Does this terrify anyone else?

[iugurl]

So I guess if a man tampered with a woman's birth control and poked holes in his condoms, it would be no big deal too? I mean she shouldn't have sex with someone she barely knows right? Those are the consequences of having sex.

 

[Guilty Pleasure]

I am completely repulsed by the idea that men should be able to choose no responsibility since women have the right to choose abortion. So because I have the right to choose between an unplanned pregnancy and murdering my unborn child**, a man should be able to shirk his responsibilities claiming he would want an abortion? He's not the one who has to deal with the moral and emotional trauma of an abortion, and putting all the guilt or responsibility or consequence on the woman is oppressive to our gender.

**I'm not trying to start an abortion debate AT ALL, just stating my belief for ME in the situation.

 

[Guilty Pleasure]

Back on topic:

I agree with Gypsy that these men are victims 100% and not to be blamed, but I also believe that this is a one in a million circumstance, and as Circe said, a red herring in the public debate of paternity and unwanted children.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Women have the choice of whether or not they want to keep a baby. I believe that men should have the choice of whether or not they want to play a financial role in a child's life in the context of an unwanted pregnancy. Both parties should be able to relinquish responsibility if they so choose, the woman through abortion or adoption, and the man through not having to pay support. No one has the right to force the consequences of their personal choices on someone else. Yeah, I realize birth control can fail and condoms sometimes break, but just because sh!t happens doesn't mean it has to ruin people's lives.

The women in this article sound like disgusting creatures. I can't imagine how screwed in the head some chick would have to be to dig some guy's sperm out of the garbage can and inject it up her vagina. That is disgusting in so many different ways.

I notice this A LOT on another forum I visit. People do not make choices any longer that cause things to happen!!!! Things happen. Yes, well, of course, the man and the woman are choosing to have intercourse, which results in CONCEPTION. But in some baffling inability to acknowledge CAUSE and EFFECT as being somehow, oh, I don't know, RELATED to one another, people can now see the conduct and yet somehow separate it from the EFFECT. The effect is not CAUSED by the action. Instead, the EFFECT just happens. It is so convenient. And so absurd!

 

[SC86]

Er ... no?

Look, here's the thing. When I was tomcatting around myself, I made partners get tested for the full battery before I'd hop in the sack with them. I was on the pill: and we used condoms; and we used spermicide; and I made a point of having the "If anything happens, you know X would be my approach, right?" talks.

Every time. Because, 1) I didn't want to get pregnant, and, 1a), if I did, I wanted to be sure we'd be on the same page. I think men take it for granted that they don't have to take responsibility for their fertility in the same way, and I don't quite understand why.

I think situations like the one you described in the other thread and the somewhat more unbelievable ones in this article are dishonest, underhanded, and perverse, but I also sort of feel like it's not rocket science that every time you sleep with somebody, there's an infinitesimal chance the result will be pregnancy. If you're really paranoid about that? Don't sleep around with people you don't care for. Use condoms. Dispose of them properly. And maybe, just maybe, talk to the people in question to be positive that your positions mesh ....

+1 exactly

 

[Bliss]

Haven't read the responses yet, but YES THAT IS TERRIFYING!!!!

I then read the article that was referenced and it scared me even more!!!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...-steal-husbands-sperm-ultimate-deception.html

Liz says that any woman over 35 or whatever is looking to trick men into impregnating her since her biological years are ending and she gets built in child support. If I were a man reading her views, I would never have sex again!!!! But I have to believe that this isn't the case. Most women who do have careers and good lives aren't going to make such careless decisions with their bodies and their fertility. I think most women want to have a baby with an actual husband or partner who will play an important role in the child's life. A baby isn't a puppy. "I'm lonely and may not be able to have a baby so let's just get knocked up with whoever comes along." Just seems reckless to me. If a woman wants to become a mother and she is single, then that is an altogether different story - one that involves lots of planning and consideration. I understand that latter, but not the former reckless method.

