Politics
More PoliticsThe Problem With Pro-Choice Men
by Hugh Ryan
Hugh Ryan is a Brooklyn-based writer and activist. His work has appeared or is forthcoming in The New York Times, Details, The Advocate, The New York Post, and other venues. He is also writing an anarchist children's book. Visit him at hughryan.org.
Getty Images; AP Photo
Why do male pro-lifers speak their minds while pro-choice guys stay silent? Hugh Ryan on the fight's glaring gender divide—and why men are turning against abortion rights in droves.
This weekend, Tim Tebow, the Florida Gators quarterback, will star in a contentious anti-abortion Super Bowl ad sponsored by the conservative Christian group, Focus on the Family. The ad comes just over a week after another man, Scott Roeder, was found guilty of the murder of Dr. George Tiller, one of the only doctors in the country providing legal and safe third-trimester abortions.
As usual, it seems men have a lot to say about the things women shouldn’t do. Indeed, the pro-life camp seems to have little trouble finding men who will stump for it loudly and forcefully. Mel Gibson, Ben Stein, and Jonathan Taylor Thomas have all lent their voices to the anti-abortion movement, to say nothing of more radically religious actors like Stephen Baldwin and Kirk Cameron. Male professional athletes have also been willing to speak out against abortion—besides Tebow, Washington Redskins cornerback Darrell Green and three-time Super Bowl winner Chad Hennings have both done so. In 1989, six members of the New York Giants Super Bowl-winning team went so far as to make a video called Champions for Life for the anti-abortion group, American Life League.
A 2009 Gallup poll found that only 39% of men identified as pro-choice—a ten percent decrease from 2008.
When male celebrities talk about abortion, they’re usually saying that it should be illegal. The pro-life side of the debate has far outpaced the pro-choice side in lining up strong men’s voices. The Tebow ad threw this into relief, and in response, Planned Parenthood Federation has crafted its own video featuring former professional athletes Al Joyner and Sean James.
But in a way, the spot only seems to highlight how far behind in the gender game the pro-choice side is. Tebow is a Heisman Trophy-winning QB in the prime of his career, while Joyner and James have considerably less star-power. James was a rookie free agent with the Minnesota Vikings for one season in the early 1990s, and Joyner, brother of track star Jackie, is best known for his Olympic gold-medal win—in 1984.
Outspoken pro-choice men are in such short supply that when Scott Fujita, the linebacker from the New Orleans Saints, offered a few tepid comments about how he and Tebow “might not see eye to eye” on the issue, it was treated as the pro-choice camp’s official (and most forceful) masculine response. Though all three of these men should be commended for speaking up for freedom of choice, the fact that they are the defining male retort doesn’t paint a strong picture of men in the movement.
Tait Sye, spokesperson for Planned Parenthood, says that even these few celebrities (and other outspoken men) “help to get our message out. They add a little bit of buzz.” He cites The Sporting News, a respected online sports outlet, which summarized the ad as “male athletes preaching to think twice before following the preachings of another male athlete.”
But is it too little, too late? The pro-choice movement has been losing male supporters at an alarming rate for at least a decade. A 2009 Gallup poll found that only 39% of men identified as pro-choice—a drastic 10 percent decrease from 2008.
Pro-choice activists argue that there’s more to the issue than one poll, however. Ted Miller, Communications Director at NARAL Pro-Choice America, points to South Dakota. When a legislative ban on abortions was defeated in 2006, anti-abortion activists claimed that a similar bill, with exceptions for rape and incest, would pass in the next legislative cycle. In 2008, the bill, now with exceptions, was handily defeated again, and both pre- and post-polling showed men and women equally against it.
Perhaps in the privacy of the ballot-box, men are able to “woman up” a little and vote to protect freedom of choice. Yet many men seem unwilling to identify with the “pro-choice” label, and when it comes to the work of the movement, men are scarce on the ground.
YOUR FRIENDS
Joy Behar Was Right
Jeff Shesol is the author of Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. The Supreme Court. He is also a founding partner of West Wing Writers, a speechwriting and strategy firm and the author of Mutual Contempt. From 1998 to 2001, Shesol served as a speechwriter to President Bill Clinton. A Rhodes Scholar, he holds degrees in history from Oxford and Brown universities. His comic strip, Thatch, appeared daily in more than 150 newspapers from 1994-1998.
