General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf men could get pregnant
then abortion would be a sacrament.
Discuss among yourselves.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)they would be women
Rinse. Repeat.
TheManInTheMac
(985 posts)Why don't people understand the definitions of the simplest words?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)And it would be the asshole fundy women trying to take away the reproductive rights of men.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)women's rights away.
Warpy
(110,900 posts)and the proud papa would do so much screaming that no other male would ever attempt it.
Then he'd turn it over to a passing woman to raise.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)maybe you should tell that to this couple.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)That's not cool. Many men are fantastic fathers.
Dash87
(3,220 posts)Skittles
(152,964 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)if men would be willing to go through such pain. The answer is I don't think so. As a man I can't imagine it as I haven't gone through it, nor do my wife and I have children so I haven't seen someone go through it. My mom has told me how painful it was.
As to the OP's question I personally don't think it should matter, access to abortion should be made available. Then again you are preaching to the choir on this one as most on here support the right to choose.
lib87
(535 posts)-Maternity leave would be at least 1 year.
-Daycare would be much cheaper.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)TexasTowelie
(111,287 posts)then children would be allowed at work.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)No, Thank You.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)which... wait a minute, that's exactly how it is now.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 3, 2013, 06:28 AM - Edit history (1)
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 3, 2013, 06:36 AM - Edit history (1)
It is still sexist to suggest that because of a certain shaped sex organ, that there exists a lack of ability to endure pain and sacrifice oneself for the perpetuation of the human race, the perpetuation of our and our loved one's DNA and the joyful witnessing of a lovely baby.
Men indeed do suck compared to the women.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)Anyone who has looked after men when they are sick know that many don't take well to that kind of physical pain. It's hardly ignorant, unless of course you have some sort of proof that men are capable of becoming pregnant. That would be quite a scientific breakthrough.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)To suggest that because I have a penis, I do not care enough about:
The world or the continuation of the human race or seeing the beautiful face of a baby born from my own body...
THAT is offensive.
Furthermore, to suggest that men cannot endure pain for the furtherance of the above, because they are such wimps or babies is both offensive and ignorant.
Your personal anecdote that men in your experience cannot handle physical pain means very little indeed. Men handle enormous amounts of pain and have done so throughout history.
Your comments are sexist and repulsive to me. I'm sorry but it really is precisely what I said it is. Hateful. You need to think about that, you really really do.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)1) men cannot give birth. Since they cannot give birth, the population cannot reproduce. 2) Men do endure all kinds of severe pain, but many hate being sick. 3) I never said they were wimps. Nor do I think it. That comes entirely from your imagination. 3) My comment was not meant seriously. I don't think, in that absurd hypothetical situation, that the human race would go extinct, but the birth rate would go down. The large percentage of absentee fathers in society, even with they don't have to go through childbirth, indicate that they would be less likely than women to carry babies to term and raise them to adulthood. Not that all men wouldn't be willing, just as all women aren't willing now. But my guess is the birth rate would decrease.
4) I'm not keen to delete comments on demand (which I have done a couple of times recently) because no one has ever cared ONE BIT that I have found comments offensive and never self delete attacks, including those insulting all feminists as fat and lazy.
I will, however, edit the remark to reflect a more serous guess.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)1) It was a hypothetical that you accepted and therefore that makes no sense.
2) Many men hate being sick? No, all men hate being sick...as do all women. So what?
3) Absentee fathers are your evidence for the fact that men don't care about their children as much as mothers. Got it. Is that because of penises or some other reason?
4) I didn't ask you to delete. I said I would delete. I see you softened your comments up so they are marginally less hateful but equally misandrist. Thanks a lot.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)I haven't looked after all men. I've looked after my father, husband, boyfriends, etc... Not all.
I don't know why there are so many absentee fathers but I never go for essentialist explanations. I expect the explanation is sociological but I'm not going to speculate. Presumably if men were giving birth they wouldn't have penises anyway. A penis doesn't facilitate that particular biological process.
