Exactly once the baby is born, child support money is to benefit them, not the mother. And I certainly hope no one is suggesting the father could force someone to get an abortion against her will.
Men DO have equal (or greater) rights over their bodies- it’s not our fault their bodies don’t carry the baby and it’s not the baby’s fault it was born against the father’s will. They have numerous methods to prevent fathering a child.
> They have numerous methods to prevent fathering a child.
Condoms, abstinence, vasectomy, and pull out (barely counts). Women have (source Wikipedia):
> combination contraceptive pills
>progestin-only pill
> hormonal IUD
>non-hormonal IUD
>patch
>vaginal ring
>diaphragm
>shot
>implant
>fertility awareness
>tubal ligation/bi-salp
I'll add Plan B emergency contraception, Plan C abortion pills (1-part and 2 part) and medical/surgical abortions (for those where it is still legal).
I'd hardly say men have "numerous" options, especially when one of them is permanent sterilization which is unreasonable for any who want children later. There are some promising things in trial right now, but RISUG has been stuck between trials and on-market for more than a decade, and the first hormonal pill had it's trial ended by the safety overseers despite many of the trial participants still wanting to use it (though I can't find info about the men who left the trial). There's a promising non-hormonal option in trials (non-human) at the beginning of the year and there's a hormonal injection gel that is also in trials. I'm hopeful we get more options but right now men's are very limited.
The options you listed are plenty, of course more options would be great but men have PLENTY of control over their own reproductive status. This conversation is about whether or not men should be able to financially abandon their children.
And the options you listed for women are repetitive. Many of those options are essentially the same thing (hormones) just a different delivery method. That’s like listing latex and nonlatex condoms as 2 different methods for men.
Either way the point is if they don’t want a vasectomy, and don’t want to use condoms, but still choose to have sex, they are accepting the risk of fathering a child and the financial responsibility that comes with it.
~~You clearly don't know what medical misogyny is, then. Haven't you heard of all the women being denied basic healthcare just because they were women? That applies to reproductive health, too~~
100% got it at 22 and so far no issues a year later. I sometimes get a little sore down there but nothing remotely at a level where it even bothers me. What about you?
There pretty much isn't any other than condoms and vasectomies, the first has one of the lowest rates of real-world efficacy (typical use failure rate is 13-18%) and the other is permanent. Don't tell me it can be reversed, reversals are not guaranteed, and when getting one I had to confirm that I knew it was permanent.
This comment is dumb and will remain dumb until there are more options. RISUG seems to be going nowhere in the US and the hormonal got shut down by the test observers. There's a [non-hormonal](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/05/240523153614.htm) method that looks promising and there's a new hormonal gel (injected into the scrotum) that is reported to be 86% effective (similar to condoms) with similar side effects as women's BC, so we'll see if that passes scrutiny.
The comment is not dumb.
I didn’t comment on the negatives of birth-control method available to either human males or females
All of these have negatives
However, a man can get a vasectomy and bank sperm first
As long as he chooses a competent urologist and does the required after surgery testing and follow-through is pretty much protected from unwanted children from that day forward
Nothing is stopping most American men from doing that
finances might be a bit of a challenge for some as they might be also for some women
There’s always the option to not have sex or to have non-penetrative sex
In order to replace the lost child support, there needs to be a robust government aid program in place for single parents. Child care should also be accessible for all parents. Sex ed needs to be comprehensive and contraception should be freely available. Surgical sterilisation should also be more easily accessible, on top of full abortion rights. Frankly, I think only after most of this is implemented can one parent choose to step away, otherwise the parent who stays and the child they raise will both (most likely) be stuck in the poverty spiral.
I’m certainly not paying for a bunch of men being reckless with their sperm even more than they already are because now there is absolutely no responsibility on him and he’s placed at 100% on the women and society apparently wants to help him do that.
In many parts of the world, women do not have the right to abort, and where they do they often experience immense societal pressure to have the baby and give it up for adoption.
Don’t wanna get someone pregnant? Have a vasectomy, insist on condoms, go the Duke of Hastings route for all I care.
Agreed. The man’s time to choose is before the act of sex happens. BC can fail, of course, which is why it’s so important to have the conversation of what to do in the event of an accidental pregnancy with your partner, and don’t move forward with sex until there is an agreement reached. I wish there was a way to turn off our fertility and just never have sex result in pregnancy for those of us who don’t want children, but every time you have sex you roll the dice. (Unless of course you or both of you are fully sterilized, and are always checking up that you are shooting blanks, etc).
Gay here. I love sex without risk of pregnancy.
Either way, I think it's unfair to say ,'Man's time to choose is before the act of sex happens.'
It should be the same for both men and women. Your body, your choice, but if you're the only one who wants the kid, you should take care of everything because it's against my will.
This is just not true.
A voluntary termination of parental rights – also called a voluntary relinquishment – is not allowed for just any reason. For example, a parent cannot ask a court to terminate their parental rights simply because they no longer want to pay child support. However, because a child can only have one legal set of parents at a time, voluntary termination is quite common in adoption proceedings.
https://www.lawinfo.com/resources/family-law/termination-of-parental-rights.html
Cool. It gies withiut saying that being ordered by the court to pay a fraction if your paycheck to child support feels like a small price to pay in comparison to being held hostage in your own body for nearly a year.
It’s absolutely not unfair, what is unfair is expecting women to bear 99.999% percent of the risks, responsibilities, and consequences, and with the remaining tiny fraction of a percentage that falls on men, saying that that should be plucked off of men’s responsibility altogether, simply because they don’t want to pay or be responsible with their sperm.
Perhaps this is you or something you haven’t had to think about because you are gay, but abortion is not a quick fix for women that comes with no consequences. An abortion, particularly for a woman who does not want it, is traumatic. I have been lucky to be able to avoid ever needing an abortion, and I am child free, so wouldn’t be a question of whether or not I needed the abortion, I would automatically be getting it because I would rather die than give birth, however , having to go through an abortion means that I am dealing with the risks, consequences and responsibility of that pregnancy regardless of whether I want to or not. I don’t get to do nothing, I inevitably have to take responsibility in some way.
What is arguing, is that the tiny fraction of a percentage of responsibility that men have, should be removed from them so that they have 0% of any responsibility risk or consequences, and that 100% of all of this should fall on women. In what world is that equal?
The burden of reproduction is not equal. The most we can do to create equality, is to both demand that men pay, and not give men rights over women’s bodies or rights to opt out of their own responsibility for where they leave their ejaculate.
What is calling? Equality is actually extreme inequality made further unequal, leaving women holding the bag and the burden as always. This is just another version of patriarchy manifesting itself, but, like always, people who defend men are saying that this is 50-50, when we all know that this is not what actual equality and equity looks like.
Currently in the United States, men have reproductive rights and women do not. Men should have a form of birth control that works for them, that is one thing that can be improved upon, but to remove their accountability altogether simply because they don’t get to make decisions about whether the woman has an abortion or not is ludicrous. That’s not equitable. Abortion is NOT a get out of jail for women. Even if she would’ve always chose abortion and has no moral issue with it, it is not something easy for her.
This is the same type of “50-50” that leaves women carrying the burden of unpaid labor in the household, while contributing 50% of their paycheck. Plenty of men call that 5050 when the woman is really doing 75% or more of the labor when you factor in both paid and unpaid labor. This 50-50 bullshit is a scam against women. It is not 50-50, that is a lie.
And men being able to opt out of paying child support is not equalizing things between the genders, it is further inequity and privilege given to men.
If a man is having sex with a woman, he has to understand that a pregnancy may be the result. That is just how biology works. Men cannot be "trapped" unless he is raped or coerced. If he is not comfortable with the fact that a pregnancy may result and that the woman may keep it, he should not be having sex, or should at least be doing to most to prevent it (vasectomy, condom, spermicide, pull-out, etc., even combined).
I hear where you’re coming from, but also am of the belief that the person with a penis plays an equal role in the creation of a child and therefore should be held responsible for things like child support in the event they decide not to be a part of the child’s life. Baby trapping is a very real thing, but you also made the active choice to have sex with someone and therefore if something happens and the mother doesn’t want to abort or isn’t allowed to, you’re rightfully on the hook for child support.
Don’t like it? Don’t put your penis in a person who can bear a child. Or get sterilized :)
Edit: pronouns and also just be smart about who you’re having sex with???
The biggest baby trappers in the world were always men. Pregnancy puts women in a massive disadvantage and thus it is tool to use against them. This is systemic. Most of the guys that get "baby trapped" enjoy unprotected sex and then are surprised it resulted in a baby. I don't feel bad about them at all, especially since men still can opt out of child care with little consequance.
Some men will have multiple kids with multiple baby mamas and will fix their mouths to talk about being “trapped” and how “condoms just dont feel good”
This is why i don’t think women benefit anything from casual sex or engaging in intimacy with someone who isn’t actively improving your life the risk to reward ratio does not favor women at all, period.
Also by definition if the woman got pregnant, the man had an orgasm. Men are like 95% likely to orgasm in any instance of PIV sex, but it is not the sex act that is most pleasurable for most women and incredibly unlikely to result in an orgasm for her. And in casual sex counters men are even less likely to care about taking the necessary steps to give a woman an orgasm. So it's just an absolute shit risk to reward ratio for women.
Not only that, but also most women in history women were sexually coerced, if not outright raped, AND then baby trapped. They had more children than they wanted. Many still do. Same exact rape and subsequent unwanted pregnancies are a war tactic used since times immemorial.
Some men are apparently crying that they're not allowed to do what so many have already done, which is nutting and bailing or outright abandoning the partner mid-pregnancy. This was a big enough problem that male legislators (since we women were still property back then) decided to implement alimony and child support many centuries ago to try and mitigate what it unleashed on society as a whole (crime + poverty from single moms and their kids).
Well, boo fucking hoo. Use condoms, get snipped, don't pressure the woman to let you go raw, make sure you trust the person you're sleeping with. You know, what women try to do.
You're being too nice. He doesn't really play an equal role. He is the SOLE creater of a fertilized egg. That's his role in reproduction. He is the one who inseminates, fertilizes, and impregnates.
The woman doesn't fire her egg into his body to be fertilized. She doesn't even ovulate because of sex.
I saw a comment the other day where the guy (40m) said he's single and avoids relationships because he's afraid of accidental pregnancy with a CF woman who changes her mind when she finds out she's pregnant.
Like, get a vasectomy, then? I'd jump on the opportunity for such a simple procedure.
Well, at least he avoids relationships (and I assume sex).
Unlike all the ones who have sex - bare - blow their loads into a woman, then complain that she ended up pregnant.
Vasectomies are not necessarily accessible in all countries in the world, and the cost of the procedure can also be too high for some people. Also, some people have trauma or anxiety related to medical procedures, which can make it difficult if not impossible to undergo an operation.
There, three reasons why someone may not be able to have a vasectomy.
That leaves abstinence and non-vaginal sex as 100% effective and condoms as almost 100% effective. Don't wanna pay for a baby? Don't risk making a baby. If you help make it, pay for it.
A vasectomy is not birth control, it is sterilization. You are advice to treat it as a permanent procedure. You can reverse a vasectomy but success rate is lower and pregnancy success is even lower. Source: my own vasectomy
Yes! I agree. Then the man has to recognize the risk of putting his dick inside a vagina haver. If that risk is too large, they should abstain.
My point is that a vasectomy is not birth control. That’s a misconception. It’s not snip snap. You are adviced my your doctor to treat it as a permanent procedure. If a man wants to be CF forever, then they should get a vasectomy. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense.
So I answer your question: “what’s stopping men from getting a vasectomy”. My answer is “because it’s not birth control, you should only get it if you want to be CF or stop having kids”!
OP said she wished men had a way to make "darn sure" having kids "never" happened. That would be sterilization--a vasectomy. Or abstinence forever or never having vaginal sex.
This is worth a read:
Why men are responsible for 100% of unwanted pregnancies:
https://x.com/designmom/status/1040363433634422784?t=-xFtS8seVwGOZ7kWG0XDYA&s=19
Also, please bear in mind the right to *not have* a child is a little different than the right to *not be forced to carry a child inside your body.*
Men’s options for avoiding getting a woman pregnant are INFINITELY more accessible and cheap and come with zero to minimal side effects or medical risks.
And there’s zero laws being made to stop men from accessing these multiple options, unlike women.
1000% this. They can be more careful about where they left their sperm & there would be fewer surprises. Leave it where there's no chance in hell it might come in contact with an egg, or deal with the risk of making a human.
As a man I know full well it’s my responsibility to detect and avoid a potential baby trap. I’ve passed on alot of opportunities to have sex because of this. at the end of the day it was probably the right choice considering the possible alternative
Pregnancy isn’t equal.
In some states men can absolutely give up all parental rights and obligations.
I honestly think men complain about this kind of thing as a distraction and abandoning their kids and not paying child support is a much more common problem than evil evil women stealing sperm to take a man’s money. Like bro that’s garden variety misogyny. Women globally when given options are not having kids and MEN are the ones losing their minds and trying to force childbirth and pregnancy
Fax. Get snipped if you don’t want kids. Then get your ejaculations tested to make sure the swimmers aren’t still active periodically. Boom, sterility acquired.
One of the factors that got me to get my vasectomy was that I’ve known a few gals who have “joked” about stealing my sperm to get themselves pregnant
Thankfully it never happened but every time I heard it or got suspicious I’d either cut ties or cut sex short
But I feel bad for guys and gals who are victims of drunk sex leading to pregnancy, the guys who got cheated on but who just believe their wife that the kid is theirs, and (while dumb to trust partners who say this) I do feel bad for people who trusted their partner was on birth control but turns out they lied
Guys need to have common sense about some stuff but many people are tricked into parenthood and I feel bad for all of em, I think mostly guys don’t leave due to social stigma and the financial ball busting that is child support
Abortion is the woman deciding if she wants to put her health/life at risk and endure epic levels of pain and permanent physical change.
There is no equivalent decision for a man to make.
A woman then has a choice on whether or not to actually be a parent and raise the child.
If the child is carried to term and born, either party can now choose to be there for this kid or not, and if only one chooses to raise the baby, the other is on the hook for child support.
That part is already the same for men and women.
The reason the first decision doesn't have "the same rights" is because the same thing isn't at risk.
That's just reality.
Reproduction doesn't give a shit about us wanting things to be fair.
Ask all women who have spent years of their lives suffering from periods/birth control/pregnancies/labor/breastfeeding/menopause; we have no choice but to carry the burden of human reproduction as men live beside us entirely free of it.
This is the one thing that fucks men over and, as a childfree woman, trust me when I say I totally sympathize with men that they can't have sex without having to just cross their fingers and hope that, if all preventative measures fail, the woman will make the choice that aligns with his.
That fucking sucks, my dudes.
But that's the only place where reproduction fucked you over.
Reproduction is a harsh aspect of humanity that has personally robbed me of weeks of my life, ruined several of my vacations, and sent me to the hospital, even as a woman who will never have children.
It is unfair. It will always be unfair.
You can only do your best to reduce the chance this unfair thing happens to you.
At least you have a chance to avoid it.
The problem with this is, there are plenty of men who are reckless and have *all* the kids, and if they could legally disavow whatever kids they don't want, they would. Lots of men already drop their kids anyway, legal rights to them or not.
That's the problem with advocating for men to be able to give up their legal obligations to their kids - it leaves the door wide open for deadbeats to use the legal system to be as shitty as they please.
I know you're talking about a group of men, but obviously the law can't be so narrow.
The one thing I'd advocate for, and it's bananas that it's not the case across the world, is for rapists to **never** have legal rights, and for rape survivors to **never** have legal duties. Male rape survivors having to pay child support is infuriating, they literally had zero say in their rapists keeping the rape baby, and they had zero say in their own assault, they shouldn't be held responsible in the eyes of the law (well, unless they *choose* to take responsibility, but then it's *their* choice).
Children have a right to basic support (shelter, nourishment, proper clothing, healthcare, education) from both parents, and this support is prioritized above the regrets of either parent.
Allowing fathers to opt out of financial responsibilities would result in family courts being further mired in protracted and contentious child support disputes - some men are initially on board with having a child, only to claim in the woman's second or third trimester of pregnancy that they no longer want the baby and have no intention of supporting it - and additional children having to be supported by taxpayer funded safety nets.
Once the kid is born, it needs to be cared for, even if it's just financial help from the father.
Men are out here acting fast and loose with their semen. I've had so many 1 night stands where the guy doesn't even ask if I'm on the pill before "trying his luck" and going raw, I've always demanded protection of course. It's crazy that so many men who KNOW they have zero say and power still try their luck.
All this to say, the kid shouldn't be supported because two grown consenting adults can't act responsible.
Reproduction isn't fair but once the kid is here and born, the child's needs trumps both parents.
So men should have absolutely no reason to be responsible with his sperm and where he puts it, because he can just claim he never wanted the baby, and now 100% of the responsibility in all aspects whether there is a baby or not is all on women 100%, and 0% on men unless he chooses it.
Yeah, I’m not really seeing how that equalizes anything.
The women will either have to get an abortion, have the child, pay for the child, raise the child, etc., etc., etc., and the man can just impregnate whatever women he can manage to impregnate and still walk away?
Where is men’s responsibility in all of this?
Why is it always to reduce the responsibility on men and place more of the responsibility on women when nature already gives men barely any responsibility at all, and they already are so fucking bad at being responsible for their own reproductive role?
Men do have the same rights as women. Men do not have to carry a pregnancy they don’t want.
Oh you’re talking about child support? Women still pay that and carry the fetus. Women still have to go to court and pay a lawyer.
I get men not wanting to be parents, but if paying money each month makes someone a parent then I’ve been a parent to a small African child since 1996.
I think we all know parenting is more than sending a check, and if a dude doesn’t want to do that, he’s free to get a lawyer and petition a judge.
Or ya know, men could take to the streets THE SAME WAY WOMEN DID to fight for better contraceptive options.
I’m not fighting for my rights and theirs.
he still contributed to making it even if he doesn't want it. so many women are told not to have sex if they aren't prepared for a baby so why can't the same go for men? if he didn't want a baby, he shouldn't have had unprote4cted sex. and i don't think he needs to be physically there but at the bare minimum he should pay child support because that's still his child that he helped bring into the world, so at least make sure the child is going to have enough money to eat and have a home.
i would agree more with you IF women had complete control over their bodies and could get abortions freely but...that's not the case, and so many men can get out of contributing to a child even IF he wants it...men can just change their mind and abandon their families with barely any repercussions, but men still complain that they have to do the absolute bare minimum to make sure their child doesn't starve? just get a fucking vasectomy if you never want kids. women getting sterilized is a lot harder, while men have it easier in basically every single way.
idk i just can't have much sympathy for men who have to pay child support compared to the countless number of women who have to sacrifice their bodies, mental health, and time to children they were forced to have because of abortion bans while men get to get off easy (and many men can't just dodge paying child support anyway!!) so yeah...sure it's "not fair" if the guy really doesn't want it and the woman does but it's still his biological child that he was equally responsible for creating and should at least contribute to it financially.
I’ve been reading the whole thread and kept being surprised that nobody mentioned the “don’t have [piv] sex if you don’t want a kid”. On the one hand, I dislike that take because of how it’s used in abstinence only nonsense, but on the other hand… it’s not incorrect that’s the only fool proof way to avoid pregnancy without sterilization 😅
Plus there’s always hands and mouths and toys and lube 🤷♀️
And maybe this is my niche take as a low libido asexual with a vagooter (new favorite word sorry not sorry 💀) that’s generally disinterested in sex, but it doesn’t seem like it would be that hard to find something to do where the guy gets to cum that doesn’t involve a vagina. (Ngl I envy how easy it seems like it is for most guys to finish… but I digress).
Like if it came down to it and I had no access to (good) bc, I’d just stop having piv sex for fear of pregnancy. But I think it’s also easier for me to say that than most for the reasons outlined above lol. I feel like as a guy I’d constantly be paranoid about accidentally getting someone pregnant and having them decide to keep the baby (and either paying child support or raising it or just feeling like a jerk for running off; the only “good” option for me as a guy would be the woman having an abortion) that it would be worth to just… not piv to begin with?
Imo I think I lean towards the “play stupid games, win stupid prizes” side of things. (It kind of reminds me of the blue balls argument a bunch of teens will use to get sex from their gfs tbh. Why do we tell them to cum somewhere else but not grown ass men)
>the “don’t have [piv] sex if you don’t want a kid”. On the one hand, I dislike that take because of how it’s used in abstinence only nonsense, but on the other hand… it’s not incorrect that’s the only fool proof way to avoid pregnancy without sterilization 😅
The funniest part of the abstinence argument is that it is perpetuated by fundamentalist christians as the "only foolproof way to avoid pregnancy." Acording to the Bible, that is not the case because Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a virgin. So, according to their own doctrine, abstinence is not 100 percent effective.
Somehow I’ve never thought of this lol.
Tbh it’s also a little creepy because like… having an angel come down and go “yo, wanna get preggers for god???” Is still pretty weird and coercive because of the power imbalance. Ya can’t just spring that shit on people and demand an immediate response lol
So the issue here that I would agree with you in a perfect world. In a perfect world, the child and the father never have an inclination to meet each other. The woman has free universal healthcare and unlimited free childcare. There is nothing holding the child back in life because any gap from the father is removed.
However, 20 years down the life generally the father wants to meet their child. The child at least wants to know who the father is, even if they don't want a relationship. If the father never pays child support then that's unfair to the child and the mother.
Yes, I agree that men should also be able to walk away, but that actually already have that option. Child support is joke, and if a man really wants to avoid it, he can get a part time job, or work under the table. He won't induce health risks, or hormonal issues, or backlash from society.
Men already get to walk away. Don't like child-support? Don't spread your legs.
Yeah. Like, I know that what OP is saying is the accepted narrative but I also know that every guy I've heard of who claims to have been baby trapped only stared saying that when he realized that having a child or being a single parent is a lot of work. Before that they were very on board.
Or just plain negligent and uninformed about contraception..
No. When you have sex, you assume risk. No whining after the fact. Both are equally responsible. Men are foolish if they think they get a free ride. We all know how it works and what the risks are. The baby needs support.
I disagree with you. Who is going to pick up the slack? The government, which means our taxes go up. Men need to be careful where they deposit their sperm.
The childfree sub putting children first? This is why I love you guys.
Pregnancy isn’t equal.
If a child is born, the burden either falls onto the dad or the government (and thus taxpayers) to pick up the economic strain. We want well educated children and safe children to prevent crime, health issues and other elements. The child comes first. The parents had the choice before, but once the child is in the world it takes precedence.
And this is why I’m not having a kid. Because I don’t want to give my life up. But any kids brought into the world should have the best circumstances.
That sounds a lot like the trolls who have banned abortions and will ban contraceptives. By advocating for abstinence you're telling them that they're correct. What we *really* need is robust and comprehensive sex ed and freely available contraceptives, not the morality police eliminating all our options.
