Gideon MacLeish Gideon MacLeish

Holy Double Standards, Batman!

▼

Holy Double Standards, Batman!

from JoeUser Forums

A few years ago, a friend of mine, after his third child, decided it was time to get snipped. So, he spoke with the doctors about it, and found out something interesting:

In the state of Wisconsin, at least, a married man MUST have his wife's permission to have a vasectomy!

Contrary to a statement on a recent blog, it is not required (in Wisconsin, at least) for a woman to receive her husband's permission to have an abortion. There's an obvious double standard here that I just don't get.

politics
13,878 views 61 replies
Reply #51 from JoeUser Forums Top
She/they should have thought of that when they had unprotected sex.


Unprotected sex (or sex where the protection has failed) is inevitable. Very few people are strong enough to resist the biological imperative, and it is impossible to determine who had failed protection or simply didn't bother at all - unless of course you require the broken condom to be surrendered at the abortion clinic, which I imagine would be embarrassing in the extreme to all concerned, as well as highly unsanitary.

If you believe this then you've never been on the wrong side of a child support case.


I'm sorry for you that you couldn't follow your own advice, but surely if a strong willed man like you cannot resist the urge then weaker people are nigh on helpless?
Reply #52 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well the hell happened, I thought we were talking about vasectomy and histerectomy?
Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #53 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #51 By: cactoblasta - 1/22/2005 2:21:32 AM
If you believe this then you've never been on the wrong side of a child support case.


I'm sorry for you that you couldn't follow your own advice, but surely if a strong willed man like you cannot resist the urge then weaker people are nigh on helpless?


You want to stop putting words in my mouth? I never said this was me now did I?


Reply #51 By: cactoblasta - 1/22/2005 2:21:32 AM
She/they should have thought of that when they had unprotected sex.


Unprotected sex (or sex where the protection has failed) is inevitable


It's only inevitable for the ignorant.
Reply #54 from JoeUser Forums Top

So? That's not really the point. I don't see why it's the father's decision whether or not to abort. All he did was knock the woman up. There's no real suffering required on his behalf. But the price of pregnancy is quite high, both emotionally and physically. Should people have to experience it for a single mistake? It's nothing like a vasectomy, where the only real effect is that you might not be able to pass on your genes.

Ooh!  Cacto!  Very good!  And so by extension, the man has nothing to do with the baby either! So get your grimy paws out of his back pocket!  It is her body and her decision, and her consequences!

See?  Pure logic at work.

Reply #55 from JoeUser Forums Top
That is really crappy. Men should be able to do what they want. Women should do what they want....
Reply #56 from JoeUser Forums Top
Reply #55 By: alison watkins - 1/22/2005 4:35:49 PM
That is really crappy. Men should be able to do what they want. Women should do what they want....


Allison, I usually don't agree with anything you write. But this time you get an insightful.
Reply #57 from JoeUser Forums Top
I don't think men should have the right to veto whether a woman obtains a legal abortion or not.  Similarly, I don't think women have the right to veto whether a man gets himself fixed.
Reply #58 from JoeUser Forums Top
don't think men should have the right to veto whether a woman obtains a legal abortion or not. Similarly, I don't think women have the right to veto whether a man gets himself fixed.


Agreed!

Even though women should not have the right to veto whether a man gets himself fixed it seems they never stop trying to fix a man. But that's a whole other thing.
Reply #59 from JoeUser Forums Top

but a pregnant woman is still carrying a parasite that is fully capable of killing her and everyone she has ever known.

Wow, a baby called a parasite. I hate to say it, cacto, but I lost a lot of respect for you from that response.

Reply #60 from JoeUser Forums Top
Using cacto's logic, it should be perfectly legal to kill a baby before its tollder years, when it is capable of feeding itself, as it is dependent on some other to provide its sustenance, and is thus a parasite.
Reply #61 from JoeUser Forums Top
Anyway, this blog was not about the rightness or wrongness of abortion. It was about a LEGAL DOUBLE STANDARD, which I believe this to be.