Dragon Tattoo Star Narrowed to Final Four
Gina Piccalo spent a decade at the Los Angeles Times covering Hollywood. She's now a contributing writer for Los Angeles Magazine and her work has appeared in Elle, More and Emmy. She can be found at ginapiccalo.com.
A former editor of Men's Journal, Claire Martin has written for Outside, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times magazine.
Inside Chelsea's Wedding Party
Lynnley Browning is a frequent contributor to the business pages of The New York Times and is a former Moscow-based correspondent for Reuters, where she covered energy and commodities. She grew up in Tulsa, Okla., majored in Slavic Languages and Literatures at Princeton University, and is fluent in Russian. She lives in Hamden, Conn., with her son.
Storm King Turns 50
Hugh Ryan is a Brooklyn-based writer and activist. His work has appeared or is forthcoming in The New York Times, Details, The Advocate, The New York Post, and other venues. He is also writing an anarchist children's book. Visit him at hughryan.org.
Pigs' Blood in Cigarettes?
Hugh Ryan is a Brooklyn-based writer and activist. His work has appeared or is forthcoming in The New York Times, Details, The Advocate, The New York Post, and other venues. He is also writing an anarchist children's book. Visit him at hughryan.org.
The Books Powerful Women Love
Hugh Ryan is a Brooklyn-based writer and activist. His work has appeared or is forthcoming in The New York Times, Details, The Advocate, The New York Post, and other venues. He is also writing an anarchist children's book. Visit him at hughryan.org.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
FarLeftFist
Yeah, because that's the reason women have abortion's. Riiiight.
funkdome
Yeah, that is almost as silly as saying that men who oppose abortion just want to tell women what to do.
BTW: Learn how to use an apostrophe. The abortion isn't possessing anything. The plural form of abortion is "abortions". I would have thought that an "intellectual" liberal would have learned that in first grade like the rest of us.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
FarLeftFist
few things in this world are more pathetic than the grammar police. I type over 100 words a minute, guess the apostrophe is just a habit Mr. Nitpickey. Most abortions are done by happily married couples who just decide to abort their babies b/c of selfish reasons...Riiiiiight. Regardless of where you stand on the issue of abortion it shouldn't matter, what your morals and ethics are aren't everyone else's. You are free to teach your family and your children whatever morals you wish to teach them and so are the pro-choice'ers. We are not a nation of morals and ethics, We are a nation of laws, and abortion happens to be legal. The fact that religion plays a huge role is another reason why people of other faiths shouldn't have to be suppressed by another groups religious beliefs, also another reason our nation was founded. Like I said, you are free to instill whatever you want on your own family, and so is everyone else.
dreaday19
Your self-hatred is pretty amazing, iam. We women are evil, we did eat that apple after all...
nikkya
amen to that that is the problem now men want rights over their body and women's too a lot of these same women talk about the rights of women in other countries when you are willing to let men tell you what to do with your own
Natural-Selection
Can we get some retro-abortions for some of our left leaning weenies here?
disfasia
This is a statement that completely ignores reality. The fact is that in the West women manage change much better than women--tests show that women manage emotional and physical stress better than men. Moreover, women abandon their children at a much lower rate even given the fact that most women still work outside the home and are the principal caregivers. So men in the West are quite guilty of adapting to change by simply shoving off, remarrying, and often replacing their first set of children with a new set, pretending that checks for book and supplies is fatherhood.
tanwhite
I seriously think you all need to get back into a time machine and go live in the 1800's where you can tell a woman what to do. Maybe if more men would step up and take care of their responsibilies more women would be able to feel they don't need to make a choice....men can barely pick their underwear off the floor, let alone put on a condom....Stop putting the blame on the women. We have it rough enough. I don't think that any woman is like "Oh yipee!, I am going to have an abortion" she is making A CHOICE for her life. If you are sooo concerned, go out and adopt a child that was given away because the woman made a choice to have it and then did not want it....Oh no, you are not going to do that, are you..The whole movement is about not taking away someones choice....
Natural-Selection
Why? Because liberal men are pussies and hide behind their big mouths. They are weak and frail....and probably should have been aborted.
