Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
network
network
All contents © Noisy Creek, Inc.
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Of the many arguments I've used to try to convince my oldest that condoms should be used 100% of the time (I'm thinking monogamy isn't happening), the very real possibility that he wouldn't have a say in the outcome of an unplanned pregnancy has been one thing that got through to him...I think.
I would have a heart attack... lol
DTMFA
Just my humble opinion, mind you.
I always find it amusing when people conflate "it's the woman's choice" with "the man has no input whatsoever". The two are not grammatically, morally or logically synonymous and so it's always interesting when people treat them as such.
"I wouldn't have asked for money or support of any kind; I would have told him solely because it would have felt wrong not to. " Well, to be fair, LW, it is far easier to hold that opinion before the child comes along. After that, with the many bills flowing in you would -- intelligently -- realize that child support is the need and right of the child, not the parent. I am vastly relieved that you dodged the bullet on this one.
Silly image aside, that's probably frighteningly close to the mentality of the anti-choicers.
I think guys should get the option to opt out - offer to pay for an abortion, and get out of child support by giving up any right to have any contact with the kid whatsoever.
Better yet - dudes, if you don't want kids get a vasectomy. If you aren't sure, make some donations to a sperm bank.
If I had made a habit of referring to either of my kids as "my wife's fetus" during her pregnancy, eventually someone, most likely my wife, would have punched me.
If you are referring to abstinence, please remember that women are raped every single day. They may have chosen to remain celibate, but if some asshole decides to take that choice away from them, they can still get pregnant.
So I hope she takes a lesson away from this: often when a guy says OK to "just being friends," that's only as long as you don't get wasted in his presence. It doesn't sound like she ever decided to have sex with him; it just kinda happened - he asked about birth control; she said the word "yes," and he pushed his penis inside her and came. Yay for being on birth control, but maybe try to tell the difference between friends and "friends", and only get wasted when you're around real friends.
Hey, bought this pack o' gum last night, and the person who rang it up totally had unibrow, and I didn't want to stare, but I couldn't help it, and now that person thinks I'm like totally the kind of person who stares at unibrows and thinks I'm thinking they're not like people and stuff. And it was because of the expression...furrowed...brow. I think I should handle this with a little "direct communication," dontcha think? I know it doesn't have anything to do with planned parenthood.
I think in situations where the guy is more involved - obviously a relationship, but also in fwb-type arrangements, hook-ups with friends etc, the right thing to do is to tell the guy and get his input.
Either way I think/hope NARAL should be fine with this - no one here (!) wants to turn this into a law...
No way. If you don't want to get stuck paying child support, don't do things that result in children.
And this? "If you don't want kids get a vasectomy. If you aren't sure, make some donations to a sperm bank."
No. If you aren't sure you want to be sterile for the rest of your life, don't have a vasectomy.
Danny,
Do you support the right of polygamists to marry the ones they love?
On your period?
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m283/…
What struck me was an idea that there don't seem to be clear indicators as to what constitutes classy these days for either laides or gentlemen. My personal standards are so out of sync with those of real people that I don't feel qualified to have an opinion.
She *wasn't* pregnant, so there's nothing to tell the guy. If she hadn't been on birth control - sure go ahead and tell him, because there's a level of personal responsibility there he should own. But if he asked and she answered truthfully, what would it accomplish? Quite frankly, this letter reads like she's trying to find a reason to make him talk to her again.
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/04/boo…
Seems to be a lot of women with that mindset in trailer parks and ghettos.
@45 The money she was talking about was to help her get an abortion. So, perhaps you are right. She should have thought about her developing fetus's right for her to get financial assistance from the guy she had sex with in helping her to abort it, had she actually had a developing fetus. But as she would have been able to get an abortion either way, it wouldn't have made any difference to the fetus, so it solely would have affected her finances and well being. So, why are you trying to make her feel like she is inappropriately bringing her ego into it, when she isn't? Perhaps you simply read the letter too quickly and skipped out on the reading comprehension part.
In terms of the guy's rights, as a man I always considered my opinion to be like that of a minority party without veto power. I do not have power to make the call, but I have rights to an opinion and to express that, letting it be considered.
