So I was reading a discussion on a real blog about men who advocate the right to a so-called "financial abortion" or male abortion. I was going to comment, but this being a real blog much more popular than this one, there were already 500+ comments and they already said the stuff that needed saying. So I'm saying it here, where no one cares.
The premise behind financial abortion is simple; since women have the right to control their own bodies, including the right to an abortion if they so desire, then men deserve to have a special right that women don't to make up for the offence of having to give up exclusivity on the right to bodily autonomy. Hence, the financial/male abortion; since men can't abort their pregnancies on account of not having them in the first place, they want to disclaim any financial liability for any real babies that are actually born as a result of pregnancies they caused but have subsequently come to disapprove of.
Feminists argue that this would mean special rights for men if it were allowed; men would be allowed to disclaim liability for their offspring, but not women. On the other hand, sexists argue that since women can choose not to have unwanted offspring through abortion, contraception, protection, sterilisation, or abstinence while men are not capable of any of those things, it's only fair to offer them the right to have children but not pay for them to compensate.
Personally, I think there's room for compromise. Men should be allowed to disclaim financial liability for offspring they don't want (but conceived anyway), but only once and only on the condition that they get the word "DEADBEAT" tattooed on their foreheads in large block letters.
No comments:
Post a Comment