TheWildestofThings
get a life
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
nikkya
i don't think any one is pro abortion simply pro choice and any woman who is, is simply taking back the right to her own body
Natural-Selection
Why don't we just call it what it is....pro-irresponsiblilty
Frenchmanaz
msshay, why do you use the term pro-abortion, as if anyone EVER thinks of it as anything other than the most horrible of decisions anyone has to make.
I also find it enlightening that none of the pro-life people in this discussion even mention how society should deal with all of the unwanted babies that would result from outlawing abortion.
All this " murderers etc " talk, but how many thousands upon thousands of unwanted and unloved children are there on this planet, that society has difficulty enough trying to find homes for even with abortion being lawful.
I am a married man, with a beautiful 8 year old boy whom I love beyond compare. I hurt every time I see a child in an abusive home. I ask you, how many more abused children would result if we forced people who were financially or emotionally capable of handling this incredible responsibility ?
It is my view that every single person who screams bloody murder about abortion be made responsible for at least one, if not more of the massive influx of new children that would result from outlawing abortion.
It gets on my very last nerve when pro-lifers act as though such a decision is EVER flippantly made, as if any woman who must endure both the excrutiating decision and the physical agony skips into an abortion clinic without the weight of the world on her shoulders. Many if not most of the pro-life people are also people who assume everyone has it as good as they do, the financial means, the stable home.
The choice component is valid, but what EVERYONE should be reminded of is the consequence of the alternative. It's just so easy to judge and then walk away once you have spouted the hate. Once all of those new babies are born, how many pro-lifers just turn and walk away.." oh, what to do with the unwanted babies....that's not my problem ".
Ideally, not a single child would be conceived without intent, but reality just doesn't play that way.
What would you pro-lifers be prepared to contribute, besides your opinions, if you forced an overturn of the current abortion rights legislation. Adopt a couple of kids ? Keep vigil to make sure every unwanted child who ended up actually going home with the parents that didn't want it were'nt beating that child every time it got in the way of their lifestyle.
Orphanages are full as it is, so before I listen to the pro life argument I want to hear solutions to the inevitable, not moral chantings, because it is just as immoral to ignore the consequences.
dreaday19
I would love someone to respond to this with actual solutions, but it's doubtful. Good post.
TheWildestofThings
good post manaz, the silence, as usual, is telling. the pro-life movement does not have a legitimate answer to the problem and probably never will.
JDesjeanCMA
Yes!! Exactly. Infact, I'll fill in the numbers for you. According to AFCARS data, U.S. Children's Bureau, and the Administration for Children, Youth and Families, (from the past 8 years) an average of 700,000 children per year go through the adoption system. Only an average of 51,000 children are actually adopted. That leaves 650,000 children in the hands of the state systems.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/afcars/trends.htm
But you know what? So many unwanted pregnancies could be avoided if the Christian Fundies would stop opposing proper safe sex education in schools and banning the presence of Planned Parenthood offices in towns.
My town's City Council is actually currently trying to ban PP from setting up an office on Main street because the idea of it "right there out in the open" is too much for them to handle.
God forbid that we expose our youth to proper healthcare, relationship counciling, free education about contraception, STD's, and the offer of free AIDs/HIV testing.
Especially considering that our city's percentage of teen pregnancies is outrageous, and this office won't even be performing abortions. They would refer patients to a neighboring city.
iamone3
Would they be presenting the following information in sex education classes?
"From the moment when the sperm makes contact with the oocyte, under conditions we have come to understand and describe as normal, all subsequent development to birth of a living newborn is a fait accompli. That is to say, after that initial contact of spermatozoon and oocyte there is no subsequent moment or stage which is held in arbitration or abeyance by the mother, or the embryo or fetus. Nor is a second contribution, a signal or trigger, needed from the male in order to continue and complete development to birth. Human development is a continuum in which so-called stages overlap and blend one into another. Indeed, all of life is contained within a time continuum. Thus, the beginning of a new life is exacted by the beginning of fertilization, the reproductive event which is the essence of life." "One often hears the rallying cry from pro-choice advocates: "my body, my choice." Certainly, they exercise a choice, but, it is not just "my body". There are two (2) bodies, each genetically distinct, and each "foreign" to the other. It should be recognized that the body of the early embryo is very active in its daily rituals of survival."