Children are deeply affected by not having a father around in their lives. While it sometimes happens due to unfortunate circumstances like divorce or tragedy, I don't think one should blindly embark on that path without thought. And choosing to get impregnated by a stranger seems to be very thoughtless and selfish to the unborn child. You don't know if that father is going to be abusive, mentally ill or how the person will choose to parent. At least women who choose sperm banks TRY to get to know their child's father by carefully choosing them the best way they can. And they're not "tricking" or "trapping" an innocent person as a means to their end. It just seems incredibly dishonest and immoral.

And what is UP with showing the author in a tragic photo with holey long johns clutching a cat...while sitting on a rug with horrific (cat feces?) stains all over it??? Just seems to add to the "crazy cat lady" stereotype. Was that done on purpose???

 

[Deia]

On a side note, I think it actually bugs me more, the degree to which this is a red herring in the gender wars: I would bet the Daily Mail had to search long and far and wide to find four crazy women who had the patience to sit there siphoning sperm out of a condom with a turkey baster AND who managed to maximize their window of fertility to successfully conceive.

On the other hand, the high numbers of abusive men who attempt trap women in relationships by confiscating birth control, sabotaging condoms, and coercing sex? Who then proceed to abuse said women once they have a captive audience, making a woman's pregnancy, statistically speaking, the most dangerous time in her life? Oddly, that fails to make the news on a regular basis, perhaps because it's a social commonplace. Depressing.

+1 to this and Circe's earlier post!

On another side note, I live in the UK, and the Daily Mail is a joke. I find it so funny to see so many people around the world read it though! This one and The Sun... they are barely one step above tabloids lol. And they are very sexist, in my opinion. (Oh...and in The Sun newspaper you get the see naked boobs everyday of the week except Sundays I think... with the lady showing her boobs on Page 3 commenting on some deep political/philosophical/etc issue when she clearly didn't make that comment, it's purely there for entertainment purposes...I was so shocked when I first saw it...it's so demeaning...that is all we are good for, showing our boobs in the newspaper...)

Bliss, yea they most likely got her to sit near the fireplace with the cat just to get that crazy cat lady look.

 

[Circe]

I think this might be the way I'm swinging. If a woman doesn't 'take charge of her eggs' and protect herself adequately she can have an abortion. A guy is stuck being forced to be a father. I think those saying he deserved it as akin to those who blame the victim when she dresses provocatively and is raped.

I think may people on this thread are blaming the victim. He should have flushed the condom. Isn't that a lot like-- she shouldn't have worn fishnets and a leather mini skirt?

And I'm sorry I do see it as a form of rape. I really do. There is a level of trust when you go home with a man, and just because you DO, that doesn't mean you can't change your mind. If you do and he forces you, he's a rapist. He's not respecting YOUR DECISION regarding your body. It's not a man's fault that his physiology makes him vulnerable (unlike a woman) to a woman STEALING something that belongs TO HIM and HIM ALONE. If a guy uses protection he's making a choice--- no kids. If there are accidents I understand, but a purposeful removal of sperm or sabotaging of it IS a type of rape.

Just incredibly hard to prove and... as this thread has demonstrated-- viewed with a distinct lack of sympathy.

As for those who say he should have kept his pants zipped and abstained and has not right to complain if a woman forces him to keep a child to term--- I hope you are pro-life because if you are pro-choice then you are inconsistent in your application of the same 'rules' for men and for women.

Okay, first off? We realize this article is totally made-up, right? Like, the more I think about it, the more made-up it is? If it were this easy to get pregnant, doctors wouldn't have developed sperm-washing technology. Women wouldn't have to carefully time their fertility down to the hour and then go to the doctor's office to have sperm injected past their hoo-ha and directly into their cervix, while taking supplementary hormones. Men wouldn't have to carefully ejaculate into a latex-free container to avoid the deterioration of their little swimmers, keep them carefully temperature-controlled and then rush them to the hospital within a tightly controlled window. Either the ladies are lying and got pregnant by other fellas, or the dudes are lying about having worn condoms correctly the whole time, or, most likely, the article-writer is lying to get paid. Jeesh.