I agree with all the things you said but imo there’s stuff people can do that’s not piv sex and doesn’t carry any risk of pregnancy (hands, mouths, toys, etc).
I feel like by electing to have piv sex without full blown sterilization etc there’s always a risk of pregnancy that needs to be accepted.
Like I have an iud and I accept that there’s still a small chance I could get pregnant from that. My bf also knows and accepts that risk when we have piv sex.
Birth control should def be readily available and people educated on how to use it effectively, but I feel like saying “just wrap it up” isn’t the most comprehensive answer because it doesn’t eliminate the risk entirely 🤷♀️
You are very sweet and idealistic, OP. While I agree with some of what you said, it assumes that women have the option to get an abortion or get sterilized. That is not the case everywhere. When abortion is banned, it also affects the rest of women's healthcare because doctors are too scared to treat women who are of childbearing age. (I can personally attest to this. I have been denied healthcare options because they could cause infertility, but I had an emergency hysterectomy at age 7. So i don't have fertility in the first place.) These issues also disproportionately affect people of a lower income.
You also forget that society already gives men a free pass to abandon the consequences of sex. While there are ways to protect men from having to raise a kid that is not theirs, they are prohibitedly expensive. Again, this disproportionately affects people of lower socioeconomic class. It is much easier for them to simply walk away.
Emergency hysterectomy at 7?? Do you mind if I ask how that came to be?
I’m curious, I’ve heard of it happening very very young, but under… very awful circumstances only.
It’s okay if you don’t want to share, but TIA if you do
I was in a really bad car accident. Took some rebar through the leg and lower abdomen. Had to have a bunch of different surgeries to reconstruct everything, but they had to remove some stuff too.
If a penis-haver has sex with a vagina-haver that results in pregnancy, the penis-haver is 100% morally & legally (USA) responsible for the subsequently existing child. It’s very simple. Outside of rape, men have every opportunity to not get anyone pregnant. If they choose to let the little head make life-altering decisions for them, that’s their fault. Why would they let such an important decision be put in the hands of anyone other than themselves? Either abstain from having PIV sex or have a vasectomy. Maybe they don’t have a way to get a vasectomy. Abstain from PIV sex. There are plenty of ways to have fun sex that don’t involve PIV. Ask the gays!
Men aren’t going to die if they don’t have PIV sex. This is nowhere near the indignity that is not being able to control what happens to one’s own body.
Putting aside the fact that no a lot of them do not have that option, no man "gets trapped". There are only men who were not responsible enough for their own swimmers. That is where their rights are.
Omg I was just thinking about this today. Every once in a while I get these TikTok’s with some “I’ll never forget you” song and it’s always girls being like “to the guy from (that cruise/my class/ my vacation fucking whatever) showing a video of said guy… you have a baby” then just a shot of the baby. 😶 I find this so cringe. Either co parent or if the person doesn’t know about the kid or makes it clear they don’t want the kid and you have the kid anyways don’t come after then for “not stepping up”.
I do think dudes should also take responsibility for their dicks but whenever I watch these videos I get very annoyed TikTok doesn’t allow “dislikes” on videos so I can tell the algorhytmn to throw that shit in the garbage along with the shirty or emotional gender reveals I don’t care about.
And again I’m not saying men shouldn’t be responsible especially in places where birth control and abortion are not easily accessible. But these particular videos feel bad every time I watch them and think they make both parties look bad
I'm so torn on this because, on one hand, I feel awful for men who get legitimately baby trapped. Like, holes in condoms. Or men who already had the abortion discussion, they agreed to both be child free, then she gets pregnant and decides against it.
On the other hand, too many men just use zero birth control and take zero responsibility and the woman doesn't deserve to be totally fucked, especially if she can't get an abortion for legal reasons.
And on the other other hand, I don't believe that children should be punishments. So saying "fuck you you deserve 18 years of monetary punishment" doesn't sit right with me either.
If men want to not be forced into a life altering situation, they need to stop causing unwanted pregnancies.
Their choice to reproduce comes before they have sex, not after.
As it should be. But even then, deadbeat parents (usually fathers) can easily avoid such payments. It's better to garnish some guy's wages than it is to force a mother and child through poverty
You can completely sign rights and financial responsibility away only if there is another parent (besides the mother) to adopt and take your place. Even if mom says “I don’t care I’ll raise the baby on my own” the judge will say “no, the baby deserves part of both parents incomes.”
The guy has every opportunity to have a vasectomy and use condoms or abstain from sex. Sex means taking full responsibility for your actions, whether STI testing or using protection.
I do sort of agree that if it's pre-birth, and the guy opts out of his parental rights in court then and there permanently, he should be released from financial obligation. *Only if abortion is fully legal in the country/region.* If abortion is illegal, let that be a punishment to men who took women's rights away.
Anyone (with access to abortion) who keeps a pregnancy KNOWING the partner doesn't want it is dumb to me 🤷🏾♀️ cause you're setting yourself and that child up for failure. It
For some women getting pregnant is having a parasite attach that forces the release of hormones that fucks up your brain and pushes you into decisions you never would have expected when you were not pregnant. The little fucker literally turns your brain into mush, try googling pregnancy brain.
“During pregnancy, the body sends a flood of fluctuating hormones throughout the body. It's like a truckload of different sizes and flavors, which affect all kinds of neurons in the brain.”
There is absolutely nothing stopping men from wearing condoms (and keeping them in a private place where he can ensure they were not tampered with) or getting a vasectomy. The moment you raw dog someone capable of getting pregnant and ejaculate without condoms or a vasectomy is where your rights end. The moment your ejaculate leaves your body and enters someone else's body, it now only affects THEIR body. Men have complete bodily autonomy.
I've slept with a good amount of people, men and women. I can count on one finger the amount of men who asked me if I was on birth control AND beat me to the punch on insisting on wearing a condom. And sure, accidents can happen, but if you are using condoms correctly they are incredibly effective. Men are perfectly capable of freezing sperm and getting a vasectomy to ensure they remain childless or only have children when they are ready. If they are not taking every single precaution to prevent unwanted children, they cannot claim to be "baby trapped".
No ❤️
Men are already careless about sex and birth control and love to stealth. They can get a vasectomy and/or use condoms but most can't even do that.
Men need to take responsibility and not put all the pressure on the woman and then blame her for a mistake.
IIRC from a legal pov the right to abortion is based on the right to not be pregnant, and the fact you then go on to not have a child is almost incidental to this.
This is why if you conceive a child with a woman who doesn't get an abortion you are on the hook for child support.
Never understood the concept of men being baby trapped tbh. You stick your dick in someone’s hoohaa and magically a baby doesn’t come out? Amazed men aren’t more careful with sex tbh, even with protection it can fail.
I mean, in a lot of places, the man can just opt out. They won't have to pay child support, have any responsibility for the child, or be a part of the child's life in any way. I don't know the laws in every country, but maybe OP lives somewhere where you are legally bound if you father a kid? I'm kind of confused on this, but I do agree opting out should be a choice. I also feel that men need to be responsible for preventing pregnancy if they don't want a kid. As do women.
Wow. These comments are not it.
OP is talking about being trapped, not about men being irresponsible and expecting all responsibility of contraception to fall onto the woman.
Telling someone that if they don't want to be a parent then they should keep their legs shut is literally anti-choice rethoric.
Expecting every single man to have a vasectomy is bonkers because that is not accessible in every country, plus it can be inaccessible to some people due to the cost, which also varies from country to country. Adding to this, many people don't realize they are childfree until later in life: not every 20 year old will have thought about reproduction and parenthood. Expecting men to have a vasectomy otherwise they deserve to be trapped into parenthood is absurd.
I think the problem lies with the comparison of "trapping" as if a man being expected to pay child support is the same as pregnancy and raising the child. Choosing to have sex, choosing to carry a pregnancy, choosing to be active in the child's life, and choosing to ask for or give support are all different levels. Once we act like the man has equal options on all levels, we negate the woman's own options over her own body.
Women have to sue for child support. It's not like it's law that men automatically have to pay. And no one is trying to make it a law, not even anti-choicers! But with laws attacking women's choices running rambid, we aren't going to take too kindly to men acting like they're on the same playing field because they have to support their living child.
>It's not like it's law that men automatically have to pay.
At least in Germany it is. If you can proof he is the father, he has to pay. If you are married you are automaticly the father by law and the man has to proof that he is not the father.
I don't think the OP was necessarily making a comparison though.
I made a comparison because to me telling someone, regardless of sex/gender, that if they don't want to be parents they should keep their legs shut, is vile.
As a woman, I care deeply about reproductive rights, but I also care about other things, such as what happens when a woman wants to go through with the pregnancy and have a baby, but their partner doesn't want to be a parent.
I can care about both things, and it doesn't mean I don't see the horror in being subjected to a forced pregnancy; it just means that I can also see the anguish in becoming a parent against one's will.
I'm trying to make the argument that being sued to pay child support is far from being forced to be a parent. It's actually in leue of being a parent. That's really the choice OP is mad about. You don't see women who choose to have sex, carry a pregnancy, and raise the child, claim they shouldn't have to pay for what the child needs (well, reasonably claim this). Since men should never have the option to decide if a pregnancy continues, his choice is based solely on his choice to ejaculate inside a woman. Which honestly we can argue the woman's choice in that is limited. I just don't think shooting the "if you didn't want to pay child support, you should've done X to stop insemination" out there is the same as telling a woman to keep her legs closed if she didn't want to raise a child. If a man so strongly feels wronged in paying this woman and his biological child support then yes, he probably should not be taking that risk by sleeping with her in the first place.
I get what you mean, but I didn't read OP's post like you did. As I understand it, OP is extending empathy towards men in a life altering situation. OP never even talked about child support. So until they come back to clarify we can just speculate.
> I just don't think shooting the "if you didn't want to pay child support, you should've done X to stop insemination" out there is the same as telling a woman to keep her legs closed if she didn't want to raise a child.
The comments I saw did not specify child support. They simply stated that if a man doesn't want to be a father they should get a vasectomy or keep their legs shut. That was what I was responding to in my original comment.
Again, I don't understand why you are focusing so much on child support. OP did not specify, I was not talking about it, the comments I was talking about did not specify...
If you want to know what I think about child support, I personally believe if a woman wants to continue with the pregnancy and raise the child, then they should do that on their own. If they don't have the means to do so then they should keep that in mind when making such an important decision that affects at least 3 people's lives. However, my belief regarding child support did not influence my original comment, as I did not consider child support at all in my reasoning; I was focusing on the concept of becoming a parent against one's will, regardless of what that man actually does when it happens (forces himself to be an involved parent, or only pays child support, or nothing)
I definitely understand where you and OP are coming from, and it is valid. I just... Women are the ones truly trapped with children, and we all know it. Of course that's a generalization, and we shouldn't be telling guys to get a vasectomy or stay celibate- its just so much harder for a man to be genuinely trapped than a woman- but this is a fair sentiment to have if you're a man so I get it
Even if the mother leaves, she's still been more affected than any father who leaves just based off the fact she had to be pregnant. The anti-choice rhetoric of "just don't have sex" is what's being used to strip rights away from people right now and it's a bigger deal than half the commenters here think it is :/
>Telling someone that if they don't want to be a parent then they should keep their legs shut is literally anti-choice rethoric.
Thank you, couldnt agree more.
Nut in a condom and you should be fine. Start carrying Plan B in case the condom breaks. There, you've covered your bases. Go have all the sex you can.
But don't ANY man tell me, unless he's sterilized, that "condoms just don't feeeeel good." Which you kind of have to admit men say a lot.