The terms "preembryo" and "individuation" have been totally discredited, not only by all human embryologists, but have also been rejected by the Nomenclature Committee of the American Association of Anatomists for inclusion in the official lexicon of anatomical terminology, Terminologia Embryologica. These terms are not used in any official textbook of Human Embryology. by C. Ward Kischer, Ph.D.
Valkyrie607
I've never met anyone who's pro-abortion. I've met people who think it's their right to tell a woman that she should be forced to give birth against her will, and those who think either forcing a woman to give birth or forcing her to get an abortion are equally heinous violations of that woman's autonomy. "Pro-abortion" is a myth made up by the people who don't trust women enough to choose when they want to become a mother.
StValentine
no one here is pro-abortion..............pro-choice maybe, but not pro-abortion...try again....
torodad
Could you make just a small attempt to argue honestly?
Pro-choice is certainly *not* pro-abortion.
Just as it's a fetus that is aborted, and not a baby or a child.
When you hold your opinions sincerely, there is no need to use weasel words.
amafangool
How about raping a thirteen year old? Duh.
PassportFan
Pro-choice groups are part of a movement which seeks to use divorce and custody laws to deprive men of their property, children and dignity.
Many men understand instinctually that pro-chice groups are not their friends -- that pro-choice activists and their allies will blindly take the woman's side and will seek to institutionalize misandry.
Illustrative hypothetical: A woman wants to terminate an unwanted pregnancy (there are no health issues), but the father is willing to accept sole financial and physical responsibility and to pay expenses and a generous surrogacy fee.
Whose side will a pro-choice group take?
Men believe that pro-choice groups will reflexively support the woman -- although there is a serious argument that, in this situation, the father is right and the woman is acting immorally and selfishly.
Until men believe the pro-choice movement will give credence to their concerns, the movement will have few vocal male supporters.
Nemo888
WTF???????? A pro-lifer who is reasoned and sophisticated? You just destroyed years preconceptions from wack jobs throwing red paint on women outside abortion clinics.
I am at a loss. Having to meaningfully reassess my beliefs and values was the last thing I expected. I have seen the misandry you speak of. We will probably both be pilloried for admitting it is there.
AlanD2
Interesting that you are concerned about divorce depriving men of their property, PassportFan. I gather you are talking about their wives.
By the way, no women should ever be forced to carry a fetus to term. A woman risks her life in childbirth, and no amount of bribery (expenses and a generous surrogacy fee) can make up for a death.
iamone3
A woman does risk her life in childbirth. I tell my grandchildren often to Thank their mothers for not aborting them.
It should be noted that women who have abortions are at risk of death also. Google "The Blackmum Wall", it`s a Memorial to those women who died having legal abortions, some of them leaving small children behind.
hush-limbo
I think, by property, he meant tangible property. As in, "When you get divorced, they would support requiring excessive amounts of child support." A lot of people feel like men get a raw deal in divorce court, although the statistics don't entirely bear that out.
AlanD2
No question that abortions can be life-threatening, iamone3.
But in the U.S., the risk of death associated with childbirth is about ten times as high as that associated with abortion.
Which is one of the reasons I support a woman's right to an abortion.
AlanD2
hush-limbo: Perhaps you are right.
But there are also men who consider their wives as personal property. You can find any number of stories of men like this who kill their wives when they threaten divorce or try to leave.
dreaday19
iam, you tell your grandchildren what???!!! Holy f***ing crap!!
"Here, kiddos, have a cookie! Now aren't you glad your mother didn't abort you?" What is this relative to? 'You may have been abused by your stepdaddy, but you should thank your momma for making the right decision to keep you.'
WOW.
sausageinc
If the man in your hypothetical illustration weren't an idiot he would be able to recognize that the fetus in the woman's uterus isn't a person because its CNS lacks the maturity level required to support the mental qualities that infuse child and adult human beings with moral status: sentience, self-awareness, memories, value for self preservation. In your illustration the man is demanding that the woman make large sacrifices and cede individual freedoms so that he can use her body to incubate a non-person into a person that doesn't yet exist. The person baby makes him a father and grants him the rights of fatherhood, the non-person fetus does not. His coercion of the woman to use her body as a means for keeping alive a non-person organism so that he will have a child at a future time is immoral. People should not be means to ends against their will.