Second - and I really hope I don't need to go into this in too much detail - my vagina is not a wallet. In point of fact, it bears absolutely no resemblance to one, starting with the lack of a coin purse, and continuing onto the fact that it is attached to me and I am a living breathing human being who gets to dictate the occupancy thereof, from penises to fetuses. I realize that "physical" and "fiscal" might sound kinda similar, but that's actually where the resemblance ends. The parallel between men's finances and women's bodily autonomy, while entertaining, is a false one.

Third and finally and most importantly, after we get past the fact that these stories are about as relevant as the ones about body organ thieves in hotels and the fact that the made-up stories are being used as another way to chisel away at women's rights so that dudes can have consequence-free sex when they want to and force women to keep unwanted babies when they want to - please read Missy's post. Please read Guilty Pleasure's post. These stories are distractions from the facts that, yeah, men who father children have a responsibility, not to their evil succubus mothers, but to their kids, whom they actually participated in conceiving, fully knowing that babies are a potential consequence of sex. Don't want 'em? Do like the really paranoid ladies have done for years, dodge the whole condom debate, and just don't have penis-in-vagina sex. Good lord.

 

[MissStepcut]

Circe, I think you're right on the money about these stories being far-fetched, and at least partially fiction.

They do represent some very real issues though. It absolutely does happen that women intentionally make fathers out of the unwilling. Like most divisive issues, both sides are going to try to cast the facts in the way that stirs up maximum indignation.

At the end of the day, the law decided that we will hold people accountable for their offspring after they come into this world (and women pay child support too). There were several possible "evils" and holding everyone accountable for their offspring was determined to be the best outcome for the most innocent parties: the children.

 

[4ever]

Dump out contents in sink. Fill up condom w/ water to check for leaks. Rinse w/ scalding hot water. Wrap in tissue and dispose.

alternate version: dump contents into toilet and flush. fill up condome w/water to check for leaks. rinse w/hot water. wrap in tissue and dispose.

Alternate version: Dump contents into toilet and flush. Fill up condom w/water to check for leaks. Tie a knot and store as a water balloon for later use.

 

[Bliss]

With all this debate over whether or not to flush the condom with swimmers...it is too funny! To be sure, the man should just carry a hot pot with him and boil it afterwards!

 

[Laila619]

Women have the choice of whether or not they want to keep a baby. I believe that men should have the choice of whether or not they want to play a financial role in a child's life in the context of an unwanted pregnancy. Both parties should be able to relinquish responsibility if they so choose, the woman through abortion or adoption, and the man through not having to pay support. No one has the right to force the consequences of their personal choices on someone else. Yeah, I realize birth control can fail and condoms sometimes break, but just because sh!t happens doesn't mean it has to ruin people's lives.

The women in this article sound like disgusting creatures. I can't imagine how screwed in the head some chick would have to be to dig some guy's sperm out of the garbage can and inject it up her vagina. That is disgusting in so many different ways.

I notice this A LOT on another forum I visit. People do not make choices any longer that cause things to happen!!!! Things happen. Yes, well, of course, the man and the woman are choosing to have intercourse, which results in CONCEPTION. But in some baffling inability to acknowledge CAUSE and EFFECT as being somehow, oh, I don't know, RELATED to one another, people can now see the conduct and yet somehow separate it from the EFFECT. The effect is not CAUSED by the action. Instead, the EFFECT just happens. It is so convenient. And so absurd!

I know.

Any time one has consentual sex with someone, even if it's 'protected' sex, there is the possibility of a pregnancy resulting and the parties involved shouldn't have sex if they don't want to accept that. I mean, it seems pretty simple!