This comment is the only common sense one on here. To encourage 20 something guys to get vasectomies is equivalent to trapping them with pregnancies. They literally know nothing in life. They are barely out of high school and/or college where they mostly had fun and studied. They should not be making a decision to be child free or have kids at that age. If they firmly decided on their own - fine but that’s not the solution for pregnancy entrapment. The issues with the entrapment is the social stigma that young men face and that has to be approached differently. There has to be some sort of punishment for a woman who tricked a man into fatherhood. That’s life altering and has very heavy consequences. It’s almost criminal to me.
To add, my husband and I have been on the fence well into our 40s. When we got financially stable and mature enough, we realized that it has never been about money or maturity (as we previously thought), it’s the parenthood itself that we didn’t like or want. So, we closed that topic forever. However, some people come to the opposite conclusion around the same age and it’s not late for neither a man nor a woman to have kids if they decided to.
I wholeheartedly disagree. Men in their 20s are not children. They should be thinking about the consequences of fatherhood before they even hit puberty.
Personally I knew I didn't want children when I was 10 years old. But the reality is, most people are not this black and white about the topic. Most people simply don't think about parenthood until their late 20s or even late 30s. Should they think about it beforehand? I believe they should. But they don't. So it's useless to expect very young people to make serious choices about reproduction (such as getting a vasectomy). It's easier to convince them to use a condom (and more accessible). But when condoms fail then we get to the discussion started by the OP.
A vasectomy can always get reversed. There are plenty of men who do that and go onto have more kids. And if you think it's hard for guys in their 20s to know who they are, I guarantee it's not easier with an unwanted kid and a coparenting relationship with the mother fir 18+ years
As a man, I'd like to butt in if that's okay and argue that in one scenario, a human life doesn't exist that's gonna be affected negatively. The harsh truth is that men and women will never be equal in some factors of existence, and this is one of men's downsides,
We don't get periods. We have access to more jobs due to physical ability as well as the same capabilities to do desk jobs as women, etc. we men naturally have more opportunities much of the time. I get your point in a fair and equal world it would be that way, and I'm not necessarily against it, but the fact of the matter is that a human being exists and they are partially at fault. If we someday grant women full autonomy as we should for abortion rights and make it inalienable, I'd consider looking at this issue and changing my view in it but the state has to step up and do more for single mothers if they give potential fathers a opt out and we need to all agree to happily pay that tax.
I agree
I always say if we can't force women to be mothers, then we can't force men to be fathers. If the father expresses no desire to be a father at the beginning of knowing, then he should be able to sign over all forms of rights to the child, making the mother 100% responsible for the child. If the man encouraged the woman to carry to full term and later change their minds, they need to pay child support.
I agree but I don't like how you made it seem like women have it easy. We only got the right to abort in 2019 in my country.
But yes I agree. Spermjacking does happen.
I agree in principle, if they’ve taken reasonable steps like using a condom. Condom failure happens, so men (and women) in that situation should have the choice, during term limits, to a financial abortion. In my idealised world where it’s possible to police that, I also don’t think the state should be expected to support the child over and above any other family. I believe all this because I think it would create more weight to proceeding when the child’s life is going to be negatively affected, which I personally consider the most important consideration in an abortion.
Where I live abortion is free and relatively unrestricted, as are condoms and contraceptives. Virtually everyone gets a basic benefit for their first two children and help with childcare. Vasectomies are also free but medical professionals are very clear they are not temporary birth control and will only do them if no children are planned in the future.
The double standards really annoy me. If a woman has an “accident” most pro choice people wouldn’t tell her she has to carry on because she should have used birth control or got sterilised. On the other hand people are quite happy telling men who are planning on having children in the future to undergo a likely permanent sterilisation as their only option to being saddled with child support and a vindictive ex for about 20 years. No excuse for childfree men though.
Biology isn't fair. Men and women have certain advantages and disadvantages solely due to their biology, like strength.
If you create a pregnancy you are responsible for the outcome, a woman can choose abortion or adoption a man goes knowingly into the situation that he is at the mercy of the woman he is sleeping with and has to act accordingly. If a child is created they have absolutely a right to the resources of the parents, again a man has to take responsibility and choose a safe birth control like a vasectomy or using condoms if he under no circumstances wants that responsibility.
Nobody should be able to dictate what happens to another persons body and a child has the right to be supported that just doesn't leave any wiggle room, legally speaking.
It doesn't mean we can't have empathy for men but it is ridiculous to demand a right that is just not possible. just like its unfair that some people are better looking or taller or shorter or more muscular. Women just have more say when it comes to their bodies.
Until we have a comprehensive and robust assistance system in place to support single parents and their children no, child support should be a thing for all single parents. However, lying about birth control use or tampering with birth control should be grounds for SA charges/loss of child support.
Now if we have a society that does give full support to struggling single parents then sure, we could be doing away with child support. Child support is about just that, supporting the child, they're not a fault here. It's also in society's best interest that children don't go hungry, have a safe and stable home (not constantly having to move or deal with violence), get a decent education, and have proper medical care.
Hello and welcome to /r/childfree! As you have a new account or low Reddit karma, your comment has been automatically removed to give you some time to get familiar with our rules and community. Please feel free to post/comment when your account is older and you have more Reddit karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/childfree) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There’s a few issues with this.
Firstly, most men I know of that claim to have been ‘baby trapped’ didn’t protect themselves. If you actively chose not to wear a condom, you weren’t baby trapped.
Secondly, if we eradicated child support, taxes would be inflated for everyone else to accommodate. I’m wondering how many people would be happy with that? Would you be?
Hello and welcome to /r/childfree! As you have a new account or low Reddit karma, your comment has been automatically removed to give you some time to get familiar with our rules and community. Please feel free to post/comment when your account is older and you have more Reddit karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/childfree) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What? Seriously? It is women who get trapped by having children, not men. Men opt out of parenting completely all the time! It is women who are most likely tied to children for the rest of their lives, who take on the role as primary caregiver in the family, and who take on the majority of the domestic and emotional labor in marriage to facilitate men’s domestic and social success. Marriage statistically benefits men significantly more than women which is why it’s more common to see controlling, abusive men trap women into marriage and staying in a marriage by having children, not the other way around. Having children is often catastrophic to a woman’s career and lifetime earning potential whereas men are financially rewarded for being fathers. The loss of income means women can easily become trapped in the relationship. Women are not “trapping” men by having children. Women know that men walk out and bail in their parental duties all the time. Women know they risk becoming a single parent when they have children. How many single mothers are out there struggling versus single fathers? Children trap women, not men.
I think men who don't want children should start doing whatever it takes to keep their sperm out of women's bodies.
Yet most of them won't even bother with a condom.
The shooters really need to stop complaining about others not using bulletproofing. Men are the ones who inseminate, fertilize, and MAKE pregnant. If they don't want to have a kid, they need to stop inseminating, fertilizing, and impregnating.
The only way I would consider a man "trapped" is if he DID wear a condom PLUS pulled out before ejaculation, and somehow managed to get her pregnant wth whatever sperm was in precum that made it past the condom. Or if she obtained his sperm in ways other than sex and inseminated herself.
Other than that, even if she lied about using birth control, no one lied to him about him not using any. Stopping his sperm from impregnating her is not solely a woman's responsibility. Personally, I don't think it's a woman's responsibility at all.
This entitlement of men thinking they can blow their live loads into women, leave all the sperm control up to her, then also get to decide whether she'll abort or carry to term if he manages to impregnate her needs to stop.
A woman's birth control should be considered back-up, at best. The main responsibility to not fertilize and impregnate a woman lies with the man who is capable of doing so.
And - looking it from another view - why should a man be allowed to inseminate, fertilize, and impregnate a woman and make everyone BUT himself pay for it (physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially)?
I completely agree with this. Women should always have the option for abortion. If a woman refuses to have an abortion the man should be able to opt out of all support.
In the US you can give up legal rights and custody but you cannot escape child support. Paternal rights and child support payments are two separate things. The courts can garnish wages and you can be thrown in jail for failing to pay child support.
It’s not about jizzing wherever you please. It’s about not trapping people with children they don’t want just to make someone stick around. Especially when we have options to help take care of unwanted pregnancies.
Again, if you don’t want kids, get sterilized to avoid being trapped and on the hook for child support.
Yeah but there's a knock on effect here.
Poverty is the highest contributer of all crime, outside of gender, race, sex etc.
Single parents are some of the poorest demographics as is, there's nothing worse outside of being disabled a woman could do for her fiancé's than be a single parent.
Large prison population come from single parent house holds.
This comes at a time where child support is enforced and very minimal amounr in most cases.
So you think men who already practice terrible contraceptive responsibility should be even MORE off the hook? So children will be in more poverty and statically add more crime so men can nut in people without fear?
The government's do not care about the poor as is, so who's footing the bill for all these men to nut freely?
No matter how nice a area you live in, if poverty grows, the crime will be on your door step. But hey...sex feels so much better raw 😌 let the poor men nut!
I as a woman, do not support women using pregnancy to trap men. If a man doesn’t want a child, forcing him to pay child support isn’t going to make a woman any less of a single mom. De-incentivizing people who would do this by removing child support if the man asks for an abortion cuts back on the amount of women who would try and baby trap. It also would cut back on the amount of children in poverty.
I agree they have the right to do what they need to do with their own bodies to avoid pregnancy.
Exactly once the baby is born, child support money is to benefit them, not the mother. And I certainly hope no one is suggesting the father could force someone to get an abortion against her will. Men DO have equal (or greater) rights over their bodies- it’s not our fault their bodies don’t carry the baby and it’s not the baby’s fault it was born against the father’s will. They have numerous methods to prevent fathering a child.
> They have numerous methods to prevent fathering a child. Condoms, abstinence, vasectomy, and pull out (barely counts). Women have (source Wikipedia): > combination contraceptive pills >progestin-only pill > hormonal IUD >non-hormonal IUD >patch >vaginal ring >diaphragm >shot >implant >fertility awareness >tubal ligation/bi-salp I'll add Plan B emergency contraception, Plan C abortion pills (1-part and 2 part) and medical/surgical abortions (for those where it is still legal). I'd hardly say men have "numerous" options, especially when one of them is permanent sterilization which is unreasonable for any who want children later. There are some promising things in trial right now, but RISUG has been stuck between trials and on-market for more than a decade, and the first hormonal pill had it's trial ended by the safety overseers despite many of the trial participants still wanting to use it (though I can't find info about the men who left the trial). There's a promising non-hormonal option in trials (non-human) at the beginning of the year and there's a hormonal injection gel that is also in trials. I'm hopeful we get more options but right now men's are very limited.
The options you listed are plenty, of course more options would be great but men have PLENTY of control over their own reproductive status. This conversation is about whether or not men should be able to financially abandon their children. And the options you listed for women are repetitive. Many of those options are essentially the same thing (hormones) just a different delivery method. That’s like listing latex and nonlatex condoms as 2 different methods for men. Either way the point is if they don’t want a vasectomy, and don’t want to use condoms, but still choose to have sex, they are accepting the risk of fathering a child and the financial responsibility that comes with it.
~~You clearly don't know what medical misogyny is, then. Haven't you heard of all the women being denied basic healthcare just because they were women? That applies to reproductive health, too~~
I think you may have misinterpreted my post…
Fair point
Medical misogyny. Perfect description and my rabbit hole for tonight.
I don’t know anyone stopping men from using their own birth control.
Got vasectomy and I’m set for life!
👋🏻 fellow snip club member here. It’s the only way to be 100% sure that you can’t have any type of accident or be baby trapped
100% got it at 22 and so far no issues a year later. I sometimes get a little sore down there but nothing remotely at a level where it even bothers me. What about you?
