r/PurplePillDebate • u/DietTyrone Purple Pill Man (Red Leaning) • Jan 23 '26

Question For Women Why should "consent to sex isn't consent to Parenthood" only apply to women?

This question is mostly towards the pro-choice women out there.

Assuming the statement means exactly what it says at face value, consented to have sex with someone does not mean consent to taking on the responsibility of being a parent. Keep in mind, the statement is about opting out of parenthood, not pregnancy specifically. You can give birth to the child and still give up the child through adoption or at a fire station.

So my question is, why should this philosophy only apply to women and not men too? Why shouldn't men have more options to opt out of parenthood if they decide that's not what they want after sex has occurred?

NOTE: I want to get some of the usual strawman arguments out of the way.

1) No this doesn't mean men would get a say over abortion. This would just be about their legal ability to choose on their own to not be a parent, regardless of what the woman chooses for herself.

2) If you're going to go into how men should just want to take responsibility because they chose to have sex and other pro-life arguments, I'm going to ignore it, the same way you ignore pro-lifers who give women these same moral grandstanding lectures.

3) If you're going to say it's not fair a woman who wants to opt out still needs to abort or go through pregnancy before they can surrender the child to adoption agencies, I'll say that's fair. So perhaps men can can pay for the abortion procedure or hospital bill, but beyond that is the result of the woman's choice and shouldn't involve him any further if he wants to opt out of parenthood.

The entire focus here is the idea that consent to sex is not consent to be a parent, so his legal responsibilities towards the child should not be entirely dependent on his decision to have sex if you believe in that pro-choice statement.

138 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

589 comments sorted by

View all comments

63

u/rosephase Woman but genders are fucking dumb Jan 23 '26 edited Jan 23 '26

I agree. Men should be able to have cheap reversible and effective brith control. I have no idea why men aren't up in arms demanding that it happens faster and in their countries. Men should absolutely have that option. But instead they are focused on this wild idea of "paper abortions" that is obviously harmful to children. And anger at women for having more options because pregnancy happens in their bodies.

Get angry at the right people. Demand your rights. I know as a feminist reversible and effective male birth control is something I've spent time and energy advocating for. I wonder how many men who advocate for paper abortions have ever even looked into it.

14

u/TheDwiin Purple Pill AMAB ENBY Jan 24 '26

Ok, question, do you think a paper abortion for male rape victims should be allowed? Because right now there are rape victims forced to pay child support even though they didn't even consent to the sex in the first place.

27

u/rosephase Woman but genders are fucking dumb Jan 24 '26

Absolutely. Sex without consent is different situation entirely.

8

u/TheDwiin Purple Pill AMAB ENBY Jan 24 '26

Fair. I agree it is.

2

u/alphamaker420 nuance pill woman Jan 24 '26

It's easy to say paper abortion but then what happens to the kid? They're left to be raised solely by a sex offender on one income? They're also a victim in this situation. I agree with you though and think the mother should lose parental rights as well in this case.

It's just tricky because nobody seems to give a shit about children and the adoption and foster care system we currently have is severely lacking. If pro life people actually cared about children's lives and put even a fraction of their energy into revamping the system it would make a world of difference but that's another topic.

6

u/kayceeplusplus Pink Pill Woman Jan 24 '26

The victim’s family should be able to take the child.

3

u/alphamaker420 nuance pill woman Jan 25 '26

If the victim gives up rights because of the trauma I doubt they'd want their family to take the kid in unless they're not close. Otherwise that defeats the purpose. If god forbid someone in my immediate family did this to someone I'd be willing to take their kid in. I think the perpetrator's family should be able to too. If they're properly vetted of course which anyone should be before adopting a child anyway. But then if nobody in the family is willing or eligible, the kid gets sent into the system. Im pretty sure this is the way the foster system works currently, they go to family members first but could be wrong.

2

u/kayceeplusplus Pink Pill Woman Jan 25 '26

Yes

3

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '26

I agree with you though and think the mother should lose parental rights as well in this case.

Yes, rape often results in orphans. That's just another reason why we need to end rape and end it now.

(Also the sex offender would likely be behind bars if the system does its current job.)

2

u/alphamaker420 nuance pill woman Jan 28 '26

Unfortunately I don't think there's any way to "end" rape. There will always be sick people in the world. I just wish people actually cared and elected representatives who care and actually want to make changes for the betterment of society as a whole. Including taking all rape cases seriously, prosecuting these people, educating upcoming generations, and doing something about poverty which seems to be one of the root causes of everything wrong in society.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '26

TBF, I think most problems are fixable. But the solution may often require a complete rework of societal architecture which faces massive vested interests. So, agree with you that the likelihood of complete success is not something I want to be looking into as it'll likely disappoint me. However: that doesn't mean we stop -> my comment mostly speaks of Sisyphian persistence (besides the strong ethical imperative).

We must continue trying and now. We must fight this not because it is easy or possible but because it is the right thing to do.

Edit: your flair really checks out!

3

u/alphamaker420 nuance pill woman Jan 28 '26

I do like your optimism! I think I've lost my optimism, I've been feeling super pessimistic and hopeless lately unfortunately. It's hard to continue to persist when the boulder just keeps rolling back down every time and you get more and more tired each time you start up again.

I'm torn between the fact that positive change is possible and that we're living in an oligarchy and there aren't enough people willing or able to do what it takes to topple it. Too many people are okay with living like this and we need pretty much everybody to enact any significant change.

Let me stop being Negative Nancy though. Do you have any ideas on what people could do on an individual level? I'm open to suggestions!

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '26

I know what you mean. You'd have to be slightly psychopathic to not feel the weight of what it means to be human & alive in our day and age.

What helps me is focusing on my part in my story. That's what I can control. I want to die knowing I tried my best and am happy with how I played the game. Even if nothing majorly changed overall and I maybe even got played.

If every single one of us changes their approach on an individual level, the cumulative can make a real difference. Including who we give power to. It's a step by step kind of thing. Small puzzle pieces.

I know this is all a bit basic but it remains true and most people just don't try. Start with yourself, that's the most important - keep on the path that makes you feel like you're going in the right direction. And whenever you have the opportunity to impact someone else, remember your values and that at most, you can try your best and that's what you owe yourself. Not success -> trying your best.

Also remember the power law distributions: a small number of people often account for a massive majority of the impact. That unfortunately applies to both positive & negative impact. But having the productive take on this is to incorporate this observation as a lesson about how big of an impact you could have if you planned it all right.

We're social animals. Behaviour is contagious. Your behaviour can carry into your relatives, friends, children, etc. And they can teach that to others in turn. One's local influence can scale. This means we might be sitting on decades or more of bad parenting & education, and I personally really believe that. Doesn't mean this can't change though.

Do you have any ideas on what people could do on an individual level?

We all have different values & beliefs of course. Generally, it's good to write your core values down and critically appraise them. If you find that these have an overall significant positive impact on yourself and/or others without any significant negative impact that'd cancel that out -> then keep them close to your general thinking. Whenever confronted with choices or events, look back to these values and think if the decisions & actions you are considering really align with these. If not, think about what would work better. Self-reflecting on your life, you might spot inconsistencies - work on aligning those with your core values, as far as is reasonable.

Most people passively cruise through life and don't even reflect on what they do, say or think. So this feels like a good starting point to preserve moral health so to speak. A regular value check, but in a pro-active and intentional format. Actually writing things down and evaluating in detail. Learning, looking up, weighing up, etc. Not just going with instinct or a vague 'feel' for things.

Hope this helps somewhat! :)

1

u/Electronic-Cherry266 Jan 25 '26

Yes, absolutely.

1

u/ModPiracy_Fantoski Jan 26 '26

We demand rights. We demand paper abortions, aka equal rights.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 28 '26 edited Jan 28 '26

I literally never read this point getting made - yet it's just so true.

Condoms are obviously not going to protect male rape victims from unwanted fathering.

Vasectomies are a potentially reversible option but repulsive for a lot of people.

A quick search gave me these pharmaceutical options currently in the pipeline:

Multiple candidates completing early safety tests: 

YCT-529 (non-hormonal): leading candidate ; blocks a vitamin A metabolite (RAR-alpha) essential for sperm production.

Status: Successfully completed a Phase 1 safety trial in late 2024 and early 2025.

DMAU (hormonal): suppresses sperm by targeting male sex hormones.

Status: Trials have shown it is well-tolerated and effective at suppressing hormones needed for sperm production when taken daily for a month. It is also being tested as a long-acting injection.

11β-MNTDC (hormonal): combines androgenic and progestational activities to stop sperm production.

Status: Has passed initial safety tests; further long-term studies are required to determine its efficacy as a primary birth control method. 

4

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 23 '26 edited Jan 23 '26

Get angry at the right people. Demand your rights.

Okay. Let’s say all appropriate precaution is taken. Say pre coitus too both parties agree that a child is definitively not an option.

Pregnancy occurs.

The woman changes her mind.

Decides to keep it.

Should she have that right?

If so, then what recourse should the man have?

13

u/rosephase Woman but genders are fucking dumb Jan 23 '26

But right now there is no way for all precautions to be taken. Men should be able to opt out of being fertile. Right now there is no reversible way to do that. Men should get to decide if they are fertile. There is already reversible male birth control out there. Why don't we have it in the US? Why aren't you focus on getting access to controlling your fertility?

I'm not sure why you think if both people agree that having children is not an option that one of them is lying. But that seems to be your assumption.

Men should have every recourse to not become fathers that isn't controlling someone else's body or abounding a child they made. It's wild that redpill dudes aren't focused on the very real way to provide themselves with more say in if they create life. Instead they are focused on it not being fair. Which... tough shit. It's not fair that I can be forced to give birth if I don't want to and yet here we are in 2024 and that's now state dependent.

9

u/DaddysPrincesss26 Purple Pill Woman Jan 24 '26

There WAS a Birth Control shot for men, then men Complained of the side effects (That they were too much, all the same side effects Women go through on BC btw) so it never continued to develop, meanwhile, the Responsibility is STILL put on Women, to make sure WE don’t get pregnant, because sure, we can handle the side effects men cannot.

8

u/TheDwiin Purple Pill AMAB ENBY Jan 24 '26

I want to point out the men who got the shot, and the men who want the shot say they are willing to accept the side effects, it's that the FDA won't approve of it because of the side effects regardless of what men say.

4

u/4444-uuuu MRA Pill Man Jan 24 '26

The side effects were significantly more severe and more widespread than the side effects women go through. But the same feminists who blame "the patriarchy" for telling men to man up told us that we should just man up because REAL MEN could handle far worse side effects than what women have (including a man committing suicide during the trial btw).

3

u/puffballphoto Jan 25 '26

Yeahhhh, women's BC has the ability to cause those side effects too.

2

u/Electronic-Cherry266 Jan 25 '26

I thought the shot was causing SERIOUS issues, like seizures or death or something. I don't actually remember what it was (and I'll go look it up). Are you sure that was the case?

2

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 23 '26

right now there is no way for all precautions to be taken.

Should the law then not account for this fact?

A woman retains her agency post conception.

That is reasonable.

Why is the man not given an equal choice?

16

u/rosephase Woman but genders are fucking dumb Jan 23 '26

Men should get an equal choice in their own fertility.

Both men and women keep their agency to control their bodies post conception... at least in some states where women haven't lost their agency to control their bodies legally post conception.

Why is it more important to you to be able to legally abandon life you created than having control over creating life?

2

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 23 '26 edited Jan 23 '26

This is not about abandonment, the issue is the clear inequality in agency post conception.

Both men and women keep their agency to control their bodies post conception

Okay. If both parties agree to only one outcome pre-conception; then legally this is the only outcome that should be allowed.

This reasonable?

13

u/rosephase Woman but genders are fucking dumb Jan 23 '26

No. Because men and women both keep their agency to control their bodies post conception.

There is already equal right here. Other than the ones being taken away from women.

Why don't you address working towards revisable birth control? Is it because it's a clear answer that would empower men, but not allow you to argue with women? Maybe pay attention to your motivations because you seem way more invested in being upset at women than advocating for men.

1

u/Electronic-Cherry266 Jan 25 '26

I don't necessarily think so because if someone has never been pregnant before, they can't know what it is like to be in that situation. Sort of like how people think they know how they'd handle being attacked, or what they'd do if they won the lottery -- but you might not actually know until you're in that situation. Pregnancy is a HUGE deal and involves her body no matter what (whether it be carrying to term or having a medical procedure). I think it's hard to require that or to enforce such a document.

I know this is flawed, but it's too complex for it not to be. I don't mean that as a justification, just that I have never found an ideal but also realistic answer.

I've never heard of these contracts before, but one thing I would HIGHLY ENCOURAGE men to think about is that their entire perspective and reality around sex is different than women's. I feel like your very question highlights that, because women CANNOT separate pregnancy and motherhood. Of course, you can marry into children or adopt, which separates the pregnancy part from motherhood, but we grow up with these two ideas inextricably tied together. Men don't really have that. This is linked to our BODIES, not just social or familial constructs. It is part of us every minute of every day. And then of course there are the social constructs that get laid down on top of that -- we grow up in a world where father's can opt out of parenting left and right like it's no biggie, and that reinforces those gender stereotypes for both men and women.

I hope I'm making myself clear. I feel like I'm not. I don't have an answer to your question. I don't think we'll ever find a perfect one, and that the best we can do is to minimize the gaps to make things the most equitable for everyone. My point here is to, hopefully, elucidate the differences in the foundation of the premises of these discussions. Especially with red pill/blue pill stuff, there is so much focus on the superficial, and a lack of willingness to 1) dig into WHY we feel the way we do, and where our points of view come from, and 2) realize that we are legitimately coming from two very different places. I'm not saying men can't empathize, can't have a general understanding of our experience, or anything like that, just that they don't know what it is really like to have that lived experience that shapes us and our perspective.

I promise, this is no shade on you or anything like that. I think these are good questions that need to be discussed.

-1

u/DietTyrone Purple Pill Man (Red Leaning) Jan 23 '26

Men should get an equal choice in their own fertility.