However, that said, those women are still sick and WRONG IMO.

 

[Gypsy]

One of my neices is raising the child of a woman who was 18 when she decided she didn't want to go to college so she got condoms and poked holes in them when she found out he had a trust fund as a result of a childhood illness/lawsuit. It is on record with the family court that she confessed to this to her mom.

YOU have self respect and YOUR vagina may not be for sale... but it does happen.

I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE EITHER/OR mentality. Both men and women do horrible things...WHY NOT PROTECT BOTH MEN AND WOMEN. WHY DOES PROTECTING WOMEN MEAN WE CANNOT PROTECT OUR MEN TOO.
Sounds to me like you are blaming ALL MEN, including those which have individually done nothing wrong, for the actions of those in the past OR even a select few in the present. THAT smacks of sexism to me. IF THE REVERSE WERE THE FACT there would be rioting women in the streets. But because they are MEN they have to shut up and take it?

 

[MissStepcut]

Gypsy, I totally understand what you're saying. It feels wrong. But what can we do? If we absolve men of liability for their own biological offspring, the child will be harmed. I guess we could jail women for these acts? But men will still have to either pay for or raise their biological offspring. The problem is, there are only bad solutions, and our courts picked one of the bad solutions and ran with it.

By the way, my father never paid a dime of child support. Instead he petitioned for, and was awarded, 50/50 custody. Why assume that a woman should be the primary caregivers of a man's child, no matter how that child came into being? Furthermore, if the father is awarded primary custody, he can seek child support too. Writing a check isn't the only solution.

 

[Laila619]

Gypsy, I hear you! But it's one of those things where, ultimately, the only person you have control over is yourself. These men would not be in this position had they not had sex. Sadly, you can't always count on another party to do the right thing (or in this case, not do the wrong thing).

 

[Circe]

Because of the attempted Personhood Amendments. Because of that douche who decided to harass his ex-girlfriend who miscarried by starting an anti-choice men's rights group advocating that dudes be entitled to oversee and dictate the actions of women who might potentially be carrying their offspring - on a billboard, after giving his fake organization an acronym which was, coincidentally, her unusual first name. Because women have only had anything resembling sexual autonomy and protection for their children for the last 50 years or so, and already, people are making up ridiculous, overblown stories to try to take those rights away. Because you give these fear-mongering asshats an inch, and they take it as a direct route to your ovaries.

Because I have only so much energy to go around, and the things that terrify me are the ones that are, a) real, and, b) common.

I am very sorry to hear about what happened to your niece's partner. But, frankly, he took that chance when he slept with her - not because he should have expected her to be a crazy-pants condom-piercer, but because condoms break. If dudes don't want to take the risk of becoming fathers, they should, a) practice abstinence, b) get reversible vasectomies, c) engage in relationships with people whom they are reasonably sure they can trust, and, d) all of the above - TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS.

Nowhere in there do I see the further curtailment or abnegation of women's rights.

P.S. - The reverse IS true. And yet, so few want to join me on my riot - wonder why. Could it be something to do with internalized patriarchy, and the way women police other women instead of looking out for themselves?

 

[Missy]

Because of the attempted Personhood Amendments. Because of that douche who decided to harass his ex-girlfriend who miscarried by starting an anti-choice men's rights group advocating that dudes be entitled to oversee and dictate the actions of women who might potentially be carrying their offspring - on a billboard, after giving his fake organization an acronym which was, coincidentally, her unusual first name. Because women have only had anything resembling sexual autonomy and protection for their children for the last 50 years or so, and already, people are making up ridiculous, overblown stories to try to take those rights away. Because you give these fear-mongering asshats an inch, and they take it as a direct route to your ovaries.

Because I have only so much energy to go around, and the things that terrify me are the ones that are, a) real, and, b) common.