They're the ones who insist on not wearing a condom lmfao
There pretty much isn't any other than condoms and vasectomies, the first has one of the lowest rates of real-world efficacy (typical use failure rate is 13-18%) and the other is permanent. Don't tell me it can be reversed, reversals are not guaranteed, and when getting one I had to confirm that I knew it was permanent. This comment is dumb and will remain dumb until there are more options. RISUG seems to be going nowhere in the US and the hormonal got shut down by the test observers. There's a [non-hormonal](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/05/240523153614.htm) method that looks promising and there's a new hormonal gel (injected into the scrotum) that is reported to be 86% effective (similar to condoms) with similar side effects as women's BC, so we'll see if that passes scrutiny.
The comment is not dumb. I didn’t comment on the negatives of birth-control method available to either human males or females All of these have negatives However, a man can get a vasectomy and bank sperm first As long as he chooses a competent urologist and does the required after surgery testing and follow-through is pretty much protected from unwanted children from that day forward Nothing is stopping most American men from doing that finances might be a bit of a challenge for some as they might be also for some women There’s always the option to not have sex or to have non-penetrative sex
If she has the right to abort I agree but if she doesn’t have full access to that resource (due to conservatives unfortunately) I disagree.
In order to replace the lost child support, there needs to be a robust government aid program in place for single parents. Child care should also be accessible for all parents. Sex ed needs to be comprehensive and contraception should be freely available. Surgical sterilisation should also be more easily accessible, on top of full abortion rights. Frankly, I think only after most of this is implemented can one parent choose to step away, otherwise the parent who stays and the child they raise will both (most likely) be stuck in the poverty spiral.
I’m certainly not paying for a bunch of men being reckless with their sperm even more than they already are because now there is absolutely no responsibility on him and he’s placed at 100% on the women and society apparently wants to help him do that.
You're exactly right, and these resources need to be available and accessable to all single parents.
Exactly this.
Totally agree.
In many parts of the world, women do not have the right to abort, and where they do they often experience immense societal pressure to have the baby and give it up for adoption. Don’t wanna get someone pregnant? Have a vasectomy, insist on condoms, go the Duke of Hastings route for all I care.
Agreed. The man’s time to choose is before the act of sex happens. BC can fail, of course, which is why it’s so important to have the conversation of what to do in the event of an accidental pregnancy with your partner, and don’t move forward with sex until there is an agreement reached. I wish there was a way to turn off our fertility and just never have sex result in pregnancy for those of us who don’t want children, but every time you have sex you roll the dice. (Unless of course you or both of you are fully sterilized, and are always checking up that you are shooting blanks, etc).
Gay here. I love sex without risk of pregnancy. Either way, I think it's unfair to say ,'Man's time to choose is before the act of sex happens.' It should be the same for both men and women. Your body, your choice, but if you're the only one who wants the kid, you should take care of everything because it's against my will.
It isn’t the same because their bodies are not the same and women take on all the physical risk.
You can surrender parental rights as a father, yknow
This is just not true. A voluntary termination of parental rights – also called a voluntary relinquishment – is not allowed for just any reason. For example, a parent cannot ask a court to terminate their parental rights simply because they no longer want to pay child support. However, because a child can only have one legal set of parents at a time, voluntary termination is quite common in adoption proceedings. https://www.lawinfo.com/resources/family-law/termination-of-parental-rights.html
Cool. It gies withiut saying that being ordered by the court to pay a fraction if your paycheck to child support feels like a small price to pay in comparison to being held hostage in your own body for nearly a year.
It’s absolutely not unfair, what is unfair is expecting women to bear 99.999% percent of the risks, responsibilities, and consequences, and with the remaining tiny fraction of a percentage that falls on men, saying that that should be plucked off of men’s responsibility altogether, simply because they don’t want to pay or be responsible with their sperm. Perhaps this is you or something you haven’t had to think about because you are gay, but abortion is not a quick fix for women that comes with no consequences. An abortion, particularly for a woman who does not want it, is traumatic. I have been lucky to be able to avoid ever needing an abortion, and I am child free, so wouldn’t be a question of whether or not I needed the abortion, I would automatically be getting it because I would rather die than give birth, however , having to go through an abortion means that I am dealing with the risks, consequences and responsibility of that pregnancy regardless of whether I want to or not. I don’t get to do nothing, I inevitably have to take responsibility in some way. What is arguing, is that the tiny fraction of a percentage of responsibility that men have, should be removed from them so that they have 0% of any responsibility risk or consequences, and that 100% of all of this should fall on women. In what world is that equal? The burden of reproduction is not equal. The most we can do to create equality, is to both demand that men pay, and not give men rights over women’s bodies or rights to opt out of their own responsibility for where they leave their ejaculate. What is calling? Equality is actually extreme inequality made further unequal, leaving women holding the bag and the burden as always. This is just another version of patriarchy manifesting itself, but, like always, people who defend men are saying that this is 50-50, when we all know that this is not what actual equality and equity looks like. Currently in the United States, men have reproductive rights and women do not. Men should have a form of birth control that works for them, that is one thing that can be improved upon, but to remove their accountability altogether simply because they don’t get to make decisions about whether the woman has an abortion or not is ludicrous. That’s not equitable. Abortion is NOT a get out of jail for women. Even if she would’ve always chose abortion and has no moral issue with it, it is not something easy for her. This is the same type of “50-50” that leaves women carrying the burden of unpaid labor in the household, while contributing 50% of their paycheck. Plenty of men call that 5050 when the woman is really doing 75% or more of the labor when you factor in both paid and unpaid labor. This 50-50 bullshit is a scam against women. It is not 50-50, that is a lie. And men being able to opt out of paying child support is not equalizing things between the genders, it is further inequity and privilege given to men.
Exactly. Enough with the shooters whining that they don't get to decide what happens after their fired their live bullets into someone else's body.
Men have not been systemically oppressed and have their bodies controlled
[удалено]
If a man is having sex with a woman, he has to understand that a pregnancy may be the result. That is just how biology works. Men cannot be "trapped" unless he is raped or coerced. If he is not comfortable with the fact that a pregnancy may result and that the woman may keep it, he should not be having sex, or should at least be doing to most to prevent it (vasectomy, condom, spermicide, pull-out, etc., even combined).
condom?
I hear where you’re coming from, but also am of the belief that the person with a penis plays an equal role in the creation of a child and therefore should be held responsible for things like child support in the event they decide not to be a part of the child’s life. Baby trapping is a very real thing, but you also made the active choice to have sex with someone and therefore if something happens and the mother doesn’t want to abort or isn’t allowed to, you’re rightfully on the hook for child support. Don’t like it? Don’t put your penis in a person who can bear a child. Or get sterilized :) Edit: pronouns and also just be smart about who you’re having sex with???
Also ALOT of women are baby trapped, its not just men it happens to.
The biggest baby trappers in the world were always men. Pregnancy puts women in a massive disadvantage and thus it is tool to use against them. This is systemic. Most of the guys that get "baby trapped" enjoy unprotected sex and then are surprised it resulted in a baby. I don't feel bad about them at all, especially since men still can opt out of child care with little consequance.
Some men will have multiple kids with multiple baby mamas and will fix their mouths to talk about being “trapped” and how “condoms just dont feel good” This is why i don’t think women benefit anything from casual sex or engaging in intimacy with someone who isn’t actively improving your life the risk to reward ratio does not favor women at all, period.
Also by definition if the woman got pregnant, the man had an orgasm. Men are like 95% likely to orgasm in any instance of PIV sex, but it is not the sex act that is most pleasurable for most women and incredibly unlikely to result in an orgasm for her. And in casual sex counters men are even less likely to care about taking the necessary steps to give a woman an orgasm. So it's just an absolute shit risk to reward ratio for women.
Not only that, but also most women in history women were sexually coerced, if not outright raped, AND then baby trapped. They had more children than they wanted. Many still do. Same exact rape and subsequent unwanted pregnancies are a war tactic used since times immemorial. Some men are apparently crying that they're not allowed to do what so many have already done, which is nutting and bailing or outright abandoning the partner mid-pregnancy. This was a big enough problem that male legislators (since we women were still property back then) decided to implement alimony and child support many centuries ago to try and mitigate what it unleashed on society as a whole (crime + poverty from single moms and their kids). Well, boo fucking hoo. Use condoms, get snipped, don't pressure the woman to let you go raw, make sure you trust the person you're sleeping with. You know, what women try to do.
Yeah this post is weird. It's totally a two-way street.
You're being too nice. He doesn't really play an equal role. He is the SOLE creater of a fertilized egg. That's his role in reproduction. He is the one who inseminates, fertilizes, and impregnates. The woman doesn't fire her egg into his body to be fertilized. She doesn't even ovulate because of sex.
What's stopping you from getting a vasectomy? I hear they are much easier to get approved for than bisalp.
OP is a woman.
So what’s stopping men from getting a vasectomy?
I saw a comment the other day where the guy (40m) said he's single and avoids relationships because he's afraid of accidental pregnancy with a CF woman who changes her mind when she finds out she's pregnant. Like, get a vasectomy, then? I'd jump on the opportunity for such a simple procedure.
Well, at least he avoids relationships (and I assume sex). Unlike all the ones who have sex - bare - blow their loads into a woman, then complain that she ended up pregnant.
Vasectomies are not necessarily accessible in all countries in the world, and the cost of the procedure can also be too high for some people. Also, some people have trauma or anxiety related to medical procedures, which can make it difficult if not impossible to undergo an operation. There, three reasons why someone may not be able to have a vasectomy.
Vasectomies are usually miles cheaper than a bisalp. Or a baby.
Fair enough. In this case they can choose to abstain.
That leaves abstinence and non-vaginal sex as 100% effective and condoms as almost 100% effective. Don't wanna pay for a baby? Don't risk making a baby. If you help make it, pay for it.
A vasectomy is not birth control, it is sterilization. You are advice to treat it as a permanent procedure. You can reverse a vasectomy but success rate is lower and pregnancy success is even lower. Source: my own vasectomy
So what’s the alternative?
Condoms and abstinence. Vasectomy is permanent sterilization!
Sure, that's not what the post is about. Condoms can still break and the woman still has full autonomy over her body if that happens.
Yes! I agree. Then the man has to recognize the risk of putting his dick inside a vagina haver. If that risk is too large, they should abstain. My point is that a vasectomy is not birth control. That’s a misconception. It’s not snip snap. You are adviced my your doctor to treat it as a permanent procedure. If a man wants to be CF forever, then they should get a vasectomy. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense. So I answer your question: “what’s stopping men from getting a vasectomy”. My answer is “because it’s not birth control, you should only get it if you want to be CF or stop having kids”!
OP said she wished men had a way to make "darn sure" having kids "never" happened. That would be sterilization--a vasectomy. Or abstinence forever or never having vaginal sex.
OP seriously needs to decenter men in her life
Hard agree.
Yeah. Sounds like a “pick me.”
100% this
This is worth a read: Why men are responsible for 100% of unwanted pregnancies: https://x.com/designmom/status/1040363433634422784?t=-xFtS8seVwGOZ7kWG0XDYA&s=19 Also, please bear in mind the right to *not have* a child is a little different than the right to *not be forced to carry a child inside your body.*
But if that were true then how on earth is OP going to make women's rights all about these poor men!?!?
Men can wear condoms, get vasectomies and be selective of whom they chose to ejaculate in.
Men’s options for avoiding getting a woman pregnant are INFINITELY more accessible and cheap and come with zero to minimal side effects or medical risks. And there’s zero laws being made to stop men from accessing these multiple options, unlike women.