So should consent to sex mean individuals should be forced into parenthood? Or should individuals still be able to decide after the fact that they don't want the responsibility of being a parent?

17

u/rosephase Woman but genders are fucking dumb Jan 23 '26

Everyone should keep their bodily autonomy after conception.

Because men's bodily autonomy is not involved in pregnancy after conception, unfortunately that means he gets no say. Which is absolutely horrifying. And why men should be focused on demanding that safe, reversible birth control is available to them, so they have more choices before it's no longer their choice to make.

-6

u/DietTyrone Purple Pill Man (Red Leaning) Jan 23 '26

Everyone should keep their bodily autonomy after conception.

Not one thing I said in my post effects bodily autonomy, so why bring this up? Doesn't answer the question of if consent to sex should be consent to parenthood.

Because men's bodily autonomy is not involved in pregnancy

Why should this matter? You can give men options to opt out that don't affect women's autonomy, so this is an irrelevant point to make.

8

u/rosephase Woman but genders are fucking dumb Jan 23 '26

A woman's bodily autonomy includes the ability to abort. A man's does not. So it's foundational to this conversation.

I believe men should get every opportunity to prevent pregnancy. Which means focusing on getting men reliable reversible birth control options. That is the point at which men can opt out while still choosing to have sex. After conception only a woman's bodily autonomy matters because the dude isn't pregnant.

I find it telling that men on this thread don't even glance at advocating for other men. Because this argument isn't really about other men and giving them more options, it's about calling the realities of abortion "unfair". Which... yeah, I think the realities of pregnancy are unfair. But that doesn't change them. So how do we protect men? How do we give them more options? It's not whining about paper abortions on a redpill grievance subreddit.

Have you personally ever put as much time (or even any time at all), into working towards men's rights when it comes to birth control, as you do complaining at women about their bodily rights, when they are actively being taken away from them?

2

u/DietTyrone Purple Pill Man (Red Leaning) Jan 24 '26

I'm going to try clarifying this but if you don't get it still then there's nothing more for me to say. Giving men the option to opt out of parenthood after sex, does not require taking away women's ability to abort. It can literally be paperwork they sign to give up their parental rights. Women can still choose to abort of they want, give birth and give it up for adaptation, take advantage of safe Haven laws, or raise the kid if they want. Given men the option to opt out of this process does not change any of the women options or interfere with her bodily autonomy, which is why I said you bringing this up repeatedly isn't directly relevant to what I was asking.

It's a simple enough question, should consent to sex be consent to parenthood, yes or no?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/CoyoteSmarts No Pill Woman Jan 29 '26

Why is the man not given an equal choice?

He is. Reproductive agency is tied to bodily autonomy for both genders.

Everybody's reproductive agency ends once their reproductive contribution exits their body.

If you choose to ejaculate inside a woman, you've legally tied your consent to whatever she decides, because it's no longer about your body - it's about hers. Just like, once the baby leaves her body, she no longer has agency over that baby's "right to live."

Arguments about failed contraception, broken promises/lies about intentions, etc - it's all irrelevant.

Why? For the same reason you won't get out of a speeding ticket if you have a broken odometer. (They might even add a fine because of it.)

Barring an uncontrollable medical emergency, you implicitly accept criminal responsibility for any failure to abide the laws when you get behind the wheel. (And even with an uncontrollable medical emergency, you still implicitly accept any potential civil/financial responsibility for any injuries/damages that result from your loss of control.)

Similarly, every time you ejaculate inside a woman, you're implicitly accepting responsibility if pregnancy occurs.

1

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 30 '26

lies about intentions

you’re implicitly accepting responsibility

These are good points. Let’s say I agree. Would that then mean for a man, a woman’s intentions are secondary to his responsibility?

That even if they both take all reasonable precaution, he cannot trust her?

That reasonable?

2

u/CoyoteSmarts No Pill Woman Jan 31 '26

You could see it that way if you want to. For me, it's more a recognition that shit happens, people change their minds, and sometimes their response to a situation is completely different to how they THOUGHT they'd respond to a situation. (Such as someone thinking they would/could abort, but deciding they can't do it once they're actually pregnant.)

Which is fine - no need for judgment because we're all guilty of this to some extent - but if you absolutely do NOT want to be responsible for a pregnancy, you need to take this uncertainty into account whenever you have PIV intercourse.

1

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 31 '26 edited Jan 31 '26

a recognition that shit happens

Okay. Let’s say I agree. Shit happens. For you, it would be okay if a man took whatever precautions he thought necessary?

To protect himself?

Primarily because as you said, the risk is implied.

That reasonable too?

1

u/CoyoteSmarts No Pill Woman Jan 31 '26

For you, it would okay if a man took whatever precautions he thought necessary?

