Women have more reproductive power, therefore more responsibility?

[Jersey]

I've been thinking about this for a while, I'd like to hear your input.

If a man doesn't want children (or the financial responsibility of one) he has two choices;

1. Abstain. And if that fails:

2. Pre-intercourse protection such as a condom. If the condom breaks, he is at the mercy of the woman he slept with.

A woman, on the other hand, has five. She can:

1. Abstain. And if that fails:

2. Use pre-intercourse protection such as condoms, hormone spiral, or birth control pills. If any of these methods fails for whatever reason:

3. Post-intercourse protection, like the morning after pill. If that also fails:

4. Abortion. And if she doesn't go through with one:

5. Put the baby up for adoption.

 

As demonstrated, women have more "lifelines" in this scenario than men do. They have more than double the reproductive power and the possibilities of planned Parenthood. My argument is that the woman therefore holds most of the responsibility of any child's existence.

If a two strangers, a man and a woman has sex together and the condom breaks (resulting in childbirth), it is mostly due to the decisions (or lack of decisions) of the woman that is the cause for the fact that the child does not have a father. She could've prevented if after the incident occurred but she didn't. The man couldn't so naturally he didn't.

My argument is not that men are all free from responsibility, but that women by nature are more responsible (in most cases) for a child's birth. There are obviously exceptions to everything, such as if the woman was held captive and raped by a man.

I'd like to hear your input. Are both parties really equal in the creation of a child?

[Jersey]

An addition to my post.
I was the product of a one night stand between my mother and my father (whom I never met). Would I be in the wrong to find this situation to be mostly the fault of my mother? Surely my dad didn't stay (and frankly, who would stay if it's a one night stand), but my mother had several more lifelines to ensure that I didn't grow up without my father, and still she chose to keep me. I'm obviously glad she did, but I still find it hard to blame my father for this unfortunate family constellation of mine.

Any help with sorting my thoughts are appreciated.

 

[Siegfried von Walheim]

Legally equal? Obviously not. Biologically equal? Sort of. 

Men don't have to be pregnant but women can kill their babies just by feeling depressed or angry enough and can hold them hostage if they are evil enough. However assuming a not-evil woman; women are obviously at the mercy of those around them while pregnant. They can't really do much for themselves and at the very least need an income provider since they cannot work (and when they can they're nearly useless) for money--especially at the level of a non-pregnant woman or a man. However it is the men that usually pay for the woman. The equality in biology is mainly like this: if the woman wishes she can kill the child. If the man wishes he can stop giving her resources (thus if they cannot get it any other way they will die slowly). Obviously half-way decent people don't threaten to knife their own babies or threaten to cast their pregnant women into the streets but there's always that potential should one side abuse their power. 

With new laws however the power of men to stop providing resources is revoked while women can kill their children far more easily than ever. They can also use their children as legal leverage to milk the man--something I have yet to find historical precedence for. The closet equivalent is a "shotgun marriage" but that's far easier to dodge and also far less cancerous in the long run (and may even be moral in the right circumstances--though it's always damage control for bad parenting i.e. immorality.)

Therefore modern men have to learn to abstain or be monogamous with good women. We have essentially become what feminists claim women were; caged animals/animals on a short leash. We actually have to copy how women used to behave about sex; we have to be very careful about being accused of sexual assault (like say by leaving doors open and keeping friends/strangers in ear shot like how women used to be very careful about ensuring people knew she was a virgin. Well being accused of sexual assault easily equates to being not a virgin for a woman), impregnating (versus being impregnated as a woman), and being legally forced to pay for bad women (like an enslaved concubine).

In good company these precautions aren't necessary; however most people do not know what good company looks like let alone have good company. 

Therefore I recommend to all young 18 to 20-something bucks to be abstinate until marriage (and be very careful about marrying a woman! If she's a thot or a trot than you better not put a ring on her!). I also recommend not being alone in the same room (especially a bedroom or a place that could be used as such) with a strange woman or female co-worker because you're pretty much in the same position as women of yore but instead of fearing accusations of virginity loss you risk accusations of sexual assault.

Be good boys and be smart and you'll be fine. 

[Siegfried von Walheim]

2 hours ago, Jersey said:

An addition to my post.
I was the product of a one night stand between my mother and my father (whom I never met). Would I be in the wrong to find this situation to be mostly the fault of my mother? Surely my dad didn't stay (and frankly, who would stay if it's a one night stand), but my mother had several more lifelines to ensure that I didn't grow up without my father, and still she chose to keep me. I'm obviously glad she did, but I still find it hard to blame my father for this unfortunate family constellation of mine.

Any help with sorting my thoughts are appreciated.

 

They're both obviously in the wrong. I don't know if your mother is more wrong because she compensated by raising you (I assume poorly but I'd love to hear the story of a changed woman actually be real) however since women normally have weaker libidos they normally have more control. However I'd argue knifing you in the belly is far worse than raising you as a single mom. I am glad to be alive, as another spawn of a single mom to another.

I can't say she's more in the wrong than your father but I can't say she's significantly less either. Presumably they were both horny and stupid as well as reckless and evil but your mother actually did raise you whereas your father didn't. I don't know how well she raised you (like it could be really, really, really evil like an Arabian prison or it could be half-way decent if she did her role right enough to not abuse you and keep you healthy and alive) but that factor naturally tilts the scale considerably. I'd say she's worse than him if she abused you but if she was half way decent then she made up for it somewhat. 

[barn]

...
A great majority of women seek out / choose to keep their child(ren) out of mostly selfish reasons, against all the associated high risks. They rarely consider THE part concerning the consequences their choice imposes upon the start of the new life; the ramifications the child will have because of that, (more importantly imo) the child will be brought into without a say/choice ...

To paraphrase someone: 'There's hardly anything women do accidentally ...let that sink in.'

Your mother had you (even if one-night stand as you so eloquently explained it above), you are here because of a reason, otherwise we wouldn't be communicating. You wouldn't exist. But you do! Hello @Jersey. You're real, however blatant it might sound... you are nothing like a probability, since you were born. Many a summers ago, right?!

 

(perspective...)

Man, (or woman) do you know what chances it took for you to be conceived???

A rough estimate is 1:1*10^9 = 1:100000000 for ONE individual .(not mentioning diet, age, menstrual cycle... etc.)

You'd have more chance winning on two separate lottery twice on a lazy Friday with random numbers, than... you get me, right?

Life is a precious gift. I think it is morally wrong, squandering it... but I do respect free-will.

(food for thought, for later) Consider this:

- It's not that how much time, or what set of circumstances we find ourselves in... It is, what we choose to do with the time we've been granted, that matters. -

When I first read through your post, I thought of:
'If I (he) got the answer to this question, it'll... '

Then, I got stuck.

Now, I'm not asking you for coming back with the missing part of the sentence, still I would be curious to know if you had thought of something along the lines. {It'd tell me you went for the cause rather than the consequences.} A simple yes/no would suffice. (...if you didn't mind, that is)

 

Barnsley

 

[Osmotic]

17 hours ago, Jersey said:

Are both parties equal in the creation of a child?

Yes.

[AllanN]

On 4/9/2018 at 11:33 AM, Osmotic said:

Yes.

I have to agree with Osmotic, and there will be reasons for and against your parent's interaction, which to you will probably be forever unknown, and it resulted in you.  There's a parallel with two people fighting - again with reasons for and against, but both are warriors.  Similarly your parents are parents regardless of what they may have thought.  That seems pretty obvious to me which leads me to wonder, what are you, "J" asking exactly?  Well, I'll presume.  Personally I've had a few one nighters in various countries and casually in retrospect I have wondered about the results which I didn't consider at the time.

I also presume your mother had some affection for the man because it appears that she doesn't resent you.  Mind you, not all women think the same, but even so, for most, having a child is exceedingly deep and the depth of experience shouldn't be underestimated.  I saying that trying to nail the thing down to should or shouldn'ts, in my opinion, is trivializing the matter and the vastness of its scope, which I'm sure you don't intend.  The power of women's love, men yearn for, and women's bodies are only really lures which instinctively most of them they paint up prettily, whilst men try to be manly.  You were a result of your father's yearning, and hers, for what she lacked at the time, whatever that was.  Motherly she seems to be, although still I'm presuming.  The interaction of your parents was a bringing together of two primordial yearnings which to your mother was priceless because the result was you, whom it seems she treasures.  You are perhaps for your mother a sparkling moment captured in time, something like a diamond, but you live and breath and feel, even like your father, somewhere faraway.

You wanted input but I dared to presume re your true question, apologies.  Maybe you'll get more pragmatic replies which are probably what you'd prefer.

[barn]

On 04/09/2018 at 12:33 PM, Osmotic said:

Yes.

Hi @Osmotic

May I ask, what the thinking is behind the word?

Barnsley

[smarterthanone]

Women have more reproductive power and less at the same time.

 

Alpha men have the most power because they are sought after by all women.

All women have the middle power because they got the reproduction.

Beta men have the least power because they have to compete for the women.