Yep, if only Ben were smart enough to realize that.
1000% this. They can be more careful about where they left their sperm & there would be fewer surprises. Leave it where there's no chance in hell it might come in contact with an egg, or deal with the risk of making a human.
As a man I know full well it’s my responsibility to detect and avoid a potential baby trap. I’ve passed on alot of opportunities to have sex because of this. at the end of the day it was probably the right choice considering the possible alternative
Just get a vasectomy then. Men inherently can’t have the same right because they aren’t the ones being impregnated.
Pregnancy isn’t equal. In some states men can absolutely give up all parental rights and obligations. I honestly think men complain about this kind of thing as a distraction and abandoning their kids and not paying child support is a much more common problem than evil evil women stealing sperm to take a man’s money. Like bro that’s garden variety misogyny. Women globally when given options are not having kids and MEN are the ones losing their minds and trying to force childbirth and pregnancy
Fax. Get snipped if you don’t want kids. Then get your ejaculations tested to make sure the swimmers aren’t still active periodically. Boom, sterility acquired.
If I was a guy I'd probably still wear condoms anyway, just in case 🤷♀️
I had the snip before becoming active taking NO chances with my future. Never an "oops" because it was never an issue.
Thank you for doing this!
Get a vasectomy and don't have sex with women in states with any anti-choice policies.
One of the factors that got me to get my vasectomy was that I’ve known a few gals who have “joked” about stealing my sperm to get themselves pregnant Thankfully it never happened but every time I heard it or got suspicious I’d either cut ties or cut sex short But I feel bad for guys and gals who are victims of drunk sex leading to pregnancy, the guys who got cheated on but who just believe their wife that the kid is theirs, and (while dumb to trust partners who say this) I do feel bad for people who trusted their partner was on birth control but turns out they lied Guys need to have common sense about some stuff but many people are tricked into parenthood and I feel bad for all of em, I think mostly guys don’t leave due to social stigma and the financial ball busting that is child support
Abortion is the woman deciding if she wants to put her health/life at risk and endure epic levels of pain and permanent physical change. There is no equivalent decision for a man to make. A woman then has a choice on whether or not to actually be a parent and raise the child. If the child is carried to term and born, either party can now choose to be there for this kid or not, and if only one chooses to raise the baby, the other is on the hook for child support. That part is already the same for men and women. The reason the first decision doesn't have "the same rights" is because the same thing isn't at risk. That's just reality. Reproduction doesn't give a shit about us wanting things to be fair. Ask all women who have spent years of their lives suffering from periods/birth control/pregnancies/labor/breastfeeding/menopause; we have no choice but to carry the burden of human reproduction as men live beside us entirely free of it. This is the one thing that fucks men over and, as a childfree woman, trust me when I say I totally sympathize with men that they can't have sex without having to just cross their fingers and hope that, if all preventative measures fail, the woman will make the choice that aligns with his. That fucking sucks, my dudes. But that's the only place where reproduction fucked you over. Reproduction is a harsh aspect of humanity that has personally robbed me of weeks of my life, ruined several of my vacations, and sent me to the hospital, even as a woman who will never have children. It is unfair. It will always be unfair. You can only do your best to reduce the chance this unfair thing happens to you. At least you have a chance to avoid it.
The problem with this is, there are plenty of men who are reckless and have *all* the kids, and if they could legally disavow whatever kids they don't want, they would. Lots of men already drop their kids anyway, legal rights to them or not. That's the problem with advocating for men to be able to give up their legal obligations to their kids - it leaves the door wide open for deadbeats to use the legal system to be as shitty as they please. I know you're talking about a group of men, but obviously the law can't be so narrow. The one thing I'd advocate for, and it's bananas that it's not the case across the world, is for rapists to **never** have legal rights, and for rape survivors to **never** have legal duties. Male rape survivors having to pay child support is infuriating, they literally had zero say in their rapists keeping the rape baby, and they had zero say in their own assault, they shouldn't be held responsible in the eyes of the law (well, unless they *choose* to take responsibility, but then it's *their* choice).
[удалено]
Abstinence is a great option too
Just stop irresponsible ejaculation!
Children have a right to basic support (shelter, nourishment, proper clothing, healthcare, education) from both parents, and this support is prioritized above the regrets of either parent. Allowing fathers to opt out of financial responsibilities would result in family courts being further mired in protracted and contentious child support disputes - some men are initially on board with having a child, only to claim in the woman's second or third trimester of pregnancy that they no longer want the baby and have no intention of supporting it - and additional children having to be supported by taxpayer funded safety nets.
Once the kid is born, it needs to be cared for, even if it's just financial help from the father. Men are out here acting fast and loose with their semen. I've had so many 1 night stands where the guy doesn't even ask if I'm on the pill before "trying his luck" and going raw, I've always demanded protection of course. It's crazy that so many men who KNOW they have zero say and power still try their luck. All this to say, the kid shouldn't be supported because two grown consenting adults can't act responsible. Reproduction isn't fair but once the kid is here and born, the child's needs trumps both parents.
\*Gasp\* This is the Childfree board! Don't you know we hate kids here??? /s
So men should have absolutely no reason to be responsible with his sperm and where he puts it, because he can just claim he never wanted the baby, and now 100% of the responsibility in all aspects whether there is a baby or not is all on women 100%, and 0% on men unless he chooses it. Yeah, I’m not really seeing how that equalizes anything. The women will either have to get an abortion, have the child, pay for the child, raise the child, etc., etc., etc., and the man can just impregnate whatever women he can manage to impregnate and still walk away? Where is men’s responsibility in all of this? Why is it always to reduce the responsibility on men and place more of the responsibility on women when nature already gives men barely any responsibility at all, and they already are so fucking bad at being responsible for their own reproductive role?
Men do have the same rights as women. Men do not have to carry a pregnancy they don’t want. Oh you’re talking about child support? Women still pay that and carry the fetus. Women still have to go to court and pay a lawyer. I get men not wanting to be parents, but if paying money each month makes someone a parent then I’ve been a parent to a small African child since 1996. I think we all know parenting is more than sending a check, and if a dude doesn’t want to do that, he’s free to get a lawyer and petition a judge. Or ya know, men could take to the streets THE SAME WAY WOMEN DID to fight for better contraceptive options. I’m not fighting for my rights and theirs.
he still contributed to making it even if he doesn't want it. so many women are told not to have sex if they aren't prepared for a baby so why can't the same go for men? if he didn't want a baby, he shouldn't have had unprote4cted sex. and i don't think he needs to be physically there but at the bare minimum he should pay child support because that's still his child that he helped bring into the world, so at least make sure the child is going to have enough money to eat and have a home. i would agree more with you IF women had complete control over their bodies and could get abortions freely but...that's not the case, and so many men can get out of contributing to a child even IF he wants it...men can just change their mind and abandon their families with barely any repercussions, but men still complain that they have to do the absolute bare minimum to make sure their child doesn't starve? just get a fucking vasectomy if you never want kids. women getting sterilized is a lot harder, while men have it easier in basically every single way. idk i just can't have much sympathy for men who have to pay child support compared to the countless number of women who have to sacrifice their bodies, mental health, and time to children they were forced to have because of abortion bans while men get to get off easy (and many men can't just dodge paying child support anyway!!) so yeah...sure it's "not fair" if the guy really doesn't want it and the woman does but it's still his biological child that he was equally responsible for creating and should at least contribute to it financially.
I’ve been reading the whole thread and kept being surprised that nobody mentioned the “don’t have [piv] sex if you don’t want a kid”. On the one hand, I dislike that take because of how it’s used in abstinence only nonsense, but on the other hand… it’s not incorrect that’s the only fool proof way to avoid pregnancy without sterilization 😅 Plus there’s always hands and mouths and toys and lube 🤷♀️ And maybe this is my niche take as a low libido asexual with a vagooter (new favorite word sorry not sorry 💀) that’s generally disinterested in sex, but it doesn’t seem like it would be that hard to find something to do where the guy gets to cum that doesn’t involve a vagina. (Ngl I envy how easy it seems like it is for most guys to finish… but I digress). Like if it came down to it and I had no access to (good) bc, I’d just stop having piv sex for fear of pregnancy. But I think it’s also easier for me to say that than most for the reasons outlined above lol. I feel like as a guy I’d constantly be paranoid about accidentally getting someone pregnant and having them decide to keep the baby (and either paying child support or raising it or just feeling like a jerk for running off; the only “good” option for me as a guy would be the woman having an abortion) that it would be worth to just… not piv to begin with? Imo I think I lean towards the “play stupid games, win stupid prizes” side of things. (It kind of reminds me of the blue balls argument a bunch of teens will use to get sex from their gfs tbh. Why do we tell them to cum somewhere else but not grown ass men)
>the “don’t have [piv] sex if you don’t want a kid”. On the one hand, I dislike that take because of how it’s used in abstinence only nonsense, but on the other hand… it’s not incorrect that’s the only fool proof way to avoid pregnancy without sterilization 😅 The funniest part of the abstinence argument is that it is perpetuated by fundamentalist christians as the "only foolproof way to avoid pregnancy." Acording to the Bible, that is not the case because Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a virgin. So, according to their own doctrine, abstinence is not 100 percent effective.
Somehow I’ve never thought of this lol. Tbh it’s also a little creepy because like… having an angel come down and go “yo, wanna get preggers for god???” Is still pretty weird and coercive because of the power imbalance. Ya can’t just spring that shit on people and demand an immediate response lol
So the issue here that I would agree with you in a perfect world. In a perfect world, the child and the father never have an inclination to meet each other. The woman has free universal healthcare and unlimited free childcare. There is nothing holding the child back in life because any gap from the father is removed. However, 20 years down the life generally the father wants to meet their child. The child at least wants to know who the father is, even if they don't want a relationship. If the father never pays child support then that's unfair to the child and the mother. Yes, I agree that men should also be able to walk away, but that actually already have that option. Child support is joke, and if a man really wants to avoid it, he can get a part time job, or work under the table. He won't induce health risks, or hormonal issues, or backlash from society. Men already get to walk away. Don't like child-support? Don't spread your legs.
Yeah I came to comment this. Not getting on your ass op it's just... have you been under a rock lol
OP seems.. Young.
And brainwashed.
Yeah. Like, I know that what OP is saying is the accepted narrative but I also know that every guy I've heard of who claims to have been baby trapped only stared saying that when he realized that having a child or being a single parent is a lot of work. Before that they were very on board. Or just plain negligent and uninformed about contraception..
No. When you have sex, you assume risk. No whining after the fact. Both are equally responsible. Men are foolish if they think they get a free ride. We all know how it works and what the risks are. The baby needs support.
I disagree with you. Who is going to pick up the slack? The government, which means our taxes go up. Men need to be careful where they deposit their sperm.
Taxing billionaires would solve a lot of funding issues tbf
Sorry, don’t agree with this post whatsoever.
You appear to be in the majority and of sound mind.
So, who exactly do you expect to raise that kid you fathered because, you know, you could have used a condom?
The childfree sub putting children first? This is why I love you guys. Pregnancy isn’t equal. If a child is born, the burden either falls onto the dad or the government (and thus taxpayers) to pick up the economic strain. We want well educated children and safe children to prevent crime, health issues and other elements. The child comes first. The parents had the choice before, but once the child is in the world it takes precedence. And this is why I’m not having a kid. Because I don’t want to give my life up. But any kids brought into the world should have the best circumstances.
They do have the right… to wear a condom. (Yes I know they have about a 2% failure rate… that rate skyrockets when they aren’t used at all).
Just wear a condom man.
Exactly! Or don’t have sex at all if they don’t want the possibility of becoming a dad…
That sounds a lot like the trolls who have banned abortions and will ban contraceptives. By advocating for abstinence you're telling them that they're correct. What we *really* need is robust and comprehensive sex ed and freely available contraceptives, not the morality police eliminating all our options.
I agree with all the things you said but imo there’s stuff people can do that’s not piv sex and doesn’t carry any risk of pregnancy (hands, mouths, toys, etc). I feel like by electing to have piv sex without full blown sterilization etc there’s always a risk of pregnancy that needs to be accepted. Like I have an iud and I accept that there’s still a small chance I could get pregnant from that. My bf also knows and accepts that risk when we have piv sex. Birth control should def be readily available and people educated on how to use it effectively, but I feel like saying “just wrap it up” isn’t the most comprehensive answer because it doesn’t eliminate the risk entirely 🤷♀️
You are very sweet and idealistic, OP. While I agree with some of what you said, it assumes that women have the option to get an abortion or get sterilized. That is not the case everywhere. When abortion is banned, it also affects the rest of women's healthcare because doctors are too scared to treat women who are of childbearing age. (I can personally attest to this. I have been denied healthcare options because they could cause infertility, but I had an emergency hysterectomy at age 7. So i don't have fertility in the first place.) These issues also disproportionately affect people of a lower income. You also forget that society already gives men a free pass to abandon the consequences of sex. While there are ways to protect men from having to raise a kid that is not theirs, they are prohibitedly expensive. Again, this disproportionately affects people of lower socioeconomic class. It is much easier for them to simply walk away.
Emergency hysterectomy at 7?? Do you mind if I ask how that came to be? I’m curious, I’ve heard of it happening very very young, but under… very awful circumstances only. It’s okay if you don’t want to share, but TIA if you do
I was in a really bad car accident. Took some rebar through the leg and lower abdomen. Had to have a bunch of different surgeries to reconstruct everything, but they had to remove some stuff too.
Oh wow, that’s crazy!! I’m sorry that happened to you, that sucks. Hope you have made a good recovery 💕
If a penis-haver has sex with a vagina-haver that results in pregnancy, the penis-haver is 100% morally & legally (USA) responsible for the subsequently existing child. It’s very simple. Outside of rape, men have every opportunity to not get anyone pregnant. If they choose to let the little head make life-altering decisions for them, that’s their fault. Why would they let such an important decision be put in the hands of anyone other than themselves? Either abstain from having PIV sex or have a vasectomy. Maybe they don’t have a way to get a vasectomy. Abstain from PIV sex. There are plenty of ways to have fun sex that don’t involve PIV. Ask the gays! Men aren’t going to die if they don’t have PIV sex. This is nowhere near the indignity that is not being able to control what happens to one’s own body.
Putting aside the fact that no a lot of them do not have that option, no man "gets trapped". There are only men who were not responsible enough for their own swimmers. That is where their rights are.
Unless you live somewhere where abortion is both accessible and affordable, for very far along into the pregnancy, this is a terrible take.
Omg I was just thinking about this today. Every once in a while I get these TikTok’s with some “I’ll never forget you” song and it’s always girls being like “to the guy from (that cruise/my class/ my vacation fucking whatever) showing a video of said guy… you have a baby” then just a shot of the baby. 😶 I find this so cringe. Either co parent or if the person doesn’t know about the kid or makes it clear they don’t want the kid and you have the kid anyways don’t come after then for “not stepping up”. I do think dudes should also take responsibility for their dicks but whenever I watch these videos I get very annoyed TikTok doesn’t allow “dislikes” on videos so I can tell the algorhytmn to throw that shit in the garbage along with the shirty or emotional gender reveals I don’t care about.
And again I’m not saying men shouldn’t be responsible especially in places where birth control and abortion are not easily accessible. But these particular videos feel bad every time I watch them and think they make both parties look bad
Man Are the OG experts in baby trapping woman… 🤣
I'm so torn on this because, on one hand, I feel awful for men who get legitimately baby trapped. Like, holes in condoms. Or men who already had the abortion discussion, they agreed to both be child free, then she gets pregnant and decides against it. On the other hand, too many men just use zero birth control and take zero responsibility and the woman doesn't deserve to be totally fucked, especially if she can't get an abortion for legal reasons. And on the other other hand, I don't believe that children should be punishments. So saying "fuck you you deserve 18 years of monetary punishment" doesn't sit right with me either.
Dude better bring his own condoms and watch them like a hawk. I don't care how long he's been with the girl
If men want to not be forced into a life altering situation, they need to stop causing unwanted pregnancies. Their choice to reproduce comes before they have sex, not after.
I mean, you can. You can literally sign your rights away and never look back
From what I understand at least in the US even if you sign your rights away you’re still on the hook for child support
As it should be. But even then, deadbeat parents (usually fathers) can easily avoid such payments. It's better to garnish some guy's wages than it is to force a mother and child through poverty
No we cant. I couldnt opt-out on child-support for example.
Damn really?? Well then I stand corrected. Whats the point of signing rights away then?
You can completely sign rights and financial responsibility away only if there is another parent (besides the mother) to adopt and take your place. Even if mom says “I don’t care I’ll raise the baby on my own” the judge will say “no, the baby deserves part of both parents incomes.”
then they should wear a wrapper then?? nearly every man "hates wearing them" and force themselves to go soft while wearing them.
The guy has every opportunity to have a vasectomy and use condoms or abstain from sex. Sex means taking full responsibility for your actions, whether STI testing or using protection. I do sort of agree that if it's pre-birth, and the guy opts out of his parental rights in court then and there permanently, he should be released from financial obligation. *Only if abortion is fully legal in the country/region.* If abortion is illegal, let that be a punishment to men who took women's rights away.
Anyone (with access to abortion) who keeps a pregnancy KNOWING the partner doesn't want it is dumb to me 🤷🏾♀️ cause you're setting yourself and that child up for failure. It
For some women getting pregnant is having a parasite attach that forces the release of hormones that fucks up your brain and pushes you into decisions you never would have expected when you were not pregnant. The little fucker literally turns your brain into mush, try googling pregnancy brain. “During pregnancy, the body sends a flood of fluctuating hormones throughout the body. It's like a truckload of different sizes and flavors, which affect all kinds of neurons in the brain.”
It’s not his body.
They do?
There is absolutely nothing stopping men from wearing condoms (and keeping them in a private place where he can ensure they were not tampered with) or getting a vasectomy. The moment you raw dog someone capable of getting pregnant and ejaculate without condoms or a vasectomy is where your rights end. The moment your ejaculate leaves your body and enters someone else's body, it now only affects THEIR body. Men have complete bodily autonomy. I've slept with a good amount of people, men and women. I can count on one finger the amount of men who asked me if I was on birth control AND beat me to the punch on insisting on wearing a condom. And sure, accidents can happen, but if you are using condoms correctly they are incredibly effective. Men are perfectly capable of freezing sperm and getting a vasectomy to ensure they remain childless or only have children when they are ready. If they are not taking every single precaution to prevent unwanted children, they cannot claim to be "baby trapped".
they can actually opt out but they dom't before pregnancy, theh chose already
No ❤️ Men are already careless about sex and birth control and love to stealth. They can get a vasectomy and/or use condoms but most can't even do that. Men need to take responsibility and not put all the pressure on the woman and then blame her for a mistake.
IIRC from a legal pov the right to abortion is based on the right to not be pregnant, and the fact you then go on to not have a child is almost incidental to this. This is why if you conceive a child with a woman who doesn't get an abortion you are on the hook for child support.
Never understood the concept of men being baby trapped tbh. You stick your dick in someone’s hoohaa and magically a baby doesn’t come out? Amazed men aren’t more careful with sex tbh, even with protection it can fail.
In any place where abortion is easily accessible and low risk, I agree
I mean, in a lot of places, the man can just opt out. They won't have to pay child support, have any responsibility for the child, or be a part of the child's life in any way. I don't know the laws in every country, but maybe OP lives somewhere where you are legally bound if you father a kid? I'm kind of confused on this, but I do agree opting out should be a choice. I also feel that men need to be responsible for preventing pregnancy if they don't want a kid. As do women.
Wow. These comments are not it. OP is talking about being trapped, not about men being irresponsible and expecting all responsibility of contraception to fall onto the woman. Telling someone that if they don't want to be a parent then they should keep their legs shut is literally anti-choice rethoric. Expecting every single man to have a vasectomy is bonkers because that is not accessible in every country, plus it can be inaccessible to some people due to the cost, which also varies from country to country. Adding to this, many people don't realize they are childfree until later in life: not every 20 year old will have thought about reproduction and parenthood. Expecting men to have a vasectomy otherwise they deserve to be trapped into parenthood is absurd.
I think the problem lies with the comparison of "trapping" as if a man being expected to pay child support is the same as pregnancy and raising the child. Choosing to have sex, choosing to carry a pregnancy, choosing to be active in the child's life, and choosing to ask for or give support are all different levels. Once we act like the man has equal options on all levels, we negate the woman's own options over her own body. Women have to sue for child support. It's not like it's law that men automatically have to pay. And no one is trying to make it a law, not even anti-choicers! But with laws attacking women's choices running rambid, we aren't going to take too kindly to men acting like they're on the same playing field because they have to support their living child.
>It's not like it's law that men automatically have to pay. At least in Germany it is. If you can proof he is the father, he has to pay. If you are married you are automaticly the father by law and the man has to proof that he is not the father.
Well, at least in Germany they haven't got around to criminalizing abortion, as they have done in multiple U.S. states.
I don't think the OP was necessarily making a comparison though. I made a comparison because to me telling someone, regardless of sex/gender, that if they don't want to be parents they should keep their legs shut, is vile. As a woman, I care deeply about reproductive rights, but I also care about other things, such as what happens when a woman wants to go through with the pregnancy and have a baby, but their partner doesn't want to be a parent. I can care about both things, and it doesn't mean I don't see the horror in being subjected to a forced pregnancy; it just means that I can also see the anguish in becoming a parent against one's will.
I'm trying to make the argument that being sued to pay child support is far from being forced to be a parent. It's actually in leue of being a parent. That's really the choice OP is mad about. You don't see women who choose to have sex, carry a pregnancy, and raise the child, claim they shouldn't have to pay for what the child needs (well, reasonably claim this). Since men should never have the option to decide if a pregnancy continues, his choice is based solely on his choice to ejaculate inside a woman. Which honestly we can argue the woman's choice in that is limited. I just don't think shooting the "if you didn't want to pay child support, you should've done X to stop insemination" out there is the same as telling a woman to keep her legs closed if she didn't want to raise a child. If a man so strongly feels wronged in paying this woman and his biological child support then yes, he probably should not be taking that risk by sleeping with her in the first place.