Rational, educated people accept that personhood develops during babyhood and toddlerhood. The legal cut-off in most places, birth, is arbitrary. But the cut-off point between two ends of a continuum can only BE arbitrary, and birth is the most logical, fair point.
I am pro-choice. One problem I have with current law is that if a man wants to end the pregancy before the fetus becomes a person he has no power, and is forced to pay child support for the person that the woman alone allowed to develop from nonpersonhood. I can't think of any resolution though, because these laws are in the best interest of the children, to which I agree.
iamone3
sausage ;
issues Bioethics | 41 - DOCS |
%u25BA When does human life begin? The final answer
by C. Ward Kischer, Ph.D.
Released November 28, 2005 "From the moment when the sperm makes contact with the oocyte, under conditions we have come to understand and describe as normal, all subsequent development to birth of a living newborn is a fait accompli. That is to say, after that initial contact of spermatozoon and oocyte there is no subsequent moment or stage which is held in arbitration or abeyance by the mother, or the embryo or fetus. Nor is a second contribution, a signal or trigger, needed from the male in order to continue and complete development to birth. Human development is a continuum in which so-called stages overlap and blend one into another. Indeed, all of life is contained within a time continuum. Thus, the beginning of a new life is exacted by the beginning of fertilization, the reproductive event which is the essence of life." "One often hears the rallying cry from pro-choice advocates: "my body, my choice." Certainly, they exercise a choice, but, it is not just "my body". There are two (2) bodies, each genetically distinct, and each "foreign" to the other. It should be recognized that the body of the early embryo is very active in its daily rituals of survival."
sausageinc
iamone3,
I left something implicit that I guess I should have made explicit. There is a difference between being human and being a person. A fetus is a human life, Terry Schiavo in a PVS was a human life. But both weren't people and that's what's important here. It's not our DNA, it's not our bodies that make us morally important agents; it's our minds. A human being that has the potential for a mind (fetus), but that does not in actuality have one, is as morally insignificant as a sperm cell or two people in the act of getting it on. Any one fetus has higher potentiality than any one sperm cell for developing into an organism with a mind, but neither has any amount of actual mind (in early pregnancy for the fetus at least), so neither has any amount of actual personhood. My morality is based in the actual.
Also, it's common courtesy to use your own words in internet discussions. CopyPasty is just laziness.
Rakiba
I find this an evil rationalization.
It is infanticide preferable to a coat hanger and it does have a social function but what if society starts deciding that retarded people are nor persons?
sausageinc
Rakiba,
Mentally challenged people clearly have minds in the exact same sense as other people. In fact, you might be one of them and not even know it.
Now, if you're talking about a person with the intellectual level of a 6 month old, I don't see any reason to waste money keeping his faint glimmerings of personhood alive.
iamone3
sausage;
Science simply does not support your opinions. It is legal for a woman to have an abortion if she chooses, however I am a firm believer that before a choice is made "ALL" information should be made available.
We must all live with the consequences of our actions or inactions and I would be remiss in my duty to my fellow man if I did not bring information I am aware of to this discussion.
Cashmoney
Good post, Sausageinc. I agree.
I'm saying that as a Christian who believes that what makes us fully human is our God-given soul.
(And until we acquire a soul, we are certainly alive but that's a trivial point. Lost of things are alive, including the hundreds of thousands of cells in a drop of blood. say. Which no one regards as having any special worth just because they're alive.)
Where I disagree with you is your qualm that men have no say in a woman's choice to terminate. I'm a man -- if the woman I'm sleeping with is likely to decide differently than I prefer if she becomes pregnant, then I need to use a condom. Or better yet, not have sex with her.) If she decides to deliver, then hell yes, he owes 18 years of child support. He's the father and society holds him responsible for supporting his kids. A father's decision-making power in the baby-making business is limited to condom/no-condom. Or sleep with her/don't sleep with her. Make the wrong decision and get her pregnant and the power to decide what happens next passes to the woman.
As it should.
PinkoLefty
I just love it when right-wingers start "sciencing".
What's that stench? Oh yeah, hypocrisy.
Not all of the science is in on global warming and the earth is only 6000 years old, but damn it if we haven't gotten the final word on when human life begins. The right in America has precisely zero credibility on scientific matters. Stick to what you know best: self-righteous hypocritical moralizing. It's your home field. You play quite well there and the referees are incredibly friendly. When you step into my world, a world of rationality, science, mathematics and formal logic, you do yourself a huge disservice.
