Comparing natural discrepancies to legal ones is a logical fallacy. Legal mandates are social constructs: they are upheld by the threat of force. Justice pertains to legal procedures, otherwise everyone would be reduced to the lowest common denominator for the sake of being 'fair.'
That was precisely my point. Me Myself, and other proponants of allowing the man to produce children without repercussions, suggest such a plan
as an appeal to fairness. They claim that it is unfair to make a man pay for a "woman's choice" (which is a BS concept, btw, to claim that the resulting baby is
only the result of the woman's choice, as if it was some miraculous virgin birth), and that allowing men to skip out on payments to a child he didn't want, would somehow even out the scales of justice. In addition, you yourself are guilty of comparing natural discrepancies to legal ones, of which I will expound more at the bottom.
If this is about fairness, if this is merely about making sure that both the man and the woman pay an equal amount, then what a woman must pay due to the inherent nature of how reproduction works should most definitely be factored in. And believe me, men do not want to have to pay that balance.
In addition, in the these arguments, more than once it has been insinuated that abortion somehow allows a woman to make a clean get-away if she doesn't want to have a baby, and that this is analogous to how a man should be allowed a clean get-away if he doesn't want a baby. That is completely false-- a woman must always pay something every single time she gets pregnant-- and that was another point I hoped my post would drive home.
Furthermore the idea women 'suffer' more than men is an ethos feminism has being promoted for the last 30 years to make women scorn men. One could just as easily say that men are missing out on a very beautiful aspect of life by not being able to carry a child, and in fact a lot of men do feel 'hurt' or 'removed' from their own children even in otherwise perfect relationships. "Male breast-feeding" has become a gag of late, but in fact it actually occurs more frequently than a lot of people suspect.
Feminism in general is led by a lot of women who have no clue how men actually operate or think, but are all too willing speak out on what they think men experience or should do.
Ah, so women do not have pain in labor, they do not experience discomfort when pregnant, they don't have any bodily reprucussions from pregnancy, and they don't have to deal with bleeding once a month.
You can sugar-coat it all you want, but there is a huge price to be paid, solely by women, in order to reproduce.
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that a man should be able to opt out of paying for at least an abortion - or that abortions should be covered by taxes. The suggestion is that perhaps one person making the most expensive life-altering decision for someone else without their consent is unjust.
She did not make this decision for someone else. It would be just as correct to claim that the man made this life-altering decision for her by getting her pregnant. (Which I think is silly-- both people chose to have sex despite the risk that a baby could result.)
It's funny. Above you claimed that "natural discrepancies" shouldn't play a factor in legal ones. Is it not a "natural discrepancy" that women have one further form of birth control that, due to the biological nature of reproduction, that she and she alone is able to utilize? If this form of birth control fails, if a woman chooses not to utilize it, a baby is produced. How exactly is this different than the failure, or the non-use, of any other form of birth control? Do you suggest that men should be solely responsible for a child when their method of birth control fails (a faulty condom, no condom, no vasectomy, failure to "pull out", etc)? Should women be solely responsible if the pill doesn't work or if she refuses to use it?
When men complain that it is an injustice that they cannot choose to terminate a pregnancy, this is no different than a woman complaining that a man doesn't feel the pain of childbirth. And you made it clear how silly you find that argument. You can't have it both ways.
The ability to choose an abortion is a biological discrepancy. It is a form of birth control available to a woman and not available to a man. Until you are ready to penalize men who choose not to have a vasectomy, or punish failed condom usage or failed pill usage or failed pulling out, you have no honest ground to stand on in your attempt to penalize women who do not avail themselves of abortion.
I'm just showing you what equality entails. 