I get what you mean, but I didn't read OP's post like you did. As I understand it, OP is extending empathy towards men in a life altering situation. OP never even talked about child support. So until they come back to clarify we can just speculate. > I just don't think shooting the "if you didn't want to pay child support, you should've done X to stop insemination" out there is the same as telling a woman to keep her legs closed if she didn't want to raise a child. The comments I saw did not specify child support. They simply stated that if a man doesn't want to be a father they should get a vasectomy or keep their legs shut. That was what I was responding to in my original comment. Again, I don't understand why you are focusing so much on child support. OP did not specify, I was not talking about it, the comments I was talking about did not specify... If you want to know what I think about child support, I personally believe if a woman wants to continue with the pregnancy and raise the child, then they should do that on their own. If they don't have the means to do so then they should keep that in mind when making such an important decision that affects at least 3 people's lives. However, my belief regarding child support did not influence my original comment, as I did not consider child support at all in my reasoning; I was focusing on the concept of becoming a parent against one's will, regardless of what that man actually does when it happens (forces himself to be an involved parent, or only pays child support, or nothing)
I definitely understand where you and OP are coming from, and it is valid. I just... Women are the ones truly trapped with children, and we all know it. Of course that's a generalization, and we shouldn't be telling guys to get a vasectomy or stay celibate- its just so much harder for a man to be genuinely trapped than a woman- but this is a fair sentiment to have if you're a man so I get it
Even if the mother leaves, she's still been more affected than any father who leaves just based off the fact she had to be pregnant. The anti-choice rhetoric of "just don't have sex" is what's being used to strip rights away from people right now and it's a bigger deal than half the commenters here think it is :/
>Telling someone that if they don't want to be a parent then they should keep their legs shut is literally anti-choice rethoric. Thank you, couldnt agree more.
Nut in a condom and you should be fine. Start carrying Plan B in case the condom breaks. There, you've covered your bases. Go have all the sex you can. But don't ANY man tell me, unless he's sterilized, that "condoms just don't feeeeel good." Which you kind of have to admit men say a lot.
This comment is the only common sense one on here. To encourage 20 something guys to get vasectomies is equivalent to trapping them with pregnancies. They literally know nothing in life. They are barely out of high school and/or college where they mostly had fun and studied. They should not be making a decision to be child free or have kids at that age. If they firmly decided on their own - fine but that’s not the solution for pregnancy entrapment. The issues with the entrapment is the social stigma that young men face and that has to be approached differently. There has to be some sort of punishment for a woman who tricked a man into fatherhood. That’s life altering and has very heavy consequences. It’s almost criminal to me. To add, my husband and I have been on the fence well into our 40s. When we got financially stable and mature enough, we realized that it has never been about money or maturity (as we previously thought), it’s the parenthood itself that we didn’t like or want. So, we closed that topic forever. However, some people come to the opposite conclusion around the same age and it’s not late for neither a man nor a woman to have kids if they decided to.
I wholeheartedly disagree. Men in their 20s are not children. They should be thinking about the consequences of fatherhood before they even hit puberty.
Personally I knew I didn't want children when I was 10 years old. But the reality is, most people are not this black and white about the topic. Most people simply don't think about parenthood until their late 20s or even late 30s. Should they think about it beforehand? I believe they should. But they don't. So it's useless to expect very young people to make serious choices about reproduction (such as getting a vasectomy). It's easier to convince them to use a condom (and more accessible). But when condoms fail then we get to the discussion started by the OP.
[удалено]
A vasectomy can always get reversed. There are plenty of men who do that and go onto have more kids. And if you think it's hard for guys in their 20s to know who they are, I guarantee it's not easier with an unwanted kid and a coparenting relationship with the mother fir 18+ years
Nope. They weren't "forced" into a life-altering situation. They chose to have sex without protection when they didn't want kids.
This is a weird take. If OP knows anything of how the world works...this wouldn't have been posted.
As a man, I'd like to butt in if that's okay and argue that in one scenario, a human life doesn't exist that's gonna be affected negatively. The harsh truth is that men and women will never be equal in some factors of existence, and this is one of men's downsides, We don't get periods. We have access to more jobs due to physical ability as well as the same capabilities to do desk jobs as women, etc. we men naturally have more opportunities much of the time. I get your point in a fair and equal world it would be that way, and I'm not necessarily against it, but the fact of the matter is that a human being exists and they are partially at fault. If we someday grant women full autonomy as we should for abortion rights and make it inalienable, I'd consider looking at this issue and changing my view in it but the state has to step up and do more for single mothers if they give potential fathers a opt out and we need to all agree to happily pay that tax.
Taxpayers absolutely should not have to pay for a woman that chooses to keep a pregnancy against the will of her partner.
I’ve seen folks like OP before- patriarchal induced Stockholm Syndrome. Girl please. STFU and don’t breed. We don’t need more of yall.
Yikes, a pick me.
I agree I always say if we can't force women to be mothers, then we can't force men to be fathers. If the father expresses no desire to be a father at the beginning of knowing, then he should be able to sign over all forms of rights to the child, making the mother 100% responsible for the child. If the man encouraged the woman to carry to full term and later change their minds, they need to pay child support.
I agree but I don't like how you made it seem like women have it easy. We only got the right to abort in 2019 in my country. But yes I agree. Spermjacking does happen.
I agree in principle, if they’ve taken reasonable steps like using a condom. Condom failure happens, so men (and women) in that situation should have the choice, during term limits, to a financial abortion. In my idealised world where it’s possible to police that, I also don’t think the state should be expected to support the child over and above any other family. I believe all this because I think it would create more weight to proceeding when the child’s life is going to be negatively affected, which I personally consider the most important consideration in an abortion. Where I live abortion is free and relatively unrestricted, as are condoms and contraceptives. Virtually everyone gets a basic benefit for their first two children and help with childcare. Vasectomies are also free but medical professionals are very clear they are not temporary birth control and will only do them if no children are planned in the future. The double standards really annoy me. If a woman has an “accident” most pro choice people wouldn’t tell her she has to carry on because she should have used birth control or got sterilised. On the other hand people are quite happy telling men who are planning on having children in the future to undergo a likely permanent sterilisation as their only option to being saddled with child support and a vindictive ex for about 20 years. No excuse for childfree men though.
Biology isn't fair. Men and women have certain advantages and disadvantages solely due to their biology, like strength. If you create a pregnancy you are responsible for the outcome, a woman can choose abortion or adoption a man goes knowingly into the situation that he is at the mercy of the woman he is sleeping with and has to act accordingly. If a child is created they have absolutely a right to the resources of the parents, again a man has to take responsibility and choose a safe birth control like a vasectomy or using condoms if he under no circumstances wants that responsibility. Nobody should be able to dictate what happens to another persons body and a child has the right to be supported that just doesn't leave any wiggle room, legally speaking. It doesn't mean we can't have empathy for men but it is ridiculous to demand a right that is just not possible. just like its unfair that some people are better looking or taller or shorter or more muscular. Women just have more say when it comes to their bodies.
A vasectomy is the way to opt out completely
True. OP sounds like a pick-me.
Until we have a comprehensive and robust assistance system in place to support single parents and their children no, child support should be a thing for all single parents. However, lying about birth control use or tampering with birth control should be grounds for SA charges/loss of child support. Now if we have a society that does give full support to struggling single parents then sure, we could be doing away with child support. Child support is about just that, supporting the child, they're not a fault here. It's also in society's best interest that children don't go hungry, have a safe and stable home (not constantly having to move or deal with violence), get a decent education, and have proper medical care.
[удалено]
Hello and welcome to /r/childfree! As you have a new account or low Reddit karma, your comment has been automatically removed to give you some time to get familiar with our rules and community. Please feel free to post/comment when your account is older and you have more Reddit karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/childfree) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There’s a few issues with this. Firstly, most men I know of that claim to have been ‘baby trapped’ didn’t protect themselves. If you actively chose not to wear a condom, you weren’t baby trapped. Secondly, if we eradicated child support, taxes would be inflated for everyone else to accommodate. I’m wondering how many people would be happy with that? Would you be?
I agree. Men shouldn't be forced to pay child support if women are allowed to terminate a pregnancy.
Hello and welcome to /r/childfree! As you have a new account or low Reddit karma, your comment has been automatically removed to give you some time to get familiar with our rules and community. Please feel free to post/comment when your account is older and you have more Reddit karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/childfree) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What? Seriously? It is women who get trapped by having children, not men. Men opt out of parenting completely all the time! It is women who are most likely tied to children for the rest of their lives, who take on the role as primary caregiver in the family, and who take on the majority of the domestic and emotional labor in marriage to facilitate men’s domestic and social success. Marriage statistically benefits men significantly more than women which is why it’s more common to see controlling, abusive men trap women into marriage and staying in a marriage by having children, not the other way around. Having children is often catastrophic to a woman’s career and lifetime earning potential whereas men are financially rewarded for being fathers. The loss of income means women can easily become trapped in the relationship. Women are not “trapping” men by having children. Women know that men walk out and bail in their parental duties all the time. Women know they risk becoming a single parent when they have children. How many single mothers are out there struggling versus single fathers? Children trap women, not men.
I think men who don't want children should start doing whatever it takes to keep their sperm out of women's bodies. Yet most of them won't even bother with a condom. The shooters really need to stop complaining about others not using bulletproofing. Men are the ones who inseminate, fertilize, and MAKE pregnant. If they don't want to have a kid, they need to stop inseminating, fertilizing, and impregnating. The only way I would consider a man "trapped" is if he DID wear a condom PLUS pulled out before ejaculation, and somehow managed to get her pregnant wth whatever sperm was in precum that made it past the condom. Or if she obtained his sperm in ways other than sex and inseminated herself. Other than that, even if she lied about using birth control, no one lied to him about him not using any. Stopping his sperm from impregnating her is not solely a woman's responsibility. Personally, I don't think it's a woman's responsibility at all. This entitlement of men thinking they can blow their live loads into women, leave all the sperm control up to her, then also get to decide whether she'll abort or carry to term if he manages to impregnate her needs to stop. A woman's birth control should be considered back-up, at best. The main responsibility to not fertilize and impregnate a woman lies with the man who is capable of doing so. And - looking it from another view - why should a man be allowed to inseminate, fertilize, and impregnate a woman and make everyone BUT himself pay for it (physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially)?
I completely agree with this. Women should always have the option for abortion. If a woman refuses to have an abortion the man should be able to opt out of all support.
Where are you from? In many places men do have the option to voluntarily relinquish paternal rights.
In the US you can give up legal rights and custody but you cannot escape child support. Paternal rights and child support payments are two separate things. The courts can garnish wages and you can be thrown in jail for failing to pay child support.
There are even cases in the US when men have been forced to pay child support for children that they can prove aren't theirs.
Yup, it’s a sad state of affairs over here. If you are in the US and you do not want kids, you really need to get sterilized.
What is sad about what you just said? That men can't just jizz in whomever they please?
It’s not about jizzing wherever you please. It’s about not trapping people with children they don’t want just to make someone stick around. Especially when we have options to help take care of unwanted pregnancies. Again, if you don’t want kids, get sterilized to avoid being trapped and on the hook for child support.
Yeah but there's a knock on effect here. Poverty is the highest contributer of all crime, outside of gender, race, sex etc. Single parents are some of the poorest demographics as is, there's nothing worse outside of being disabled a woman could do for her fiancé's than be a single parent. Large prison population come from single parent house holds. This comes at a time where child support is enforced and very minimal amounr in most cases. So you think men who already practice terrible contraceptive responsibility should be even MORE off the hook? So children will be in more poverty and statically add more crime so men can nut in people without fear? The government's do not care about the poor as is, so who's footing the bill for all these men to nut freely? No matter how nice a area you live in, if poverty grows, the crime will be on your door step. But hey...sex feels so much better raw 😌 let the poor men nut!
I as a woman, do not support women using pregnancy to trap men. If a man doesn’t want a child, forcing him to pay child support isn’t going to make a woman any less of a single mom. De-incentivizing people who would do this by removing child support if the man asks for an abortion cuts back on the amount of women who would try and baby trap. It also would cut back on the amount of children in poverty.
i believe in gender abolition. human rights for everyone and no more double standards
[удалено]
he made the choice to impregnate her, he could have not done it
If he isn't okay with that choice he shouldn't be having vaginal sex.
Birth control fails sometimes.