Letters to the Editor
-
What a ridiculous argument
I'm sorry Farhad, but you've gone from one end of the ridiculous spectrum to the other. Life's not fair, indeed!
When women wanted the right to vote, did "Life's not fair" stop them from obtaining justice?
When people clamored for the right to use birth control, did "Life's not fair" stop them?
Did the supreme court say "Life's not fair" to Jane Roe?
If my girlfriend decides she wants a baby, whether I like it or not, and sabotages the birth control, forcing me into parenthood, well, I guess life's not fair, is it? She has the right to do that because she has a womb, and if I don't like it I should just masturbate.
If men had the right of abdication, early in the pregnancy, this sort of occurrence would be very rare indeed. As long as women have all the rights, and men have none, well, I guess life won't be very fair.
-
A suggestion I've heard; doesn't quite work but almost
One suggestion I've heard is to give either parent the right to terminate their parental obligations at some stage of pregnancy. That is, if the father doesn't want a kid, he signs a form saying so during the first trimester. The mother then makes a decision as to whether or not *she* wants the kid, knowing that the father will not be providing child support. Thus, no forced abortions, no one raising or supporting a child he does not want. And similarly, a mother can sign a form saying she doesn't want the kid, and her parental rights/obligations are terminated, and the dad gets to raise the kid alone. The only real problem with this scenario is that she's forced to go through nine months of pregnancy and risk her life in birth in order to provide said kid. If both say they don't want the kid, it's an abortion. If both say they want it, then it's joint parenting, with all attendant rights and obligations.
It's almost right. If only biology were a little more fair, it would work.
-
interesting
interesting tidbit:
http://www.glennsacks.com/shouldnt_men_have.htm
"To date, courts have refused to consider fathers' reproductive rights even in the most extreme cases, including: when child support is demanded from men who were as young as 12 when they were statutorily raped by older women; when women have taken the semen from a used condom and inserted it in themselves, including from condoms used only in oral sex; and when women concealed the pregnancy from the man (denying him the right to be a father) and then sued for back and current child support eight or ten years later.
"
also a recent study showed that 70% of married men were at the least encouraged and at the most coerced into marriage by their girlfriend.
-
This is a little off topic but...
When I first started reading Farhad's pieces on Salon, I assumed that he was a man. A few months ago, however, he posted something in Broadsheet. Since Broadsheet is, ostensibly, the Women's Blog, I figured that I must of been mistaken, that Farhad was a woman, and reconfigured my mental image accordingly. Now, just when I was getting used to that idea, comes this post, in which Farhad identifies himself as a man, thus throwing my mental image of this person into further confusion.
Why are men posting on the Women's Blog? Is it truly a Women's Blog if men are contributing?
-
SHAME
To Farhad
"Most men would want to have input in whether or not they become parents". You think? Wow it's awfully decent of you to believe that. So what does input mean? Do you now support financial liability abortion? Do you believe it a man's RIGHT to become a parent or not.
Your first article was well constructed and articulated a clear position. Your current incarnation is dull and does not articulate any kind of practical solution or even take a stand. You have writers on this site who make Jessica Simpson seem like a Rhodes Scholar, and they don't appologize for their dullest and most self serving position. Yet you backpedaled like footage of Greg Armststron in reverse to get yourself out of having taken a stand on an issue that your demographic might not have supported. Congratulations.
For a few momments it seemed that the notion of liberal men as not being eunichs might have some validity. But alas, you fell under the backlash. This article is as limp, insipid and stillborn as a John Kerry speech. So yes you're safe in the confines of liberal hegemony. Welcome back to the bedroom honey, you can get some again.
-
Of course it's unfair
but wait till you stick out in front like you'd swallowed a watermelon and you have to pee for two and then give me your considered judgement on the unfairness of child production!
I was 23 before reliable birth control (i.e. the pill) was generally available to American women who did not have any particular menstrual problems. It really isn't possible for younger folks to comprehend just how different the world was then. While it's perfectly possible for women to resent that they bear the burden of responsibility for controlling their fertility--I was never one of them.
I'm sorry that men as yet don't have as good a non-surgical control but I suspect that if enough of you wanted it, the drug companies would have figured it out. On the other hand, the pill has all sorts of side effects; are you prepared for that? Women literally risk death, either way.
Let's also not forget history. It's not all that long since a father had absolute possession of his children. The mother not only had no right to her children, a married woman owned nothing whatsoever except what her husband or father was inclined to give to her. I really think you guys can put up with a generation or two of occasionally lacking direct control.
-
Christ
And you get paid for this?
-
I predict that the world will be ":SHOCKED" "SHOCKED" to see
the enthusiastic male reception to contraception that doesn't either permanently destroy fetility or the pleasure of sex. Who knew! Don't men just enjoy putting the "burden" of contraception on women in order to preserve men's entirely enviable position? What you will see is more condom resistance and more test driving of relationships with fertility concealed.