This man, C. Ward Kischer, is or was a member of the American Bioethics Advisory Commission. The name of the organization was presumably chosen so that it could easily be confused with the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. It is an invention of the American Life League and its members were cherry-picked on the basis of their beliefs. Their opinions and statements are to be taken with a mountain of salt, a good deal of laughter, and a smidgeon of pity.
One of Kischer's more easily accessible statements is that there is no such thing as a pre-embryo. Ever heard of a zygote? Blastocyst anyone? Not much of a scientist, are you Kischer? In refuting the existence of pre-embryos he accuses the opposition of manipulating definitions and playing with semantics, and then goes on to manipulate definitions and play at semantics. He is simply not to be taken seriously.
Here's a funny video of him, complete with dramatic background music, arguing his "case", complete with the obligatory right-wing Hitler reference: http://vimeo.com/3258426
Oh, Hitler! Do you never get old? You know who else liked pie? Hitler!
dreaday19
©2000 American Bioethics Advisory Commission
A division of American Life League, Inc.
This is where iam's study comes from.
surprised?
SharnCedar
I was pro-life until I started boinging a woman in an immoral manner, and didn't want any kids to happen accidentally. That's pretty much the absolute and complete definition of a "pro-choice" male - he is a scum having affairs or a selfish coward who doesn't want to raise children. Me included. I'm now por-choice, because I'm evil. You MSM robots happy now?
FarLeftFist
See, as a male it doesn't matter if your pro-choice or pro-life, but it's males like you that are the very reason abortion should remain legal. Until we can find a way to rid the planet of people like you having abortion available is the solution.
tanwhite
you are not evil, you are just weird.
TheWildestofThings
your logic is twisted, along with your sense of humor.
whipmawhopma
Good for you, Hugh Ryan. I suspect most of the rest of us males will be avoiding this subject if at all possible, whatever we really think or feel, and we would prefer it that way.
ChanRobt
Apparently men apply their minds long enough to realize what abortion really is. And recoil in horror at the truth of it.
What has it been -- 60 million abortions in the U.S. since Roe vs Wade? Sounds something like a Holocaust. Only this has been a silent one.
iamone3
It is a crime against humanity, and one day the world will demand this infanticide & those committing these atrocities be brought to justice.
sausageinc
LOL.
AgathaX
An unmarried, unemployed, and/or uneducated woman having a baby because someone convinces her that a little clump of cells without brain waves is human: THAT is a crime against humanity. That said, I trust we are within a decade or two of having long term birth control that is sufficiently effective, available, and without side effects that abortion is irrelevant.
corwinsr
I'm so sick of women telling men that we get to have an opinion when we can get pregnant.
Really?
How about this: you can tell me I don't have a say when you can get pregnant without a guy.
And while we're at it, let's look at the other argument about telling women what they can do with their own bodies.
If you're pregnant - it's not just you're body that's at stake.
See that? I didn't even get into pro-life or pro-choice because there's a bigger issue regarding who gets to make this choice.
iamone3
corwinsr;
"If you're pregnant - it's not just you're body that's at stake."
I am a woman and I agree with that statement.
Valkyrie607
If you're not pregnant, it is definitely not your body that's at stake.
proffordisabilities
I think that the men who don't like to comment on pro-life/pro-choice feel uncomfortable because they know that they are out of their league commenting on something they will never completely understand, be responsible for, or be emotionally tied up in. They know that they will never have those 9 months of maternity and all that it entails; they know that they will never have to tell their bosses that they are pregnant and will have to take some time off when the birth of the baby arrives (as for me, I waited until I was well into maternity clothes, and the VP of Finance Strongly urged me to tell my boss, the President of the corporation, that I was pregnant, which was quite obvious, and made for a nice ice breaker, talking about my nice, new wardrobe and how hard it was to find any suits to fit my new shape. I wonder how a man would tell his boss he would be needing to take some time off to birth a baby, and then when it turned out to be an emergency c-section and the Kelly Girl I trained to take over for me wasn't yet available, and then instead of 2 weeks I needed 6 weeks, my boss wasn't happy at all, expecially when I expected my pay for all those 6 weeks of leave, which he kept telling me he didn't have to so he wouldn't until my doctor called his brother, a partner in a big Boston law firm, and his brother knew better and told his brother, my boss, to just pay it because he was liable as sick pay to pay me. Now do you think any man would stand there and tell his boss, the president of a large corporation from an olde Boston family, rather well known, would any man sit there in a chair facing the presidet and tell him he owned you 6 weeks of pay, and you didn't want to hire his brother's firm to get him to pay me. And then there's a multitude of vitamins to take which is I am rather sure why pregnant women have morning sickness, then the diets the doctors put you on that drive you crazy hungry, then it's up to the husband or partner whether or not they want to be your breathing coach, then it's the LaMaze training, and afternoon naps you take at the office until the boss comes in to wake you up and ask for this report to get done by tomorrow at 9am.
And the feedings, which your husband would do but he hasn't got the breasts for it, and the cooking the vegetable and meat and blending your own fresh baby food, and, say what part of this does the husband do? And if your not married or partnered then you do it all, and work to pay for it all yourself.
So, this is where we have the conundrum, while the women are going through all this ordeal, not tagging the men with any responsibility, and you know he doesn't even want to know he fathered a child and then have to pay child support, never mind spend time with the kid, and then all these holy Christian men who go to church with their wife and kids on Christmas and Easter, how much can you ask from the poor over-tired working man, so you take care of the baby and it's needs all by yourself.
And you're going to tell me that men should have a stake in the decision about abortion???
SensiStar
Men have convinced women they should vote GOP.
Even though the GOP does not believe a woman should receive the same pay for the same job a man does.
Convincing them they have no control of their bodies is nothing.
JAGUAR6CY
We have all been taught that men are just oppressors. The "journalist" who wrote this piece apparently never went to "college" where these facts are well known and required dogma.
JAGUAR6CY
It is strange that abortion is fanatically defended by liberals as a "choice", but adoption is never mentioned, suggested or considered to be a "choice". To them, abortion is the only answer. Men tend to see the hypocricy in that and understand that it just doesn't "feel" right. Are you a liberal? Why?
iamone3
I am a woman and when I chose Life, those that said they were pro-choice disrespected My "Choice". I lost several so-called friends. Really I lost no real friends.
aspen420
liar liar pants on fire. that is the lamest argument for/against abortion i've ever heard. you must have been, like, 15 when you made your choice, and your friends disappeared because they wanted to be horny teenagers.
i am pro choice (although you won't catch me murdering my children) for a variety of reasons, but overall, murder is acceptable in our culture on many levels, including vanity. just look at your leather shoes. life is expendable and disrespected, but i doubt you will find very many men who are pro-beat-your-girlfriend or pro-child-sex-trafficking.
there is a fundamental problem with the argument for pro-life, and that is it starts and ends with human life only, and then it gets far more finite and it just boils down to babies.
following the same armchair psychology logic here, if someone raped and murdered your mom you'd want to see them dead. you wouldn't have cuddly feelings about the quality of the murderer's life.
Baritenortone
I love these sorts of responses to this debate. Let's assume that the USG said, "Ok, fine, we'll abolish abortion, but we're going to have to raise your taxes 1% to pay for the facilities and personnel to handle all of the new orphans." All of the pro-lifers would recoil in horror and say "nevermind." It would be a perfect example of the weak foundations of social conservatism. Despite all of the shouting on the news, demonstrations, etc., the second that any policy could potentially affect their pocket books, they'll flee from it.
aspen420
thank you! the pro-life movement is all about control for nine months. after that, the value of life from birth to death rapidly diminishes. after birth, no one wants to pay for other people's choices. it's unfortunate, and it's sad, but it's true.
there is so much control tied to a woman's quality of life when it comes to sexuality and reproduction. the only way to prevent abortion is through education, one that also conveys that abstaining from sex is the only sure-fire way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and stds. women have to be able to control their own destinies. otherwise lifers will try their damnedest to do it.
oh yeah. and tebow's mom shoud have got a second opinion. in matters of life and death, it's worth it.
iamone3
Barit;
That is hogwash and your nose is growing.
dreaday19
you chose. which means you thought about your options. you can't choose if there is no choice.
Valkyrie607
The operative word here is "choice." Either you're lying or you have a bunch of sociopaths for former friends. I'm glad you made your choice. Aren't you glad nobody forced you to give birth? Aren't you glad nobody forced you to have an abortion?
tanwhite
i don't believe you,
mcasio
Wait a sec...you had friends that stopped speaking with you because you didn't have an abortion? Really? That seems...unlikely.
iamone3
mcasio;
No , I quit speaking to them, I wanted to enjoy my pregnancy , they were very negative. This was with my first child and I almost died, she was premature and she almost died. After that I surrounded myself with positive people.
dreaday19
You are a self-righteous terror. And I'm going to go out on a limb and say those friends didn't miss your attitude (you know, the one your grandchildren get to enjoy *often*).
Learn the difference between true wisdom and preachiness.
disfasia
What a strange jump in logic. There is no relationship between adoption and having an abortion and really, only someone who would face no such choice (ie. a man) could make such a connection. It is like saying, "It is raining today, I won't read The New York Times". The choice to carry a pregnancy to term and to trust that someone will actually adopt the child who will not be mentally unstable is a huge choice. Given the many comments on here, I am more convinced than ever of the severe lack of mental sanity in our culture and that our notion of childrearing is much akin to tokenism and trophy children. Having a child is a personal choice. It is not your business unless it is your body. Carrying a child for nine months is part of the reason that many women cannot mentally have a child. It is not a "grin and bear" it kind of process and nobody has the right to impose this onto any woman.
They misogyny I am reading here is stunning and I really think many of these comments underscore the deep-seated hatred for women in our country.
iamone3
dis;
Pro-Choice should include adoption and your statements are asinine. By your logic a woman should kill her child cause they might be adopted by someone thats mentally unstable. They might also be a loving couple that can not have children otherwise.
There has been a lot of trashing men here and as a woman I find that despicable.
AlanD2
iamone3: disfasia's post is cogent and honest. You are the one being asinine, as all of your posts on this thread show.
I find your trashing of women no less despicable than that being done by men.
Valkyrie607
Of course adoption is a choice. Only an idiot would contend otherwise. Or someone with a political axe to grind.
iamone3
The terms "preembryo" and "individuation" have been totally discredited, not only by all human embryologists, but have also been rejected by the Nomenclature Committee of the American Association of Anatomists for inclusion in the official lexicon of anatomical terminology, Terminologia Embryologica. These terms are not used in any official textbook of Human Embryology
issues Bioethics | 41 - DOCS |
%u25BA When does human life begin? The final answer
by C. Ward Kischer, Ph.D.
Released November 28, 2005
Rakiba
Here is why:
Abortion seems like murder to me, a man.
Its infanticide and calling it else is bs.
But, its not my body so do I really have a say.
Also, do we want women dying in alley ways? No, of course not.
There you have in my guess 51% plus of the way men feel.
iamone3
Well said Rakiba, also most women know instinctively that abortion is murder.
AlanD2
If this were true, I doubt we would have so many abortions, iamone3.
I wish you would find some other site to spread your lies.
FarLeftFist
Except a fetus isn't an infant, it's a fetus.
thebaker
The only difference between a "fetus" and an infant is size and location.
dreaday19
and the ability to independently live.
iamone3
Man...is a tame or civilized animal; never the less, he requires proper instruction and a fortunate nature, and then of all animals he becomes the most divine and most civilized; but if he be insufficiently or ill- educated he is the most savage of earthly creatures.
Plato Quote
Just_Margaret
Mr. Ryan, you make a good point. Pro-choice men do tend to be quieter about it. Perhaps they lack the need to, say, shove their opinions down other's throats? I think the difference may be that pro choice men, being of a more open minded nature, may not properly comprehend the anti choice mindset, and it's incredibly intrusive nature.
I know a man who is pro choice, who has never has any personal connection to someone having to make a choice as to what they may do about a pregnancy. He just *knows* that choice must prevail. These men do exist. I married one :)
penalcolony
Correction: Darrell Green is an EX (retired 2002) Washington Redskins CORNERback.
Advice: If you're looking for high profile supporters of choice, it's probably a waste of time to pursue jocks who may be sympathetic but make their livings in the midst of the widespread and extremely aggressive Christian athletes movement.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.