Fair or Foul: Women Anonymously Discuss Regretting Having Their Children and Becoming Single Mothers

[deadeye]

We all know women are mostly mad as themselves for fucking up when they should've known better, that's all.

Pretty much sums it up.

I wish more women like that would speak up instead of the ones glorifying it like it's some sort of badge of honor or something.

It gives a more realistic.....instead of idealistic.......perspective of just how difficult it really is.

I guess some of them put up a brave front because they don't wanna show any weakness, but deep down they know they're really hurting inside.

 

[mrtdb]

It's a fair thought...but if they take it out on the child it becomes foul

Regret is a killer, especially from a woman's perspective. Women are the ones that get approached...so I imagine the outcomes of the relationships they accept have a greater impression on them. Especially the ones who were looking for the wrong things. The thing about being young is that people don't always know what they should be looking for. It's easy to get caught up in physical traits you see in the opposite sex (for men: ass, boobs, eyes) (for women: eyes, chest, height). A lot of women become single mothers young because they accepted dudes that had those physical traits because they hadn't matured yet and started looking for the traits of a good man/father (ambition, loyalty, perseverance (because if you're black the man in your household can't be a bitch...he's gonna have to lead the family through shit), compassion, discipline, etc.) One thing I've noticed is that women who have children generally mature faster than other women, but as women in general mature they start to look for those traits and they start to realize they curved and rejected men that had them, and accepted men that didn't. When you add in the fact that she's seeing those men she rejected are settling down and treating women right as she gets older, I imagine there is some regret to be felt. She wants a redo, she felt like she had too much responsibility at too young of an age, she thought she knew what to look for, she thought she had it all figured out.

So the feelings are warranted and understandable. From her perspective she's always going to wonder what life could have been like, if she could have found a man that would have supported her and lead her to a better life. Once again....the feelings are perfectly understandable as long she doesn't take it out on the child. Preferably she should focus on the positives instead of the negatives though

Sidenote: This is why fathers AND mothers AND older siblings (people only seem to put the burden on the father for some reason) need to play a huge role in a young girls life, because these young girls don't know shit. Yet they're being approached consistently, and on top of that, feel like they know shit. They say boys are harder to raise up until the teenage years, then the roles flip for a reason. Once a girl hits the pre-teenage years you have to be on her ass, letting her know you're not going to tolerate her dating just anyone. Even when she reaches adulthood...being an adult doesn't make you less stupid...hitting 18 doesn't give you a sudden rush of wisdom. Until she reaches the age of fucking 24 or whenever the fuck you feel she can make a sound decision you need to be on her ass sharing your wisdom until she picks up some of her own to make sure she doesn't fall for the trap of single parenthood.

 

[desertrain10]

not really

How does it not? A woman can choose not to have unprotected sex too. You talk about a woman exercising her agency. That's where it's done.

I support not allowing women to have abortions past a certain a certain point in their pregnancy

but banning all abortions this isn't the same as outlawing drunk driving or outlawing the recreational use of a substance

while i agree taking into consideration the wishes of all parties involved in regards to whether or not a child is carried to term is ideal.... what if the father wants to keep the baby that the mother doesn't want? how are we to recognize his wishes? is it by basically forcing the woman to stay pregnant or she'd face criminal charges???

nope I can't get with that

we are taking about a biological process that happens inside of a woman's body

besides the health consequences , for many a pregnancy could potentially hurt their earning power and cost them their jobs

interjecting the law into the situation any further then it already is I'd argue is an act of discrimination

we would effectively be stripping away one group's right to their reproductive organs...and no, it isn't the same as requiring a man to pay cs

I think things could be handled with some sort of mediation. What if the man is willing to compensate the woman for wages lost while pregnant? What if the man was believed to be sterile and this is his one and only chance at having a child? You don't think he should have a means of pleading his case.

And you feminists have to stop with this bullshit about regulating abortion being the same as stripping away reproductive organs it isn't. No one is saying women can't fuck til their hearts content. All people are saying is that if you do that, you do it knowing there are consequences, and you don't get a get out of jail free card. And yes, it is absolutely the same thing as requiring a man to pay cs. In both cases, the parents have to be responsible for their actions. You and women like you want to set up a scenario where women are able to pick and choose when they want to be accountable for their choices, but men's accountability is totally dependent on the whims of the women involved. This is just one more example of how feminists are full of shit when you say you want equality. You don't. You want the deck to be stacked in your favor.

I get that its a tough responsibility to be the incubators for the next generation, but society didn't place that responsibility on women, biology did. You guys want society to fix nature's "mistake," but not everyone agrees that it was a mistake. And that's the crux of a lot of feminist arguments. You guys like denying biological truths to support flawed world views.

how is requiring that a man pay cs the same thing as requiring women carry children they do not want to term????

reading your post you agree that child bearing is inherently unequal so I'm not getting it....you can argue this is about holding women accountable for their actions the same as men... but fact is the consequences for these actions are not at all the same

his career and earning potential is impacted, but not in the same way...and obviously women become pregnant and give birth, and men don’t

when a man has a percentage of his wages garnished he is not then saddled with the same health risks/consequences that are associated with child bearing that women are once they become pregnant.....technology and advances in healthcare have mitigated these risks, but they are there...not to mention the older the woman the more likely there will be complications

so yes further regulating who can have an abortions would be effectively stripping away a woman's right to her reproductive rights and I'd argue discriminatory....

I'd even argue further regulating who can have an abortions would be discriminatory the same way banning female centric contraceptives would be discriminatory. the point of a abortion, same as contraceptives, is to prevent an individual from becoming a parent... in addition, considering a woman's womb is a reproductive organ, further regulating who can have an abortions would be effectively stripping away a woman's right to her reproductive organs

and how is preserving a woman's right to an abortion society's attempt to fix nature's "mistake" rather then about preserving individual liberty? if the mistake you are referring to is the inherent inequalities of child bearing, I'd disagree. for thousands of years women have used herbs and the likes to abort unwanted pregnancies without much resistance. with advances in the healthcare naturally the medical field introduce safer alternatives. I'd say legally banning or setting up road blocks to prevent certain ppl from having abortions is a better example of social engineering

regardless, if you still want to make the argument preserving a woman's right to an abortion is society's attempt to fix nature's "mistake", how is the intent behind your suggestion that "these things" be handled with some sort of legal mediation any different? that is not just a way society could try to level to level the playing field

that said, i believe having an abortion is morally wrong. and it is unfortunate fathers have no legal say in the matter of abortion.but I also believe a womans right to her body should come before almost all else. And really there’s no way around it legally because the consequences of a different ruling (that he could force her to have an abortion against her will) would be inhumane to say the least

you are letting your need to make this into a battle of the sexes, referendum against feminism blind you....almost like some of yall have vagina envy

you want to talk about the rights of men, fine. but like other feminists I know of , I myself would be ok with men being able to opt out of cs... as I stated multiple times

 

[The Lonious Monk]

how is requiring that a man pay cs the same thing as requiring women carry children they do not want to term????

reading your post you agree that child bearing is inherently unequal so I'm not getting it....you can argue this is about holding women accountable for their actions the same as men... but fact is the consequences for these actions are not at all the same

his career and earning potential is impacted, but not in the same way...and obviously women become pregnant and give birth, and men don’t

when a man has a percentage of his wages garnished he is not then saddled with the same health risks/consequences that are associated with child bearing that women are once they become pregnant.....technology and advances in healthcare have mitigated these risks, but they are there...not to mention the older the woman the more likely there will be complications

so yes further regulating who can have an abortions would be effectively stripping away a woman's right to her reproductive rights and I'd argue discriminatory....

I'd even argue further regulating who can have an abortions would be discriminatory the same way banning female centric contraceptives would be discriminatory. the point of a abortion, same as contraceptives, is to prevent an individual from becoming a parent... in addition, considering a woman's womb is a reproductive organ, further regulating who can have an abortions would be effectively stripping away a woman's right to her reproductive organs

and how is preserving a woman's right to an abortion society's attempt to fix nature's "mistake" rather then about preserving individual liberty? if the mistake you are referring to is the inherent inequalities of child bearing, I'd disagree. for thousands of years women have used herbs and the likes to abort unwanted pregnancies without much resistance. with advances in the healthcare naturally the medical field introduce safer alternatives. I'd say legally banning or setting up road blocks to prevent certain ppl from having abortions is a better example of social engineering

regardless, if you still want to make the argument preserving a woman's right to an abortion is society's attempt to fix nature's "mistake", how is the intent behind your suggestion that "these things" be handled with some sort of legal mediation any different? that is not just a way society could try to level to level the playing field

that said, i believe having an abortion is morally wrong. and it is unfortunate fathers have no legal say in the matter of abortion.but I also believe a womans right to her body should come before almost all else. And really there’s no way around it legally because the consequences of a different ruling (that he could force her to have an abortion against her will) would be inhumane to say the least

you are letting your need to make this into a battle of the sexes, referendum against feminism blind you....almost like some of yall have vagina envy

you want to talk about the rights of men, fine. but like other feminists I know of , I myself would be ok with men being able to opt out of cs... as I stated multiple times

Alright, let me start off with one thing that really irks me. Your whole argument depends on this idea that abortions are some kind of fundamental right. You have to believe that else none of this even matters. After all, the government can't take away something you aren't entitled to to begin with. Guess what, abortions are human developed medical procedures. Governments decide on the legality of medical procedures all the time. No one questions the right of the government to do that for other procedures. Why is this one different? If abortions didn't exist, what would women do then? Make wiser decisions before having sex or deal with the consequences. They do exist, but again, they are man made not some kind of fundamental biological right.

Past that, you're just being obtuse. I never said the consequences were the same for men and women. I said the principle is the same. For both men and women, the choice to lay down and have sex is a conscious decision. For both men and women, there are consequences for that decision. Yes, there may be more consequences for women, but that doesn't change the principle. I suggested mediation. There is nothing stopping a mediator from giving the woman's desires higher priority, but that's not what women want because again you don't want equality. You feminists always say that it's her body, so the choice should be 100%. Fuck the child. Fuck the man. How is that fair?

And I still don't see how outlawing or restricting abortions infringe on a woman's rights over her reproductive organs. Are you saying that because if abortion is gone then women can't just have sex without ignoring the consequences? Again, that's not some guaranteed right. But let's say that it is. Let's say that it's a right of any person to have sex as much as they want without consequence. If we do what you say and give women full say, then doesn't that deny men the rights over their reproductive organs? I don't know what the right answer is, but I can say that the feminist stance is contradictory and hypocritical, and that follows through on a lot of the things ya'll stand for. But you don't have to take my word for it. Go on youtube and listen to all the ex-feminists who say the same thing.

 

[lord nemesis]

My BM probably made one of them posts

 

[kzzl]

its fair

kind of off topic, but its going to be interesting to see how, if ever, we begin to address the fact that here in america child bearing has become disadvantageous....which is obviously problematic

with women for example, you marry/bear children young and your spouse decides to leave you, there is little support there... especially for low income mothers...and more than likely you have little career prospects

you wait until the "right time" to have children, there's a good chance you may struggle to get pregnant considering our chances of getting pregnant begin to dwindle after our early thirties.....most the time fertility drugs aren't covered by your insurance

What do you mean by dissadvantages and little support? Welfare, spousal support, food stamps, tax credits, and child support are available to them.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

its fair

kind of off topic, but its going to be interesting to see how, if ever, we begin to address the fact that here in america child bearing has become disadvantageous....which is obviously problematic

with women for example, you marry/bear children young and your spouse decides to leave you, there is little support there... especially for low income mothers...and more than likely you have little career prospects

you wait until the "right time" to have children, there's a good chance you may struggle to get pregnant considering our chances of getting pregnant begin to dwindle after our early thirties.....most the time fertility drugs aren't covered by your insurance

What do you mean by dissadvantages and little support? Welfare, spousal support, food stamps, tax credits, and child support are available to them.

I never really understood that myself. Maybe she's talking about the push by some to reduce some of those things. I do agree that fertility drugs and treatments should more commonly be covered by insurance. IVF is prohibitively expensive. Insurance should help out with that. I mean we have young knuckleheads making babies by the boatload. We should give the couples who take the time to do it right all the help we can, else we'll be overrun by problem children turned problem adults.

 

[desertrain10]

@The Lonious Monk

lol @ obtuse

like most people, i regard the right to control one's own body a fundamental right....

so yes i believe giving a third party the final so say in regards to whether or not a woman wants to end a biological process that is occurring within her own body is infringing upon her rights

at the same time, governments can and have decided on the legality of medical procedures...i never disputed that...doesn't mean i agree with it ...i believe only medical professionals and their patients should have a say in the practice of medicine... and i was only making note of the fact women have been aborting unwanted pregnancies on their own using herbs and the like for thousands and thousands of years without much resistance. many around the world still do. so whether or not abortions are illegal, women will have have them. the only difference is without the assistance of a trained medical staff more women will die . ignorant of you to believe any different. shows how little you know of what you speak

i have to also ask are you seriously ok with the government budding into our bedrooms? how do you feel about the controversy surrounding stem cell research?