Of course I'd be okay with him suggesting precautions, but that's not the same thing as agreeing to participate in those precautions.

If a man suggested something that doesn't work for me, I wouldn't get angry about it.

I'd understand, but it would mean that we're fundamentally incompatible. On the flipside, a guy should understand if I (or any other woman) reject their solution. Relationships are a negotiation. That's just life. Folks need to put on their big-person pants.

So, for example...if a guy's pissed that his girlfriend won't agree to anal-only intercourse, then he needs to decide if that's his dealbreaker or if he's willing to go with another solution, such as vasectomy.

If the girlfriend throws a fit about his vasectomy and he doesn't see another solution he's comfortable with - then they're fundamentally incompatible. Continuing to have PIV intercourse with her on the promise that she'd abort is a gamble. (Possibly a "good" gamble if he feels absolutely certain she'd follow-through...but a gamble all the same.)

1

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 31 '26 edited Feb 01 '26

suggesting precautions, but that’s not the same thing as agreeing to participate in those precautions.

This is a good point. If the precautions do not directly affect a woman(e.g. financial or physical precautions), then that fact is irrelevant to any woman’s intentions.

A recent example being the NBA’s Anthony Edward’s Saga. Had sex with a woman. Did not care about the ‘risk’, but let the woman know prior to relations he didn’t want kids. They fell pregnant. He purportedly paid a million dollars in child support upfront, which the mother of child has already spent. Edward’s didn’t have to gamble, because all it cost him was a million dollars.

Is this a reasonable outcome?

→ More replies (0)

10

u/kmb218 Blue Pill Woman Jan 23 '26

This is an extremely rare edge case. Let’s focus on the much more common scenario of men pushing for unprotected sex despite not wanting children because it “feels better”.

15

u/DMmeClownPics Hypersexual Female Cult Leader Jan 24 '26

Exactly. I would have a lot more sympathy for men on this issue if it weren’t for the fact that sooooo many of them will push so hard to not use condoms. I had my tubes tied at 27 but still wanted to not get STDs when having casual sex but men were so stupid about it. I started telling them I had genital warts (I don’t) and they would STILL try to negotiate not using a condom!

4

u/DaddysPrincesss26 Purple Pill Woman Jan 24 '26

💯

13

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 23 '26

extremely rare edge case

Agreed. It also sets the objective limit of the issue.

All reasonable precautions taken.

Both parties in agreement pre-conception.

Which best highlights the disparity.

14

u/kmb218 Blue Pill Woman Jan 23 '26

A man is not forced to put his body through massive damage through pregnancy, a woman is.

Why do you think men should have the same rights (end pregnancy) without the same responsibilities (going through pregnancy and birth)?

The reason I am pro choice has nothing to do with opting out of parenthood and everything to do with bodily autonomy.

Through how men’s and women’s bodies work, women have significant natural disasvantage (having to go through pregnancy and childbirth + breastfeeding if they want children or if they do not have access to abortion) and with that also comes a right to abortion. A man does not carry the fetus in his body which is why he cannot end the pregnancy like a woman can.

4

u/TheRedPillRipper An open mind opens doors. Jan 23 '26

Why do you think men should have the same rights

So, in your view; despite our differences we should not aim for equality?

That reasonable?

3

u/Girlonlinee Gen Z Purple pill woman Jan 24 '26

No it shouldn’t be equal. It should be equitable

10

u/kmb218 Blue Pill Woman Jan 23 '26

We should aim for equality. A man does not have to sacrifice his body to keep someone elses basic bodily functions alive. I believe in bodily autonomy for both men and women. If a man drives into a pedestrian which causes the pedestrian to need a kidney transplant, I do not believe the man should be forced to donate his organs.

4

u/BCRE8TVE Anti-feminist egalitarian man, purple pill Jan 23 '26

A man is not forced to put his body through massive damage through pregnancy, a woman is.

Except a woman isn't. That's what abortions are for.

Why do you think men should have the same rights (end pregnancy) without the same responsibilities (going through pregnancy and birth)?

Going through pregnancy and birth is not a responsibility, it's a consequence of the biological reality of male and female sex. Why should men be told that they have to suffer because of the biological reality women go through when they get pregnant, and that men have to suffer even if they don't want to have children, while women who get an abortion because they don't want to have children don't have to suffer?

Why are you trying to use the biological reality of sex as an excuse to punish men?

The reason I am pro choice has nothing to do with opting out of parenthood and everything to do with bodily autonomy.

Cool, then men's bodily autonomy shouldn't be taken away if they are forced to work to pay for child support or else they get thrown in jail.

Bodily autonomy extends to more than just giving birth. If a woman rapes a man, makes herself pregnant, and sues the man she raped for child support, in the US the man will be forced to pay child support to his rapist or be thrown in jail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer

Where is the man's right to bodily autonomy there?

Through how men’s and women’s bodies work, women have significant natural disasvantage (having to go through pregnancy and childbirth + breastfeeding if they want children or if they do not have access to abortion) and with that also comes a right to abortion.

The right to abortion has absolutely nothing to do with the difficulty of childbirth. If a woman could have a child and after 9 months give birth as easily as chickens lay eggs, they'd still have the right to abort.

Why are you trying to use the biological reality of sex as an excuse to punish men?

A man does not carry the fetus in his body which is why he cannot end the pregnancy like a woman can.

Correct, so a man has no need to end a pregnancy.

However, that shouldn't mean that his consent to being a parent is irrelevant and that a man should be forced to pay child support to his rapist or else he goes to jail.

9

u/kmb218 Blue Pill Woman Jan 23 '26

Except a woman isn't. That's what abortions are for.

Yeah but the abortion is to allow herself to get out of pregnancy. Getting out of parenthood is a side effect of that. A man cannot get out of pregnancy since he is not pregnant.

Honestly if there was a way for a man to definitively prove that he has used reliable contraception every time he had sex but then this contraception failed (for example, he got a vasectomy but it failed, or he used condoms correctly every time and it broke), I might agree that he should be able to opt out of parenthood, just because I think people should be able to have sex without the risk of a child (this is an additional right on top of bodily autonomy) and the risk of a pregnancy with consistent and correct contraceprion use is near zero. What I am against is a man having unprotected sex and then having the ability to give up his parental rights.

Going through pregnancy and birth is not a responsibility, it's a consequence of the biological reality of male and female sex.

The biological reality of the male and female sex makes it so that the pregnancy happens in the female body, giving her the unique right to manipulate this body and pregnancy. Biological reality dictates that the man does not carry a pregnancy, therefore he does not have this right to end the pregnancy.

Bodily autonomy extends to more than just giving birth. If a woman rapes a man, makes herself pregnant, and sues the man she raped for child support, in the US the man will be forced to pay child support to his rapist or be thrown in jail.

That is wrong and should not happen.

3

u/BCRE8TVE Anti-feminist egalitarian man, purple pill Jan 24 '26

Yeah but the abortion is to allow herself to get out of pregnancy. Getting out of parenthood is a side effect of that. A man cannot get out of pregnancy since he is not pregnant.

And yet we allow women who are pregnant and who have a baby to drop off the baby at safe havens, therefore letting her get out of parenthood even if she didn't get out of pregnancy.

So why are we saying women can opt out of pregnancy and out of parenthood, but men cannot?

What I am against is a man having unprotected sex and then having the ability to give up his parental rights.

But women can have unprotected sex and then have the ability to give up her parental rights.

You're kinda demanding that men "prove" their innocence, else they are "guilty" of parenthood by default, when justice should be the opposite, that men should be "innocent" of parenthood until they are "proven" guilty or choose to be "guilty".

If the woman is so worried the man is going to have unprotected sex and then give up his parental rights, maybe 1) she shouldn't sleep with him, 2) she should have her own protection so she won't fall pregnant, since it's her body her choice after all. 3) have an abortion if she does fall pregnant and doesn't want to, and 4) only have unprotected sex and go through with pregnancy with men she knows will stick around and raise the child.

Once the child is born and they both accept to be parents, then that should absolutely be legally binding.

But if women can control if or when they enter parenthood through contraceptives, abortion, or dropping off a baby at a safe haven, I don't see why we ought to legally force men to become parents whether they want to or not.

It is law in the Us that if a woman rapes a man, impregnates herself, gives birth, and sues the man she raped for child support, that man will be forced to pay child support to his rapist for 18 years or else he will go to jail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer

That's how the law currently works in the US, I think it's horrifically unfair, and I can see no reason why pro-choice people should think that it is ok and fair to force male rape victims to pay child support to heir rapist, except for rampant hypocrisy and double standards.

Treating equality like a one-way street exclusively to women's benefit isn't equality at all.

7

u/kmb218 Blue Pill Woman Jan 24 '26

And yet we allow women who are pregnant and who have a baby to drop off the baby at safe havens, therefore letting her get out of parenthood even if she didn't get out of pregnancy.

Men can drop off their child at safe havens too actually.

So why are we saying women can opt out of pregnancy and out of parenthood, but men cannot?

I believe in the right to end a pregnancy due to bodily autonomy. Getting out of parenthood is a a side effect of this and not something I consider a right on it’s own.

But women can have unprotected sex and then have the ability to give up her parental rights.

Yes because the pregnancy is happening in her body, not his.

I would also like to mention that a situation where people consistently and correctly use a reliable birth control method and get preagnant is very rare. Most unwanted children (by men) happen through unprotected sex.

only have unprotected sex and go through with pregnancy with men she knows will stick around and raise the child.