I could have comment on your sexist remarks, but there are so many such remarks around this site they aren't enough hours in the day. For example, above you claim men who would give birth would be women. 1) that assumes there is nothing to being female other than child production, that you see their worth as limited entirely to producing children. 2) If men giving birth were actually women, your point about misandry wouldn't hold at all. Then they'd only be women and fodder for you and your buddies to call fat, lazy, and crazy.
Now, I'm sure you'll go into Meta and ask your friends to delete their horrifyingly insulting comments. Yet somehow I don't think you care about that. Those attacks are only directed against women, after all. We hardly count.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)I would love to see it.
handmade34
(22,755 posts)I have had 5 kids, at home, no anesthesia. This is a difficult video for me to watch as I don't like to see anyone go through pain. I can't discuss "what if men got pregnant" because I think we are all unique and some would be ok, some not, just as many women anymore can't tolerate natural childbirth and use many drugs and sometimes C-section.
longer version
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)I told you I reject essentialist explanations.
theKed
(1,235 posts)quinnox
(20,600 posts)Then the dark side of the moon would be a good hiding place.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)BainsBane
(53,001 posts)You'll be called a misandrist for insinuating that men would want to abort fetuses and don't love lots and lots of babies.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)I figure I've been called every name in the book in at least five languages.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)I've had Jehovah's witnesses try to convert me in three languages. And I've been insulted in at least four languages, but given my poor French, I couldn't quite follow it all. Still, I got the gist. I've doubtless been insulted in languages I can't understand so not sure if that counts.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)I guess that's six.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Spent two years in Italy and Turkey courtesy of the Air Force and one time was dating a woman from Kiev.
Picked up a smattering of Spanish here in TX since 74.
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)I lived there from about 88 to 98, for grad school. I loved Austin.
kdmorris
(5,649 posts)or we would not see so many women involved in the anti-choice movement. Using that logic, all women would be pro-choice and all men would be pro-life in today's world and that is simply not the case.
This entire thread is pretty sexist. I've seen my husband endure an incredible amount of pain and suffering from back injuries, illnesses, etc, stoically (much more so that I am), and have no doubt that, were he able to carry these twins instead of me, he would do it with no problem - he'd be as uncomfortable as I am, sure, but I don't believe that the human race would die out if men were able to get pregnant - as has been suggested in some of the replies.
Why do we at DU constantly try to alienate each other? We are all (well mostly all - barring the trolls) on the same side.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)My threads have been locked for less than this. But that's because they were locked by female mods posing as women who lock threads of men who can't get pregnant.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)They're not. The vast majority are pro-choice.
It's not about the pain. It's about the power.
It's the fact that an unplanned pregnancy can easily derail a woman's career and cause a lot of other hardship in her life. If the gender with more power was the one to bear children, then abortion would be much easier to get. And we wouldn't have stupid comments like "just keep your legs together!!" as the solution to unplanned pregnancies.
The comment says nothing about the pain capacity of men.
kdmorris
(5,649 posts)I was not talking about the original post when I mentioned the pain - I was talking about the further comments about how the human race would be extinct (it has now been edited) if men were the ones bearing the babies. ETA: Or how one baby would be born and the man would do so much screaming that no other male would attempt it.
And the main point of my post was that OPs like this just alienates a segment of DU unnecessarily. You'd have a point if the vast majority of men (who have more power) were anti-choice, but they are not. If the gender with more power was overwhelmingly anti-choice, then maybe this OP would make sense. Since that isn't the case - this is just flamebait.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Look down at the "Legal in many/most/few...." section. Only the "Illegal in all circumstances" is pro-life. 73% of women are pro-choice, no matter how they label themselves.
In fact, one of the main marketing victories of anti-choice groups is to convince women that if they personally would not get an abortion, but also would keep it legal for everyone else, they are "pro-life". They aren't.
It's a privilege issue. Abortion is an abstract problem for men, so they dither about the morality or other issues. But if it was something that actually got in the way of their lives, they'd sure as hell support it.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)At least, not for all men.
When my girlfriend was pregnant some years ago now, she was also having some rather serious health issues. We weren't quite sure what caused them, there was some suggestion that it might be cancer, requiring chemo and so on. What she most likely would have done, had this been the case, is abort. This is for a variety of reasons that I don't need to get into here. Though I had long considered myself progressive and pro-choice, the very idea that she might have an abortion was overwhelming for me.
I was a young (soon to be - maybe) father, but I was proud and eager. She was a young (soon to be - maybe) mother who was much the same. The primary issue was not "dithering about the morality or other issues", it was the very possible, very real consequences of serious illness that might have denied a young couple they very much wanted to have. I don't know how I would have reacted had she had the abortion, had the biopsy determined that she was suffering from an immediate threat (she had a benign tumor) and thus would be a good candidate for the chemo.
As it turned out, she gave birth to a very healthy infant. I was there every step of the way - and cannot imagine a more wonderful or magical feeling than that of suddenly discovering that you're a parent... that your life will never be the same.
All that said, what the experience ultimately did for me was strengthen my pro-choice stance (everyone has a right to make decisions about their own body), but it also granted me an understanding of what it might be like to personally have to cope with an abortion. It's not something I'd wish on anyone, but it is certainly a woman's right to choose in any circumstance.
This isn't an abstract problem for all of us. Some have undoubtedly had more difficult experiences than I have, especially women who had spouses, significant others, or families who were not supportive of their rights. While I can't understand the issue from the point of view of a woman, it is far from abstract to me.
kdmorris
(5,649 posts)I AM a woman. In fact, I am a pregnant woman. I get the whole power and privilege thing.
I disagree with this OP. I disagree with the posts that make it seem like men would fold like a house of cards if they ever had to give birth and I disagree with you. Most of the men on this site are pro-choice. This OP and your defense of it just serve to lump them in with other men who ARE a threat to choice.
ETA: 81% (a higher percentage than the 76% of women) of men are pro-life then by the same standards that you just used. And they have "all the power".
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Um....I don't understand this at all.
I'm saying if men gave birth, access to abortion (and all family planning) would be much, much, much easier. If anything, I'm saying they would be even more pro-choice.
You seem to be saying that these statements are somehow anti-choice.
And that would be what I was talking about with it being an abstract issue for men.
I'm not saying men are anti-choice. I'm saying all family planning is harder to get than it should be, and would be if men gave birth.
kdmorris
(5,649 posts)I'm not saying that your statements are anti-choice. I'm saying that this OP was made on DU, where I assume that the support for choice among men approaches 100%. In the general population, by your standards, 81% of men are pro-choice. So, posting this here does nothing except further divide us along gender lines. You want to say "If Republican men got pregnant, then abortion would be a sacrament" then I might even get behind that and agree with it.
But lumping all the good men here on DU with the people who are in power and who are trying to eliminate choice (and a bunch of other women's reproductive rights) out in "the world" doesn't do anything except be "in your face" with men who are already on our side.
So, to be clear, what I am saying that I disagree with your statement:
I'm saying if men gave birth, access to abortion (and all family planning) would be much, much, much easier. If anything, I'm saying they would be even more pro-choice.
I don't believe that they can be anymore pro-choice given that, at this point in time, when they do have power - you've stated that men are 81% pro-choice (since we are only looking at the last line).
Furthermore - I believe that the comments made on this thread - that have nothing to do with abortion, but with men's ability to bear pain, give birth and parent are pretty sexist. They do nothing but further anger and alienate a group of good people who are already on our side.
So, again, to be clear posting this kind of stuff is sexist and goes after our allies (since they are the men here), not our enemies:
There would be only one baby born and it would be a male
and the proud papa would do so much screaming that no other male would ever attempt it.
Then he'd turn it over to a passing woman to raise.
they'd only have one baby
(this one was edited)the human race would become extinct
Seriously, we don't even need enemies if we are just going to keep tearing each other apart like this. This is the simple truth:
There are some women who are assholes.
There are some men who are assholes.
There are some Catholics/Religious people who are assholes.
There are some Atheists who are assholes.
There are some African-Americans who are assholes.
There are some Caucasians who are assholes.
ETC
Judging an entire group by the assholes among us is wrong and is, at best, stereotypical. At worst, it's bigoted. Hope that clarifies it for you.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)Women hold more power at the ballot box than men do. So your whole idea of "privilege" and power doesn't really hold much water. The majority of men voted for Romney. He lost.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Oh wait....
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)If women are the majority voting block and men hold the most elected positions, who do you think are putting them there?
I'm not sure how you worked the pay gap into that one, as it has nothing to do with it. It also seems a bit disingenuous to point to the raw pay gap (which doesn't take into account lots of different factors) and not mention virtually every other social statistic where men get the shit end of the stick.
Kath1
(4,309 posts)But they would overwhelmingly support abortion rights. No doubt.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)For the same reasons men did.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,161 posts)MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)We do know support and opposition for abortion is fairly close between the sexes, with women being slightly more likely to support abortion than to be against it.
I'm not sure this would change much if men could get pregnant, and still somehow not be women.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)It's not okay when men do it. It's not okay when women do it, either. I have noticed that there are some here, who in the past have become very angry about things that they perceived as sexist (though others did not). One argument that was frequently used was, if something was offensive to enough members of a particular group, such as a particular word, then it should not be used.
Well, I'm going by the same concept - not as a tit for tat, but because sexism is not acceptable, regardless of which gender it is directed at.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Oh, wait.
Never mind.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)It's not so nice to have to re-live the history that led to quotable historic statements.
Initech
(99,909 posts)Abortions in one hour or less - then it's free!
frankieallen
(583 posts)Solly Mack
(90,740 posts)knows what would happen?
I certainly don't.
To suggest that abortion would be a sacrament, or that the population would fail because they couldn't stand to do it more than once...I think that's unfair.
I don't think I'm stronger than a man because I've been through three pregnancies and deliveries (one of which was very difficult and which my doctor said could have been deadly).
Were they worse than having a limb or two or three blown off by a landmine or IED during wartime?
I couldn't do that, and to suggest that birth would be unpopular if men could do it is, IMO, similar to claiming that there would never be any war if women ruled the world.
Because, well...we're just delicate flowers who wouldn't dream of fighting for any reason.
do I really need this? --->
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 3, 2013, 10:11 PM - Edit history (1)
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: For crying out loud, this is an old joke that's been going around for ages...get a grip. You want to express your opinion, do so in the thread...don't turn to the jury to do the job for you.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't think it is sexism to use humor to point out sexism. I think that's called satire. But I'm just a high school English teacher, so what do I know. And for the record, thanks for the alert because I got a laugh out of this post and wouldn't have seen it but for the alert.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This statement is related to a quote from Gloria Steinnem, though edited. It relates to women's liberation. I see no sexism in it.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The OP is a direct quote from Florynce Kennedy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florynce_Kennedy The Alerter is a Troll. The Troll is one of the men who camps out in META (their real home is the Conservative Cave) and likely has over 25K posts and their only purpose is to divide the women among themselves and the women from the men. They are succeeding because they have so many gunners and cavers in their circle jerk of hate. The women are clearly leaving DU. Soon all that will be left are gunners, haters, teabaggers, and cavers. Have a good time changing each other's diapers.
****************************************** (Separating the copied text from my own words)
Response to 1:
So apparently, sexist jokes directed towards men are completely acceptable as long as some find them to be humorous. I need to get a grip, because it offends me. How often has this exact logic been used against women who found misogynistic "jokes" offensive? Often. Yes, very often indeed. Because I am male though... this is acceptable?