i understand that abortion for you is the rejection of personal responsibility, but that thought is not mutually exclusive with the idea that a woman should have the utmost control over her own body. and this notion that it is a rejection of personal responsibility is a weak reason to support the ban or FURTHER regulate abortions... in great part because as i've repeatedly suggested, a pregnancy is perhaps one of the most determinative aspects of a woman's or girl's life. it disrupts her body. it disrupts her education. it disrupts her employment. and it often disrupts her entire family life

yes, sex is a choice and can lead to reproduction. but reproduction again is a biological process upon which the individual does not exert choice...meaning no woman has a conscious influence on the contact between the egg and the sperm. she can put herself in a position not to get pregnant but that's where it ends. that said, what about when contraceptives fail? and what about teenage women? i don't believe their lives should be forever disrupted because of something that was largely out of their control or because they made a dumb mistake. and besides satisfying this perverse need you all have to spread your misery unto others, specifically women, what purpose does that serve? if the goal is uplifting the most vulnerable among us this is hustling backwards. want lower the abortion rate? support causes to make bc more accessible and put sex ed in school

i understand there are also the rights of the fetus to consider, but then there is the question of when should a fetus be considered a person. i believe that should happen when the fetus becomes viable. that is why i am fine with banning late term abortions unless it is a medical emergency. that is a reasonable compromise. women are given ample time to make arrangements. and sure one could argue that that is also infringing upon a woman's right to her body, but again the difference is that i believe that the fetus is now a person

otherwise if you are of the camp that person-hood should start at conception, there isn't that great a difference between a plan b pill and an abortion...so....

there's also the question should the rights of an nonviable fetus supersede that of the mother's right to her own body? but then i'd argue what of the child born to a mother who were pressured into taking on that role? but whatever. women are bad, they must suffer the consequences at all costs, right?

that said, i do believe that morally speaking a woman should feel compelled to take the father's wishes into consideration. and i would support a way for me to opt out of cs. at the same time, i don't believe that legally the father should have any recourse in whether or not a child is aborted. as we agreed to before child bearing women disproportionately. and it would be humane to force a women into having an abortion for reasons outside of her own wishes. so yes i would not welcome a court mediator nor would i blame any woman for not welcoming a mediator with any real power into the situation. fight me lol

i agree though there is a lot of hypocrisy to go around on both sides of the isle. many ppl including politicians who claim to oppose reproductive rights on the grounds of personal responsibility, oppose rape victims having abortions. and many pro-lifers condemn birth control, and abortion, while rallying against single mothers and programs that help poor children, women and families

anyways, same as you i can only speak for myself

 

[The Lonious Monk]

@The Lonious Monk

lol @ obtuse

like most people, i regard the right to control one's own body a fundamental right....

so yes i believe giving a third party the final so say in regards to whether or not a woman wants to end a biological process that is occurring within her own body is infringing upon her rights

at the same time, governments can and have decided on the legality of medical procedures...i never disputed that...doesn't mean i agree with it ...i believe only medical professionals and their patients should have a say in the practice of medicine... and i was only making note of the fact women have been aborting unwanted pregnancies on their own using herbs and the like for thousands and thousands of years without much resistance. many around the world still do. so whether or not abortions are illegal, women will have have them. the only difference is without the assistance of a trained medical staff more women will die . ignorant of you to believe any different. shows how little you know of what you speak

i have to also ask are you seriously ok with the government budding into our bedrooms? how do you feel about the controversy surrounding stem cell research?

i understand that abortion for you is the rejection of personal responsibility, but that thought is not mutually exclusive with the idea that a woman should have the utmost control over her own body. and this notion that it is a rejection of personal responsibility is a weak reason to support the ban or FURTHER regulate abortions... in great part because as i've repeatedly suggested, a pregnancy is perhaps one of the most determinative aspects of a woman's or girl's life. it disrupts her body. it disrupts her education. it disrupts her employment. and it often disrupts her entire family life