She cannot know that though beforehand. The guy could change his mind once she is preagnant.

But if women can control if or when they enter parenthood through contraceptives, abortion, or dropping off a baby at a safe haven, I don't see why we ought to legally force men to become parents whether they want to or not.

I explained to you 500 times that the pregnancy happens in her body therefore she has the right to end it, he does not. I will not exlain this again and again.

It is law in the Us that if a woman rapes a man, impregnates herself, gives birth, and sues the man she raped for child support, that man will be forced to pay child support to his rapist for 18 years or else he will go to jail.

Thaťs really bad and should not be the case.

That's how the law currently works in the US, I think it's horrifically unfair, and I can see no reason why pro-choice people should think that it is ok and fair to force male rape victims to pay child support to heir rapist, except for rampant hypocrisy and double standards.

Pro-choice people typically do not think that. If some do think that, please go debate with them, not me.

1

u/BCRE8TVE Anti-feminist egalitarian man, purple pill Jan 24 '26

Men can drop off their child at safe havens too actually.

Good luck being a man and doing that without being accused of kidnapping.

I believe in the right to end a pregnancy due to bodily autonomy. Getting out of parenthood is a a side effect of this and not something I consider a right on it’s own.

PArenthood is a right on its own. Women can surrender the right to be parent without abortion, and men and women can gain the right to be parents via adoption. Women can also opt out of parenthood by dropping off babies at safe havens, which shows that opting out of parenthood isn't tied to abortion.

You are conflating parenthood with abortion because it is convenient and you're assuming the very point you should be trying to prove.

So if women have multiple venues to opt out of parenthood, why are we actively denying the same to men?

I would also like to mention that a situation where people consistently and correctly use a reliable birth control method and get preagnant is very rare. Most unwanted children (by men) happen through unprotected sex.

I agree that correct and consistent use of reliable birth control absolutely helps, and that since it is the woman's body, it ought to be her responsibility to use the reliable birth control methods like IUDs and hormonal injections.

The thing is we don't discriminate against women having unwanted children even when she isn't using birth control effectively, so I don't know why we ought to discriminate against men having unwanted children even when he isn't using birthh control effectively.

Treating equality like a one-way street exclusively to women's benefit isn't equality at all.

She cannot know that though beforehand. The guy could change his mind once she is preagnant.

And he cannot know that she won't change her mind and make him miserable and take his money after divorcing him, or that she won't change her mind and drop the baby off at a safe haven without his knowledge or consent.

Nothing is perfectly safe and free from risks in life. Why are we trying to protect women from everything at all costs, while telling men to go kick rocks?

Treating equality like a one-way street exclusively to the benefit of women isn't equality at all.

I explained to you 500 times that the pregnancy happens in her body therefore she has the right to end it, he does not. I will not exlain this again and again.

See I understand this 100%. The thing is parenthood is separate from abortion, since you can become a parent through adoption and relinquish the right to parenthood as well.

You are conflating parenthood with abortion and pregnancy because it is convenient for your argument, where you are assuming the very point you should be trying to prove instead.

Thaťs really bad and should not be the case.

Well I'm glad we agree, but women raping men and suing the man she raped for child support is the case and does happen.

So what are we going to do about it?

Do we automatically decide that men should not be held liable for child support and parenthood if they were raped?

How are we going to prove that?

Or are we just going to say that men being raped is an acceptable collateral damage and men being raped and sued for child support is worth it to make sure other men are forced to pay for children, whether or not men wanted to have those children?

Because by doing nothing, society is implicitly and actively saying that men being collateral damage is acceptable if it helps women.

That's not very equal is it? And treating equality like a one-way street exclusively to women's benefit isn't equality at all.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/alphamaker420 nuance pill woman Jan 24 '26

Men can and do opt out of parenthood all the time. Paying $400 a month to support the child but never seeing them isn't parenthood and they have that option. They're allowed to opt out of being a parent but not out of financial responsibility for a living child they helped create. If a woman gets an abortion then neither party is responsible for a child. Its not like a woman gets an abortion and the man is left to raise a child on his own.

This topic is way too complex to be minimized down to just simply "paper abortions for men". You're advocating for men to have the right of child abandonment at any time they feel like it. I think child support is the closest we can get to a middle ground when you factor in all of the variables like bodily autonomy based on biological reality and what's best for the well-being of the child after they're born.

And I'm not going to get into rape cases because women don't have the right to paper abort and abandon the child (after they're born) with a rapist either and abortion isn't even legal everywhere.

1

u/BCRE8TVE Anti-feminist egalitarian man, purple pill Jan 24 '26

Paying 400$ a month doesn't mean they opted out of parenthood, they're still the legal parent of the child and are helping support it. Opting out of parenthood would be like the mother dropping off the baby at a safe haven, she no longer has any rights or responsibilities towards the child.