-the $ and support were for the abortion, not the kid. Read it again guys.
See #2. Not exactly your question, but the right response.
I have lied about NOT being on birth control several times in order to instill a fear of impregnating me and therefore ensure proper condom use. Honesty is the best policy in a relationship, but harmless lies to protect oneself in a situation like that are priceless.
The same as him a CPOS
I dont think that women should feel under an obligation to tell a one night stand that they got pregnant and had an abortion, but I agree with Dan's reasons for why they should if they want.
I think the real lesson here is about using condoms and not letting yourself feel pressured into not using them, but I think the LW realises it was a very foolish mistake. I think it is very easy to be blase about an abortion, and it is great that it is an option, but it plays havoc with your body and can be very emotionally distressing. Also, if you freak out the next day why not get a morning after pill? In england you can walk into a chemist and buy one, often various organisations will even reimburse you for them. I know they are not good for you, but much better then a baby, or an abortion.
A situation like this - a drunken "one-thrust stand"? I don't see how he has any right to demand being informed, nor why she would have any obligation whatsoever to tell him, if she chose to have an abortion under these circumstances.
The "he's on the hook if she decides to have it, so he deserves some input if she decides not to" doesn't follow, any more than the idea that if he had driven drunk into the front of her house he'd have to pay to repair it, so he should have some input into what color she decides to paint it.
UGH!
What a shitty lover he'd make. Just saying...
Shouldn't that read that he's the guy who would be on the hook for child support payments after he impregnated you.
He doesn't have to have sex with her. There is no gun to his head. When having sex, no matter what protection you are using there is ALWAYS a chance that it will result in a pregnancy, and both parties are aware of that. His choice, was to risk that her birth control was effective. You roll the dice, you take your chances.
And what happens after that is her decision. You don't get to try to convince her, or badger her, or intimidate her. Her decision.
Have the abortion. And keep your mouth shut. What he doesn't know is better for both parties.
Let's be honest: guys don't give a shit about their semen and where it ends up (except if they have a specific fetish for facials, for instance, but that's a sexual concern, not a reproductive one). Suddenly, when it just happened to have collided with the woman's ovum, they go all batshit crazy if you try to "wipe it off", so to speak, because they have "rights" as a father. How hypocritical.
Well, if they have rights, they also have obligations, and this idiot obviously didn't care about that before his one thrust. "Are you on birth control?" means "I don't want to wear a condom but I don't want a baby from you either; that's all I care about, and if you get any diseases from me, that's your problem."
He stated clearly he didn't want the baby. He has no right to know whatever happened after that. Period.
But in this day and age, I find it sad to see that women still don't understand that condoms aren't only for contraception (I don't expect this kind of assholes who call themselves men to ever get it). Condoms are for protection. Against a whole bunch of unpleasant things. Use them. All the time. Have some self respect.
And if the guy reacts negatively in ANY WAY to condom use, DON'T HAVE SEX WITH HIM and get the fuck away from him ASAP, coz he's a total jerk. Period.
LW - if you ever find yourself in a backseat situation like this again, feel free to insist on a condom. They reduce sensation, and many guys who come early find that a condom helps them last longer. Not only will you no longer be the only one responsible for contraception, but you may even also get to enjoy a climax out of the deal.
Dan, is this from personal experience? Is there something you'd like to tell us?
And, no, this woman—who needs to stop berating herself, btw—does not need to tell a one-night stand about an abortion beforehand if knows she is definitely getting one. As Dan said, it is ultimately the woman's choice, so why put herself through the potential emotional harassment? What if the guy is a lunatic hypocritical fundie and makes her life hell for her choice? Just get the abortion, move on, tell him about it later (if you must) and vow to use a rubber forever after.
Men make their choice once they come inside a vagina; after that it's entirely up to the woman what she does with the pregnancy.
All this talk about how the guy gets no say because he chose to do the deed is crazy to me. The woman chose to have sex, too. Yet she has options. She can abort. She can have the baby and keep it. She can have the baby and give it up for adoption. If she decides to give it up for adoption, she can decide if the baby will ever get to know who she is or if she wants to be a part, however small, of the child's life.