yes, sex is a choice and can lead to reproduction. but reproduction again is a biological process upon which the individual does not exert choice...meaning no woman has a conscious influence on the contact between the egg and the sperm. she can put herself in a position not to get pregnant but that's where it ends. that said, what about when contraceptives fail? and what about teenage women? i don't believe their lives should be forever disrupted because of something that was largely out of their control or because they made a dumb mistake. and besides satisfying this perverse need you all have to spread your misery unto others, specifically women, what purpose does that serve? if the goal is uplifting the most vulnerable among us this is hustling backwards. want lower the abortion rate? support causes to make bc more accessible and put sex ed in school

i understand there are also the rights of the fetus to consider, but then there is the question of when should a fetus be considered a person. i believe that should happen when the fetus becomes viable. that is why i am fine with banning late term abortions unless it is a medical emergency. that is a reasonable compromise. women are given ample time to make arrangements. and sure one could argue that that is also infringing upon a woman's right to her body, but again the difference is that i believe that the fetus is now a person

otherwise if you are of the camp that person-hood should start at conception, there isn't that great a difference between a plan b pill and an abortion...so....

there's also the question should the rights of an nonviable fetus supersede that of the mother's right to her own body? but then i'd argue what of the child born to a mother who were pressured into taking on that role? but whatever. women are bad, they must suffer the consequences at all costs, right?

that said, i do believe that morally speaking a woman should feel compelled to take the father's wishes into consideration. and i would support a way for me to opt out of cs. at the same time, i don't believe that legally the father should have any recourse in whether or not a child is aborted. as we agreed to before child bearing women disproportionately. and it would be humane to force a women into having an abortion for reasons outside of her own wishes. so yes i would not welcome a court mediator nor would i blame any woman for not welcoming a mediator with any real power into the situation. fight me lol

i agree though there is a lot of hypocrisy to go around on both sides of the isle. many ppl including politicians who claim to oppose reproductive rights on the grounds of personal responsibility, oppose rape victims having abortions. and many pro-lifers condemn birth control, and abortion, while rallying against single mothers and programs that help poor children, women and families

anyways, same as you i can only speak for myself

You know I can let it go. I don't know why I argue about this with you. You're not really the problem here. We disagree on the issue, but I do admit that you're at least willing to discuss it and acknowledge some of the difficulties associated with this and other issues. Other proclaimed feminists aren't like you though, and that's what is annoying.

The two sides of this issue will probably never agree, but there could at least be some type of compromise. That can't happen if one side is trying to demonize the other just for disagreeing though. And that's the primary thing I disagree with you. It's unfair to call people who are against abortions misogynists or to state that they are attacking women. More than just the woman has a stake in this issue. Acknowledging that doesn't mean you hate women. Abortion isn't the only issue that applies to either. A lot of feminist issues come down to things feminists believe should be true and them bashing anyone who disagrees. That's a shitty way to handle social situations. Many women understand that. That's why they are also against feminism. Unfortunately, a lot of feminists are quick to attack them for that. Basically, women have the right to use their agency to act in the way they want, unless they use that agency to act against feminist interests. That's the kinda hypocrisy that irks the shit out of me, and why I can't understand why any female who really wanted to make changes would ever affiliate themselves with feminism. It's all good though. I know that's something else we'll never agree on.

 

[desertrain10]

its fair

kind of off topic, but its going to be interesting to see how, if ever, we begin to address the fact that here in america child bearing has become disadvantageous....which is obviously problematic

with women for example, you marry/bear children young and your spouse decides to leave you, there is little support there... especially for low income mothers...and more than likely you have little career prospects

you wait until the "right time" to have children, there's a good chance you may struggle to get pregnant considering our chances of getting pregnant begin to dwindle after our early thirties.....most the time fertility drugs aren't covered by your insurance

What do you mean by dissadvantages and little support? Welfare, spousal support, food stamps, tax credits, and child support are available to them.

lol

that point i was making was that america isn't a very family friendly country ...

yes there is welfare, spousal support, food stamps, tax credits, and child support are available ....

but who wants to be on welfare when you are penalized for working too many hours or making too much money

then if you make too much money to get any government assistance, yet you don't make enough to cover all your expenses including rent and child care expenses ....what are you to do?

spousal support eventually runs out

if a man is experiencing financial difficulties, and he can't pay his child support along with spousal support, he could potentially end up in jail ...or end up in a long court battle

the child support system is broken

also....

it is no longer a possibility for most families to have one parent to stay at home to care for the children

as i stated in my post most the time fertility drugs aren't covered by your insurance

there's also the lack of affordable child care options

employers with 50 or more workers must allow parents 12 weeks of leave annually to care for a newborn, they aren't required to pay you

we are only of the few developed countries without universal paid sick leave

 

[zzombie]

They recently passed a 12 weeks paid sick/maternity leave bullshit program in nys and I am already dreading the money wasted

 

[zzombie]

Now if I hire someone to replace you for those 12 weeks and they do a better job than you and I fire you .. . Then I would be wrong just another Evil capitalist.

