damnedfurry comments on Women's rights vary

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (5 children)

The irony is that the issue they're talking about involves women losing, in some states, rights that men have never had in any state; men have zero legal means of opting out of parenthood, full stop.

If this was about women losing something that men aren't already without, they might have the foundation of a point. But it's still a fact that women haven't really given a shit about advocating for giving men the equivalent rights, throughout the decades that they had them nationwide.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

There is quite a big difference between parenthood + possible life threatening situation + all the "normal" changes that are part of pregnancy; and parenthood.

If it would be purely about parenthood, you would have a point but it is not. And maybe a conversation about the ability to opt-out of parenthood should be had but the conversation about abortion rights is not about parenthood.

I strongly encourage you to inform yourself about the consequence of the recent changes of abortion rights in America. It is not about parenthood, but health care.

Edit: https://www.propublica.org/article/georgia-abortion-ban-amber-thurman-death a little starting point

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 point 11 months ago (3 children)

I'm fully aware of the healthcare aspect when it comes to abortion, because of what pregnancy entails, but it shouldn't be ignored that in the vast majority of cases, abortion is elective, sought because the would-be mother simply does not want the child to be born—in other words, she wants to opt out of parenthood.

If the law across the board in the US was that abortion was always allowed in cases where the pregnant woman's life was in danger, but never otherwise, women wouldn't be any less outraged than they are presently, even though that would put them on pretty much on an even keel with where men are, re reproductive rights.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The normal changes that happen in pregnancy are not to ignore. And what about pregnancy through e.g. rape? Do we dismiss the mental harm it would cause to have a daily reminder that someone did that to you?

Stop comparing.

Just say, "i think there should be an opt-out option for men" and move on. You can't compare pregnancy and it's implications with simply parenthood, but you don't need to. Just argue for what you want without punch down. Women are not your enemy. You can have more rights and they can have more rights.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

Do we dismiss the mental harm it would cause to have a daily reminder that someone [raped] you?

Of course I don't dismiss that. But you say this as if aborting such a pregnancy would actually do anything to meaningfully reduce that trauma. You need counseling/therapy regardless.

Stop comparing.

Generally speaking, this is not a productive thing to say to someone who has fewer rights than you do.

Make no mistake, I want everyone to have full rights here—and in cases where it's literally impossible for one of the sexes to have right X because of the biological realities and/or recognized bodily sovereignty (e.g. males would obviously make no use of a right to terminate their own pregnancy, nor should they be able to dictate whether any pregnant person terminate or not terminate the pregnancy), they should be legally afforded the closest equivalent possible.

Just argue for what you want without punch down. Women are not your enemy.

Your implication is frankly offensive. This is not, at all, a fair characterization of anything I've said here.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 11 months ago*

Your implications dismissed it. You talked about how most abortion being done by choice, because you wanted to make the point that a man should have a choice too, ignoring the fact that a cis man when raped, can't and will not be impregnated and will not experience the trauma of such a pregnancy. There is an imbalance in the comparison. Of course, it doesn't end with rape but also simply the consequences of being pregnant, e.g. possibly depression. By pointing at the choice and demanding the same ability to choose, you equate both. They are not the same and you dismiss all the differences.

I am very certain being pregnant by your rapist and having to carry the child to terms would be increasing the trauma of the rape and aborting the child would consequently reduce the trauma. I mean either way you would have trauma but I am fairly certain it is reducing.

I am telling you to stop comparing to vastly different situations. That your comparison is bad because of it.

"If this was about women losing something that men aren't already without, they might have the foundation of a point. But it's still a fact that women haven't really given a shit about advocating for giving men the equivalent rights, throughout the decades that they had them nationwide."... "women haven't really given a shit about advocating for giving men the equivalent rights"... jup... the focus of women's lack of "giving a shit" surely doesn't frame women in any way negatively.... yeah... get real.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent