Who is responsible for pregnancies? (Derail from: Policies that will reduce abortions)

[Metaphor]

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some man’s ejaculation. But sure, let’s punish women…

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some woman's ovulation. But sure, let's punish men...

Virtually no ovulation alone has resulted in a pregnancy in the history of women ovulating. There is an entire industry based on this fact.

Men releasing in women has resulted in a notable percentage of pregnancies. There is an entire industry based on that fact.

No ejaculation alone has ever resulted in pregnancy, either. It takes both.

Only one of the events is freewill and arbitrary.

Unless it's rape both consented to the sex.

Not arguing otherwise. There was an attempted parallel with men in women verses ovulation, which is involuntary.

The manufacture of sperm is involuntary, too.

 

[Toni]

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some man’s ejaculation. But sure, let’s punish women…

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some woman's ovulation. But sure, let's punish men...

Virtually no ovulation alone has resulted in a pregnancy in the history of women ovulating. There is an entire industry based on this fact.

Men releasing in women has resulted in a notable percentage of pregnancies. There is an entire industry based on that fact.

No ejaculation alone has ever resulted in pregnancy, either. It takes both.

Only one of the events is freewill and arbitrary.

Unless it's rape both consented to the sex.

Not arguing otherwise. There was an attempted parallel with men in women verses ovulation, which is involuntary.

The manufacture of sperm is involuntary, too.

But not the release of sperm in a vagina.

 

[Metaphor]

Ovulation is involuntary.
Sperm production is involuntary.
A woman allowing sperm near her vagina is voluntary.
A man ejaculating sperm near a woman's vagina is voluntary.

 

[Metaphor]

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some man’s ejaculation. But sure, let’s punish women…

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some woman's ovulation. But sure, let's punish men...

Virtually no ovulation alone has resulted in a pregnancy in the history of women ovulating. There is an entire industry based on this fact.

Men releasing in women has resulted in a notable percentage of pregnancies. There is an entire industry based on that fact.

No ejaculation alone has ever resulted in pregnancy, either. It takes both.

Only one of the events is freewill and arbitrary.

Unless it's rape both consented to the sex.

Not arguing otherwise. There was an attempted parallel with men in women verses ovulation, which is involuntary.

The manufacture of sperm is involuntary, too.

But not the release of sperm in a vagina.

Yes, that act is voluntary, as is a woman deciding to have sperm released into her vagina.

 

[laughing dog]

A woman allowing sperm near her vagina is voluntary.

Not necessarily. Consent ("allowing") may not be voluntary - please no pedantic excuses.

 

[Rhea]

A woman allowing sperm near her vagina is voluntary.

At least 6,378 Australians and 463,634 Americans every single year disagree with you.

 

[Toni]

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some man’s ejaculation. But sure, let’s punish women…

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some woman's ovulation. But sure, let's punish men...

Virtually no ovulation alone has resulted in a pregnancy in the history of women ovulating. There is an entire industry based on this fact.

Men releasing in women has resulted in a notable percentage of pregnancies. There is an entire industry based on that fact.

No ejaculation alone has ever resulted in pregnancy, either. It takes both.

Only one of the events is freewill and arbitrary.

Unless it's rape both consented to the sex.

Not arguing otherwise. There was an attempted parallel with men in women verses ovulation, which is involuntary.

The manufacture of sperm is involuntary, too.

But not the release of sperm in a vagina.

Yes, that act is voluntary, as is a woman deciding to have sperm released into her vagina.

A woman does not necessarily agree to having sperm released in her vagina. There is rape, for one thing. Also men lie about pulling out in time, promises to use a code don or even having had a vasectomy or otherwise being sterile.

Again, no one is telling men they must gestate an embryo fir 9 months and then pass an 8 lb baby through any of their orifices, nor seeking to curtail their educational or career opportunities for the sin of having engaged in heterosexual sex.

 

[Metaphor]

A woman allowing sperm near her vagina is voluntary.

Not necessarily. Consent ("allowing") may not be voluntary - please no pedantic excuses.

What on earth are you talking about?

 

[Metaphor]

A woman allowing sperm near her vagina is voluntary.

At least 6,378 Australians and 463,634 Americans every single year disagree with you.

What on earth are you talking about?

 

[Metaphor]

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some man’s ejaculation. But sure, let’s punish women…

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some woman's ovulation. But sure, let's punish men...

Virtually no ovulation alone has resulted in a pregnancy in the history of women ovulating. There is an entire industry based on this fact.

Men releasing in women has resulted in a notable percentage of pregnancies. There is an entire industry based on that fact.

No ejaculation alone has ever resulted in pregnancy, either. It takes both.

Only one of the events is freewill and arbitrary.

Unless it's rape both consented to the sex.

Not arguing otherwise. There was an attempted parallel with men in women verses ovulation, which is involuntary.

The manufacture of sperm is involuntary, too.

But not the release of sperm in a vagina.

Yes, that act is voluntary, as is a woman deciding to have sperm released into her vagina.

A woman does not necessarily agree to having sperm released in her vagina. There is rape, for one thing. Also men lie about pulling out in time, promises to use a code don or even having had a vasectomy or otherwise being sterile.

Again, no one is telling men they must gestate an embryo fir 9 months and then pass an 8 lb baby through any of their orifices, nor seeking to curtail their educational or career opportunities for the sin of having engaged in heterosexual sex.

I'm not telling women to do it either.

I'm just tired of the poor analogies and I'm calling them out.

 

[Metaphor]

By the way, I assume both laughing dog's response and Rhea's response are a reference to forcible rape. Every single respondent has made clear that forcible rape is not 'voluntary', and I don't think it's voluntary either. By the same token, when a 13 year old boy ejaculates into a an adult teacher who has groomed him, I don't think that's 'voluntary'.

So, back to my point. The production of eggs is involuntary. So is the production of sperm. The release of that sperm into a vagina is also voluntary by both parties, barring cases of rape, which I will have to append to every sentence now as everybody is determined to argue in bad faith.

 

[Metaphor]

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some man’s ejaculation. But sure, let’s punish women…

Every unwanted pregnancy begins with some woman's ovulation. But sure, let's punish men...

Virtually no ovulation alone has resulted in a pregnancy in the history of women ovulating. There is an entire industry based on this fact.

Men releasing in women has resulted in a notable percentage of pregnancies. There is an entire industry based on that fact.

No ejaculation alone has ever resulted in pregnancy, either. It takes both.

Only one of the events is freewill and arbitrary.

Unless it's rape both consented to the sex.

Not arguing otherwise. There was an attempted parallel with men in women verses ovulation, which is involuntary.

The manufacture of sperm is involuntary, too.

But not the release of sperm in a vagina.

Yes, that act is voluntary, as is a woman deciding to have sperm released into her vagina.

A woman does not necessarily agree to having sperm released in her vagina. There is rape, for one thing. Also men lie about pulling out in time, promises to use a code don or even having had a vasectomy or otherwise being sterile.

If a woman lied about being on birth control, you would in no way say that excuses a man from 'responsibility' for ejaculating near or in her vagina.

 

[ramoss]

A woman allowing sperm near her vagina is voluntary.

At least 6,378 Australians and 463,634 Americans every single year disagree with you.

What on earth are you talking about?

Those are the number of women who get raped (reported, it's the numbers are probably higher than that).

 

[Metaphor]

A woman allowing sperm near her vagina is voluntary.

At least 6,378 Australians and 463,634 Americans every single year disagree with you.

What on earth are you talking about?

Those are the number of women who get raped (reported, it's the numbers are probably higher than that).

Yes, I figured that out after googling. But it's a bullshit point that I address in post #51.

 

[laughing dog]

By the way, I assume both laughing dog's response and Rhea's response are a reference to forcible rape....

As usual, you are incorrect with your assumption but thanks for the expected pedantic excuse.

And, as usual, you are wrong. A woman may voluntarily consent to a penis being inside her, but not voluntarily agree to receive live sperm. For example, condoms fail or are sabotaged. Or a man lies about his fertility or breaks his promise to pull out before ejaculation.

Hence your "point" is simply invalid.

More importantly, as you are very well aware, only the woman ends up bearing the physical, responsibilities of actually carrying the fetus, regardless of the nature of the insemination. That simple point seems lost to a number of so-called men in this discussion.

 

[Metaphor]

By the way, I assume both laughing dog's response and Rhea's response are a reference to forcible rape....

As usual, you are incorrect with your assumption but thanks for the expected pedantic excuse.

And, as usual, you are wrong. A woman may voluntarily consent to a penis being inside her, but not voluntarily agree to receive live sperm.

For example, condoms fail or are sabotaged

Women should stop sabotaging condoms.

Or a man lies about his fertility or breaks his promise to pull out before ejaculation.

Hence your "point" is simply invalid.

Of course, my point is not.

More importantly, as you are very well aware, only the woman ends up bearing the physical, responsibilities of actually carrying the fetus, regardless of the nature of the insemination. That simple point seems lost to a number of so-called men in this discussion.

So....what, exactly? I was calling out bullshit analogies. I will continue to call them out, because bullshit analogies weaken your argument.

It is a bullshit "point" to say ovulation is involuntary as if the correct 'comparison' is ejaculation rather than the production of sperm.

It is a bullshit analogy to claim ejaculation is voluntary, as if women do not also voluntarily receive ejaculate.

Stop raising bullshit analogies.

 

[Bomb#20]

Not necessarily. Consent ("allowing") may not be voluntary - please no pedantic excuses.

What on earth are you talking about?

You're construed as having consented when a moral philosopher's hypothetical stand-in for you would in the philosopher's opinion have rationally consented, if she were behind a Veil of Ignorance in the Original Position?

 

[Metaphor]

Not necessarily. Consent ("allowing") may not be voluntary - please no pedantic excuses.

What on earth are you talking about?

You're construed as having consented when a moral philosopher's hypothetical stand-in for you would in the philosopher's opinion have rationally consented, if she were behind a Veil of Ignorance in the Original Position?

The argument so far:

Me: Men voluntarily ejaculate near vaginas is the equivalent action of women voluntarily allowing ejaculate into their vaginas.
Them: Sometimes men ejaculate without permission or rape women, therefore nothing a woman does is ever voluntary. Also, rape.

 

[Bomb#20]

Not necessarily. Consent ("allowing") may not be voluntary - please no pedantic excuses.

What on earth are you talking about?

You're construed as having consented when a moral philosopher's hypothetical stand-in for you would in the philosopher's opinion have rationally consented, if she were behind a Veil of Ignorance in the Original Position?

The argument so far:

Me: Men voluntarily ejaculate near vaginas is the equivalent action of women voluntarily allowing ejaculate into their vaginas.
Them: Sometimes men ejaculate without permission or rape women, therefore nothing a woman does is ever voluntary. Also, rape.

Whether your point is simply invalid depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.

 

[steve_bank]

I think legally the man usually ends up paying support for the woman and baby.