 

[desertrain10]

They recently passed a 12 weeks paid sick/maternity leave bullshit program in nys and I am already dreading the money wasted

Lol

Times they are a'changing

 

[zzombie]

They recently passed a 12 weeks paid sick/maternity leave bullshit program in nys and I am already dreading the money wasted

Lol

Times they are a'changing

For the worse that money is going to come from tax payers

 

[The Lonious Monk]

I think maternity leave should be something you pay into like retirement. If they did it that way, all the issues associated with it go away.

 

[desertrain10]

@The Lonious Monk

lol @ obtuse

like most people, i regard the right to control one's own body a fundamental right....

so yes i believe giving a third party the final so say in regards to whether or not a woman wants to end a biological process that is occurring within her own body is infringing upon her rights

at the same time, governments can and have decided on the legality of medical procedures...i never disputed that...doesn't mean i agree with it ...i believe only medical professionals and their patients should have a say in the practice of medicine... and i was only making note of the fact women have been aborting unwanted pregnancies on their own using herbs and the like for thousands and thousands of years without much resistance. many around the world still do. so whether or not abortions are illegal, women will have have them. the only difference is without the assistance of a trained medical staff more women will die . ignorant of you to believe any different. shows how little you know of what you speak

i have to also ask are you seriously ok with the government budding into our bedrooms? how do you feel about the controversy surrounding stem cell research?

i understand that abortion for you is the rejection of personal responsibility, but that thought is not mutually exclusive with the idea that a woman should have the utmost control over her own body. and this notion that it is a rejection of personal responsibility is a weak reason to support the ban or FURTHER regulate abortions... in great part because as i've repeatedly suggested, a pregnancy is perhaps one of the most determinative aspects of a woman's or girl's life. it disrupts her body. it disrupts her education. it disrupts her employment. and it often disrupts her entire family life

yes, sex is a choice and can lead to reproduction. but reproduction again is a biological process upon which the individual does not exert choice...meaning no woman has a conscious influence on the contact between the egg and the sperm. she can put herself in a position not to get pregnant but that's where it ends. that said, what about when contraceptives fail? and what about teenage women? i don't believe their lives should be forever disrupted because of something that was largely out of their control or because they made a dumb mistake. and besides satisfying this perverse need you all have to spread your misery unto others, specifically women, what purpose does that serve? if the goal is uplifting the most vulnerable among us this is hustling backwards. want lower the abortion rate? support causes to make bc more accessible and put sex ed in school

i understand there are also the rights of the fetus to consider, but then there is the question of when should a fetus be considered a person. i believe that should happen when the fetus becomes viable. that is why i am fine with banning late term abortions unless it is a medical emergency. that is a reasonable compromise. women are given ample time to make arrangements. and sure one could argue that that is also infringing upon a woman's right to her body, but again the difference is that i believe that the fetus is now a person

otherwise if you are of the camp that person-hood should start at conception, there isn't that great a difference between a plan b pill and an abortion...so....

there's also the question should the rights of an nonviable fetus supersede that of the mother's right to her own body? but then i'd argue what of the child born to a mother who were pressured into taking on that role? but whatever. women are bad, they must suffer the consequences at all costs, right?

that said, i do believe that morally speaking a woman should feel compelled to take the father's wishes into consideration. and i would support a way for me to opt out of cs. at the same time, i don't believe that legally the father should have any recourse in whether or not a child is aborted. as we agreed to before child bearing women disproportionately. and it would be humane to force a women into having an abortion for reasons outside of her own wishes. so yes i would not welcome a court mediator nor would i blame any woman for not welcoming a mediator with any real power into the situation. fight me lol

i agree though there is a lot of hypocrisy to go around on both sides of the isle. many ppl including politicians who claim to oppose reproductive rights on the grounds of personal responsibility, oppose rape victims having abortions. and many pro-lifers condemn birth control, and abortion, while rallying against single mothers and programs that help poor children, women and families

anyways, same as you i can only speak for myself

You know I can let it go. I don't know why I argue about this with you. You're not really the problem here. We disagree on the issue, but I do admit that you're at least willing to discuss it and acknowledge some of the difficulties associated with this and other issues. Other proclaimed feminists aren't like you though, and that's what is annoying.

