights over her body. Once a man can step in and have a court order her to keep a baby, then the next step is to have the court take over her health care and diet to ensure her a healthy unwanted baby. And from there one can look forward to legal suits against women who want to keep the baby, but the father doesn’t believe that she’s taking proper care of herself and therefore the baby and so wants to have greater influence over her medical care, and then it effects every pregnant woman. And let’s not forget the days of the coat hangers. Give a woman no choice, and she’s apt to feel she has no other recourse but to handle it herself. We might as well just become pretty brood mares.
Then of course there’s the flip side. She wants to have the baby and he doesn’t. So he runs to the court and suddenly she doesn’t have the right to refuse a medical treatment because she’s been ordered to have an abortion. Never mind that having an abortion puts her at risk of becoming sterile. Oh yeah, and also never mind that it is potentially fatal for the woman, as well. AND, maybe abortion is against her religion, so now they’re also stepping on her freedom of religion. And what a great country we would be!
I’m not saying it’s fair, but it certainly is one hell of slippery slope.
In truth I believe it should always be handled on a case by case basis between the two people involved. If we can have an STDs talk before having sex (which I should is a given) then why not add in a couple of extra lines about pregnancy. Surely if one is grown up enough to be having sex, one should be able to discuss it’s possible consequences in a similarly mature manner.
On a personal note: Abortion isn’t the only choice, just the best.