Response to 2:
I am well aware of what satire is. I'm no high school English teacher - but I am an English major at a pretty decent University. The fact that you laughed out loud at this... does not make it acceptable under any circumstances. The humor is entirely debatable, deliberately offensive - and representative of a double standard that exists far too commonly within our culture.
Response to 4:
There seems to be some confusion about who this quote came from. Regardless of who it came from, it's still sexist.
Response to 6:
I don't know who you are. It now occurs to me that I have, at some point, posted in meta. Does this have anything to do with the subject at hand? You can also note that I have less than 2,000 posts - and have been here for years... If you can produce some evidence to substantiate your accusations of me being a troll (this would be difficult, as none exists) I would be very interested in seeing it.
Overall, I find this thread, many of the responses to it - and the overwhelming response to my alert, to very clearly indicate that there are several people here who find sexism directed against men acceptable and even funny. Well, I don't find it amusing, progressive, clever, or even remotely factual. I am a male, I am very offended by this thread. I'd ask you to examine how you would feel were a man to begin a thread like this, suggesting that "If women could (insert action)" it would be a sacrament....
I am well aware of the history of oppression directed against women, primarily by men. I am well aware of the misogyny that is so frequent among numerous men of this age. It is not, however, by any means one-sided. If we are to truly be progressive, to truly represent the ideas of equality and justice, then this is one issue that I would hope would find some unity of purpose among a group of intelligent progressives.
As a man, I support real feminism. By this I mean that I support the idea that we should all be entitled to the same rights, to equal pay, to equal representation, to justice. I will, however, call out sexism when I see it regardless of who it is directed against, and regardless of who is guilty of it.
If I am angry, if this one touched a nerve, it's because I am well aware of the double standard that suggests it's okay for one group to do something that they have come down very hard on another group for doing. That's all I have to say.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)And I'm a guy, see nothing offensive about what she wrote. It's probably true.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)The funny thing is you see the same people rail against sexism all the time complaining about what they have to put up with, yet the vast majority of sexism that is even remotely directed at women gets hidden. Meanwhile blatant sexism like this gets a pass because evidently the majority of people feel that men can take it while women can't, which interestingly enough is an example of benevolent sexism.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)As a man, there is no question in my mind that it is true.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)Many of them are quite thoughtful.
treestar
(82,383 posts)IOW if both men and women could get pregnant, people born of males would have higher status than people born of females.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 3, 2013, 06:59 PM - Edit history (1)
I'm afraid I think this is wishful thinking, rather than evidence-based - on average, men are more pro-choice than women.
Edited for typo.
Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)However, this thread really has nothing to do with evidence or facts or anything based in reason and a lot more to do with sexism and scapegoating.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)More seriously, that's clearly not the whole story - on average, women vote more liberally than men, at least in presidential elections (and it would surprise me if that were different for Congress or state offices).
But in single-issue surveys, my understanding is that support for abortion rights is fairly consistently higher among men than among women, which I think is compelling evidence against the "banning abortion is about men trying to control women"narrative is a false one.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)So these state legislatures aren't full of anti-choice legislators passing anti-choice laws?
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)I don't think there's any rational underlying philosophical thread that connects support or opposition for higher taxation, looser immigration control, more health-care spending, less defence spending, gay marriage, etc.
I think that there are - and always have been, two "gangs" in American politics; the issues they adopts as badges have varied over time and are basically secondary. People adopt a gang for a variety of reasons, largely irrational, and then accept and internalize the justifications for that gang's totem positions, and convince themselves that they hold those views for rational reasons.
Currently, the more macho of the two gangs in the USA is the Republicans, and hence they attract the votes of more men, and the Democrats attract the votes of more women. The stances on issues are only secondary.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)More women than men are pro-choice, and more men than women are anti-choice.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160058/majority-americans-support-roe-wade-decision.aspx
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)--the ones that with the most power and influence in society, were the ones that could get pregnant, they would make it legal, acceptable and possible to end pregnancies. I think this is a better way to put it
Forcing women to bear unwanted pregnancies is a form of domination.