I am very sorry to hear about what happened to your niece's partner. But, frankly, he took that chance when he slept with her - not because he should have expected her to be a crazy-pants condom-piercer, but because condoms break. If dudes don't want to take the risk of becoming fathers, they should, a) practice abstinence, b) get reversible vasectomies, c) engage in relationships with people whom they are reasonably sure they can trust, and, d) all of the above - TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS.

Nowhere in there do I see the further curtailment or abnegation of women's rights.

P.S. - The reverse IS true. And yet, so few want to join me on my riot - wonder why. Could it be something to do with internalized patriarchy, and the way women police other women instead of looking out for themselves?

Circe, I just want to say that I agree with everything you have had to say in this thread. Except you said it all so much better than I ever could have.

 

[Circe]

Circe, I just want to say that I agree with everything you have had to say in this thread. Except you said it all so much better than I ever could have.

Thanks, hon. That's a really nice thing to hear.

 

[iheartscience]

Because of the attempted Personhood Amendments. Because of that douche who decided to harass his ex-girlfriend who miscarried by starting an anti-choice men's rights group advocating that dudes be entitled to oversee and dictate the actions of women who might potentially be carrying their offspring - on a billboard, after giving his fake organization an acronym which was, coincidentally, her unusual first name. Because women have only had anything resembling sexual autonomy and protection for their children for the last 50 years or so, and already, people are making up ridiculous, overblown stories to try to take those rights away. Because you give these fear-mongering asshats an inch, and they take it as a direct route to your ovaries.

Because I have only so much energy to go around, and the things that terrify me are the ones that are, a) real, and, b) common.

I am very sorry to hear about what happened to your niece's partner. But, frankly, he took that chance when he slept with her - not because he should have expected her to be a crazy-pants condom-piercer, but because condoms break. If dudes don't want to take the risk of becoming fathers, they should, a) practice abstinence, b) get reversible vasectomies, c) engage in relationships with people whom they are reasonably sure they can trust, and, d) all of the above - TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS.

Nowhere in there do I see the further curtailment or abnegation of women's rights.

P.S. - The reverse IS true. And yet, so few want to join me on my riot - wonder why. Could it be something to do with internalized patriarchy, and the way women police other women instead of looking out for themselves?

Standing ovation:

Also, hi Circe! Hope you're doing well!

 

[Circe]

Also, thinking further ... I just wanted to clarify one point that makes a huge difference to me, vis-a-vis the distinction between men raping women, and women bearing children their former sexual partners don't want.

Rape is, by definition, non-consensual. Rape is not, in any sane society, a normal risk that a woman runs just going about her business. It is seen as a violent, criminal aberration. Sure, there are the people who genuinely believe that anybody with a vagina who wears a short skirt, or leaves their house, or leaves a window open was just gagging for it, but we agree they're crazy ... right?

On the other hand, in most if not all of the cases we're talking about, the sex that leads to the pregnancy is consensual. Pregnancy? Has always been a risk of sex. This is why people - historically women - have always been very concerned with preventing it.

So we're equating ... what, a woman's right to not be raped when she takes the risk of leaving her house to a man's right to have sex without any consequences or responsibility, ever? Meaning, the man suddenly gains the right to dictate that a woman get an abortion, or have continued contact with him if he decides he wants to be a dad even if she has no feelings for him or even fears or dislikes him, and/or deal with the results of the act they performed together all on her lonesome if he doesn't, all in the name of "fairness?"

Wow, if that's fair, count me out. We literally cannot win.

This is the sort of thing that makes people believe that the Sexual Revolution set women's rights back instead of pushing them forward: suddenly, women not only have to deal with not getting pregnant, they have to do it while owing men that consequence-free sex in the first place (and if they don't, we get people arguing that things like the DC gym shooting are because bitches don't sleep with men enough, thus frustrating them and driving them to mass-murder).

My point about my vagina not being a wallet actually wasn't about the fact that I don't tend to profit by it: it was me pointing out that being raped is a violation of a woman's body, while a man paying child support out of his wallet is a feasible consequence of his actions. Big difference ....

ETA: Crosspost - thanks, Thing!

 

[mrs jam]

All this talk about consequences, broken condoms, crazy shenanigans, and forced parenthood is making masturbation make even more sense.

 

[HollyS]

So I guess if a man tampered with a woman's birth control and poked holes in his condoms, it would be no big deal too? I mean she shouldn't have sex with someone she barely knows right? Those are the consequences of having sex.

It's a two way street, yes. Women shouldn't be sleeping around with guys who've been quite willing to sleep around. And vice versa. In the real world, Samantha Jones gets the clap, herpes, a baby, or HIV. . .eventually. Regardless of 'safe' sex. Just the risk of HPV alone should give a gal pause.

Casual sex is a myth of epic, gigantic, preposterous proportions. No. Such. Thing.

And, yeah, a guy is just as big a turd if he pulls tricks to impregnate a woman. It's bizarre, and I'd go so far as to call either scenario an assault. But good luck making the case for assault, or anything else. There is only one sure fire way to protect oneself. Be real darn persnickety about the who and how many when it comes to partners.

 

[MissStepcut]

It comes down to: men and women are different. They can be equal in their difference, but there aren't strong analogies for certain issues that are unique to either gender.

"Though abortion is conduct, it does not follow that the State is entitled to proscribe it in all instances. That is because the liberty of the woman is at stake in a sense unique to the human condition and so unique to the law. " - Sandra Day O'Connor, in Casey v. Planned Parenthood

Abortion and pregnancy are unique to women. And yes, while there are incidents of women raping men, on the whole, fear of heterosexual rape is particular to women too.

Fear of paternity fraud is unique to men.

It's useless to try to draw analogies where there are none. We have to embrace the complexity and deal with the issues uniquely.

 

[kenny]

Abortion and pregnancy are unique to women.

... which is why it always sounds odd when a man says, "We are pregnant."

 

[MissStepcut]

Abortion and pregnancy are unique to women.

... which is why it always sounds odd when a man says, "We are pregnant."

It's charming for him to have that degree of buy-in, but if she's forced to take bed rest, only her career will suffer the consequences. He may take paternity leave, but only she will because she physically must.

I think O'Conner gets it right: in a society that is striving for perfect equality between all classes, some inherent differences demand different treatment under the law.

 

[partgypsy]

This story doesn't terrify me, as circe said it is like the organ stealers in it's regularity, while regular domestic abuse is just not newsworthy. But I just want to point on it happened twice (same woman, 10 years apart) to my brother, where the woman misrepresented she was on birth control and got pregnant. And you can say, yeah use a condom, but what if the woman shows you her birth control prescription and attacks you why would you use a condum, are you saying I'd sleep with someone else, etc. Basically, crazy stuff DOES happen (at least to my family). Anyways he was stupid, he really paid for it both emotionally and financially. After many years of her using the children to manipulate him, not putting him on the birth certificate yet wanting child support off the books, him not having formal rights (nightmare situation) now has custody of both of his two kids. But for reasons you can imagine, he doesn't even date.

FYI I (as well as my brother) is for a man being responsible for child support even if it wasn't his choice to have the child. The obvious responsibilities of a mother versus a man, even paying child support is not symmetrical. And the legal option of abortion does not make it symmetrical because for some people due to ethical, religious, or personal reasons it is not a viable choice.

 

[movie zombie]

....FYI I (as well as my brother) is for a man being responsible for child support even if it wasn't his choice to have the child. The obvious responsibilities of a mother versus a man, even paying child support is not symmetrical. And the legal option of abortion does not make it symmetrical because for some people due to ethical, religious, or personal reasons it is not a viable choice.

very very true.

 

[sunheds]

Condoms should not be flushed

 

[mrs jam]

Condoms should not be flushed

Neither should socks or dental floss.