The guy can decide which whiskey to drink himself into a stupor with while he waits for the mother to decide what the rest of his life is going to be like.
Assuming Barabara is a woman and not a logician, how odd is it that the two champions for the man's choice have uteri?
She can decide that she will not be a mother without deciding if she will carry the child to term.
To me, these are different decisions. I agree that the man shouldn't get any say in whether the woman carries the child to term because of the reasons you sited.
Once that decision is made, she gets to decide if she will raise the child and support it financially. The man does not get to make that decision. That seems unfair to me.
Seriously, this is something I learned from my father long before I became sexually active, and something I will pass onto my son: If you don't want to be a father -if you are not ready to accept the responsibility - then don't do something that has the potential to make you a father. It's that simple.
"-if you are not ready to accept the responsibility - then don't do something that has the potential to make you a father. It's that simple. "
Change the word "father" to the word "mother" and I've been given the exact same argument from people wanting to ban abortion and limit access to/education about birth control.
She has points in her favour and I'm not favourably inclined towards him, but I'd want to know how drunk he was before deciding where he lands on the Creep Scale. I can just see how someone turning an interlude that wouldn't use up a nickel on a parking meter into a full performance of the Ring Cycle might, if they were equally intoxicated, tilt the Sympathy Meter. But even if so, she still seems well rid of him.
But what entertains me about this is recalling the precept laid down by, of all people, Miss Marple's mother, that a true lady can neither be shocked nor surprised. I just cannot quite conjure a credible scene in which Miss Marple, after a glass or two too much of her damson gin or something suitable, found herself alone in the back of one of Inch's taxicabs with Canon Pennyfather when the two were swept up in a wave of unecclesiastical passion. At least there would be no need for any conversation about birth control.
If I don't stop now, I shall only end up plotting out Miss Marple's Secret Life - time to hit the green button.
Like the LW, I'm not a lady by Miss Marple's mother's standards (or, presumably, anyone's standards): I was definitely shocked and surprised when a NSA guy put it in my ass when I had told him half an hour earlier that was off the table. I didn't say no as it was happening, so it wasn't rape - that's what he tells himself.
LW had been clear (when sober) that she didn't want to have sex with him. He was not so very drunk, since he was thinking about birth control. She was enjoying making out; he took that as permission to have sex and put it in. LW never decided to have sex with him. He took the decision out of her hands by penetrating her. There was no time for "no," before he was inside her and coming. She had said no in the past, but she was making out with him, so all her "no"s from before, when she was sober, get erased. And me, I fully intended to have PIV sex with my date, so the fact that he went in a different hole, a hole I'd told him to stay out of -- well, that's just my bad luck. Getting drunk or naked while having holes is apparently an invitation to men to stick their dicks in whichever holes they choose.
If a man chooses not to use his options before he gets a woman pregnant, I don't think he should be permitted to escape his responsibilities. He had a chance; he blew it. It's in her hands now, as it should be, and if that means a lifetime of child support - for his child - then he should have thought of that before deciding to deposit his sperm into her vagina.
Ideally, women and men should arrive at consensus about the future of a pregnancy. I think anyone sane would agree that that's always the best case scenario.
If a well-argued case from the potential father were all it took to talk a woman out an abortion, she likely shouldn't have it. I know that when I had mine, nothing my mate could have said would have changed the rock-solid certainty I had in my gut.
When I chose to have a child a few years later, nothing could have convinced me to abort. Luckily, in both cases, we discussed it and my mate was on board.
Most pro-choicers aren't about women aborting fetuses that the men involved are desperate to raise.
Anyway, that said, thanks for supporting choice and promoting Planned Parenthood.
Kudos.
You say "I didn't say no as it was happening, so it wasn't rape - that's what he tells himself." I'm not quite getting what you are trying to say there. I'm not jumping all over you here, there is no reason to, and the act obviously disturbed you greatly. But your statements are all disjointed in the last few posts.
This was only our 2nd scene -- BDSM scenes between people who don't know each other well should not be renegotiated mid-scene, in character, especially when he told me to be quiet and didn't ask me to positively affirm that the change was okay. He says I could have safeworded or said no. The truth is that he showed piss-poor judgment. But then so did I, for playing hard with someone I didn't know. Not a situation for the law. I wasn't damaged, physically, though obviously there were emotional consequences, which I just spewed all over Slog.
My point, insofar as I had one, is that "legal consent" is not the only ethical question. The guy in the letter and the guy in my ass should have known better than to go where they went. Now, the LW and I should have known better too - we took risks and trusted people. But we pay the consequences for that, and as far as I can tell, the guys (in these 2 cases) don't.
I am content to accept your knowledge of how drunk LW's friend was or wasn't. I don't drink myself, and have only seen two people in a state of clear intoxication in my life - one of them being my mother - and not for at least twenty years.
Yes, I really do lead that sheltered an existence. Rip it if you like; I suppose I owe you one.
I do think what constitutes classy or a lady (or a gentleman for that matter, and it seems sufficiently incontrovertible that the LW's ex-friend is not) is a legitimate point of consideration, but I hesitated to raise it because I expected people to jump down my throat and assume I was victim-blaming CL for getting drunk (in public if the qualifier matters) or making out in a car with someone she'd put off limits. Actually, I recuse myself from opining on either of those points. I don't have sufficient life experience to pronounce and I don't live enough in the world to claim familiarity with whatever standards there might be. I'd be happy to accept any consensus that might emerge.
As far as that goes, one could perhaps make out a case that the concept of ladies and gentlemen is best restricted to Wimbledon as something that probably has more baggage than it has utility.
I am sorry to hear that your trust was violated. I had a couple of similar experiences, though rather less extreme.
(A) she's a lady and he's a rapist, or
(B) she's no lady, so she got what she was looking for.
Afraid that set me off; sorry for raising my voice.
My angle's a weird one. It comes from knowing a type of woman who always insisted on being called a lady, even to the point of correcting people who called her a woman, and thinking that, if a woman who abused children could call herself a lady, then the term was rather meaningless.
I don't think there should be a way. Don't want to risk incurring parental rights and obligations? Don't put your sperm in someone's vagina.
You comment that it isn't fair that a woman who gets pregnant has the option of keeping the kid, raising it as a single parent, and holding the man responsible. Perhaps; it also isn't fair that a woman who gets pregnant has the responsibility of dealing with the pregnancy and the effects of her decision on how to deal with it, be it through abortion, adoption, or keeping the child. All those options carry with them their own risks and burdens which fall disproportionately on the woman.
As a counterbalance to that, and perhaps as a motivation to men to be a little more careful of where they put their sperm, I am not in favour of allowing men to just opt out of their responsibilities. Whatever decision a woman makes in response to an accidental (or planned) pregnancy, opting out isn't on the menu for her.
@75 No, women have the option to opt out of PREGNANCY, but not motherhood. "Once that decision is made, she gets to decide if she will raise the child and support it financially." Is not true. Both parents are required by law to take care of their child. Women cannot give up a baby for adoption or take sole custody w/o the father's equal input. It becomes a joint responsibility that neither can "chose" to abdicate independently. To ask that men, and only men can be relieved of that burden is ridiculous.
@98 Source?
Of course, all else is not equal. As you pointed out, women bear a disproportionate share of the cost and risk associated with pregnancy as a biological matter, and a disproportionate share of the cost associated with parenting as a practical matter. And should she elect to have an abortion, the woman will also bear a substantially greater burden than the man.
Furthermore, at the point of abortion the fetus's interests do not (as a legal matter) outweigh the interests of a "birthed" human, whereas at birth the baby's interests do. Which is why neither the father nor the mother can just abandon a kid-- the "baby surrender" facilities are a sad and necessary exception. I am also not convinced that punting the baby to an adoption system with over a million unclaimed kids is the bestest course of action.
My hope is that a long-awaited male contraceptive pill makes this inherent tension moot. Gawd knows I'd love to fuck my girlfriend without using a condom. Come on, Science!