The two sides of this issue will probably never agree, but there could at least be some type of compromise. That can't happen if one side is trying to demonize the other just for disagreeing though. And that's the primary thing I disagree with you. It's unfair to call people who are against abortions misogynists or to state that they are attacking women. More than just the woman has a stake in this issue. Acknowledging that doesn't mean you hate women. Abortion isn't the only issue that applies to either. A lot of feminist issues come down to things feminists believe should be true and them bashing anyone who disagrees. That's a shitty way to handle social situations. Many women understand that. That's why they are also against feminism. Unfortunately, a lot of feminists are quick to attack them for that. Basically, women have the right to use their agency to act in the way they want, unless they use that agency to act against feminist interests. That's the kinda hypocrisy that irks the shit out of me, and why I can't understand why any female who really wanted to make changes would ever affiliate themselves with feminism. It's all good though. I know that's something else we'll never agree on.

In regards to reproductive rights...i agree...we will have to agree to disagree

Thankfully the Supreme Court share my sentiments...or at least they are sensible about the issue

We are closer to joining the rest of the developed world and retiring this tired debate

Also I agree that just because a person is aganist abortions doesnt mean they are a misogynist

But I'd also argue that a lot of the opposition to abortion is rooted in misogyny

There's a difference

And I'm not trying to demonize anyone. I would say its a reasonable conclusion to reach after so many debates with pro lifers, who refer to women as 'sluts' , ends with me being called an 'evil bitch'

That said, most extremist, idiots of any ideology or creed are guilty of charges you always level against feminist

Feminist, women don't hold a monopoly on hypocrisy

Men generally don't support gender equality if it does not benefit them, same as women

Shit...Given our capacity for violence and empathy, why would anyone want to identify as a human being

But I digress

With anything else in life, you have to wade through the bullshit and do your own research...

Otherwise its not really my responsibility to coddle you...

 

[7figz]

But would a father saying this be considered the scum of the earth ?

 

[The Lonious Monk]

In regards to reproductive rights...i agree...we will have to agree to disagree

Thankfully the Supreme Court share my sentiments...or at least they are sensible about the issue

We are closer to joining the rest of the developed world and retiring this tired debate

Also I agree that just because a person is aganist abortions doesnt mean they are a misogynist

But I'd also argue that a lot of the opposition to abortion is rooted in misogyny

There's a difference

And I'm not trying to demonize anyone. I would say its a reasonable conclusion to reach after so many debates with pro lifers, who refer to women as 'sluts' , ends with me being called an 'evil bitch'

That said, most extremist, idiots of any ideology or creed are guilty of charges you always level against feminist

Feminist, women don't hold a monopoly on hypocrisy

Men generally don't support gender equality if it does not benefit them, same as women

Shit...Given our capacity for violence and empathy, why would anyone want to identify as a human being

But I digress

With anything else in life, you have to wade through the bullshit and do your own research...

Otherwise its not really my responsibility to coddle you...

You were doing so good until your last couple of statements. Dropped some condescension. That's unusual for you. Believe me though, my disagreements with you aren't rooted in ignorance, but ideological differences. Part of the reason I say feminism is bullshit is precisely because i have done research, enough research to know that almost every instance where feminists try to use actual data to back up their arguments, they fail. That leads to most of the hypocrisy, contradictions, and inconsistencies in the arguments.

You're right though. It would be more accurate to specify radical feminists when make most of my claims, but honestly radical feminism seems to have the most sway these days.

 

[7figz]

...

Men generally don't support gender equality if it does not benefit them, same as women

...

Wow, I couldn't disagree more. If anything, I see this from women.

Not that the IC is the best example, but there are only 1 or 2 female posters (out of the hundreds on here right) that ever speak out against or admit to double standards when those type of threads come up. If anything, they'll support it or not even respond to the thread.

 

[desertrain10]

I think maternity leave should be something you pay into like retirement. If they did it that way, all the issues associated with it go away.

In NYC its something akin to how workers pay into Social Security

But its not completely employee or employer funded, tax dollars are used

I would take no issue with my tax dollars being used for such a program though

Hard to see anyone who claims to be pro-family would be

We are already paying for wars and other shared services that we may never use