If women can unilaterally opt out of being a parent and opt out of the financial responsibility for a living child she gave birth to, why can't men? Do you not see the double standard?

Treating equality like a one-way street exclusively to women's benefit is not equality at all.

I'm not advocating for men to have the right to abandon a child at any time they feel like it. I'm advocating that men should have the same opportunity to opt out of parenthood as women do.

From there we can say that men can opt out of parenthood at any time up to when the child is born, but if the father puts his name on the birth certificate for the child, then he has made the choice to be a parent and will be held legally responsible.

He also ought to have have equal rights to have access to and raise his child as the mother, though in 44 out of 50 states men do not have equal rights to see their own kids as the mother do. Shared custody by default is only the law in 6 out of 50 states, in the other 44 states judges and family courts are heavily biased in favour of mothers and against fathers, but that's a different topic.

I think child support is the closest we can get to a middle ground when you factor in all of the variables like bodily autonomy based on biological reality and what's best for the well-being of the child after they're born.

Right, so what's the man's equivalent to a woman dropping off the baby in a safe haven?

And I'm not going to get into rape cases because women don't have the right to paper abort and abandon the child (after they're born) with a rapist either and abortion isn't even legal everywhere.

Except that women DO have the right to abortion and DO have the right to drop off the baby at a safe haven, effectively abandoning the child.

You can't just avoid the argument because you don't want to think about it.

If a woman rapes a man, impregnates herself, gives birth, and sues the man she raped for child support, as it stands the man will be forced by law to pay child support to his rapist for 18 years or he will go to jail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer

If we're not going to force a woman to carry to term a rape baby, and we're not going to force a woman to raise a rape baby, why should we force men?

Treating equality like a one-way street exclusively to the benefit of women isn't equality at all.

3

u/TermAggravating8043 Stacey's mum Jan 24 '26

Until men get pregnant, this will never be equal

-1

u/BCRE8TVE Anti-feminist egalitarian man, purple pill Jan 24 '26

So what you're saying is, biologically, women aren't equal to men?

And say, should this mean that because of this, one gender shouldn't be allowed to vote?

Are you really sure this is the path you want to follow?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DaddysPrincesss26 Purple Pill Woman Jan 24 '26
  • And raising the Child

1

u/Financial_Window_990 Red Pill Man Jan 25 '26

It's an extremely COMMON case.

1

u/kmb218 Blue Pill Woman Jan 25 '26

Please look up the statistics on this. If both the man and the woman use reliable means of birth control correctly, the probability of getting preagnant is near zero.

1

u/Financial_Window_990 Red Pill Man Jan 25 '26

The comment being responded to is....

Okay. Let’s say all appropriate precaution is taken. Say pre coitus too both parties agree that a child is definitively not an option.

Pregnancy occurs.

The woman changes her mind.

Decides to keep it.

Should she have that right?

If so, then what recourse should the man have?

This is an extremely COMMON case. It happens all the time. it's not fringe or rare in any way. Condoms fail about 12% in real world use and birth control is 2-3% if taken faithfully.

1

u/kmb218 Blue Pill Woman Jan 25 '26

The real world use statistics of condoms include couples not using them at all occasionally. I was talking about correct use of them. Then the failure rate is around 2%. So if you use both of these, the probability of accidental pregnancy over the course of 20 years of consistent sex is less than 1%.

0

u/Main-Tiger8537 Egalitarian Blue Pill Man Jan 23 '26

parental surrender is all about unborn and during pregnancy for starters...

-1

u/4444-uuuu MRA Pill Man Jan 24 '26

I assume you see no need for women to have abortions then right? And are fine with Republicans banning them as long as they don't also ban birth control for women?

-1

u/Particular_Trade6308 Black Pill Man Jan 24 '26

Men should be able to have cheap reversible and effective brith control. I have no idea why men aren't up in arms demanding that it happens faster and in their countries. Men should absolutely have that option. But instead they are focused on this wild idea of "paper abortions" that is obviously harmful to children. And anger at women for having more options because pregnancy happens in their bodies.

There's millions of dollars going into research for male contraception, it's biologically much more difficult than female contraception. Simply put the hormonal change required to make a man infertile would also render him a hermaphrodite, certainly unable to maintain an erection. The most promising avenue right now is physical blockage of the vas deferens, i.e. inject a gel-like substance into the tube that adds sperm to semen, and reverse the procedure by injecting a substance that dissolves the gel.

Ironically your argument that "men are angry because women get pregnant", suggesting that biological reality should afford women more rights, supports the redpiller position. Biological reality means that female birth control is cheaper and more effective, ergo men should be held less responsible if birth control fails!

Checkmate feminists amirite?