It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Men's-rights activists seek right to decline fatherhood in event of unplanned pregnancy

page: 74
56
<< 71  72  73    75  76  77 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Wow, never thought of that argument coming out of men lol.




posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 


I hate to break this to you, but no where in that study do they give any of the information REQUIRED to decide which sex is smarter (or mentally more powerful). The study simply states that there is noticeable differences, that unfortuantely do fit into certain stereotypes.

The reason we can't figure out whom is smarter is because we still lack all the required info.

For example, I say my computer is faster/better than yours because I have a 2600 ghz 2 core processor and you have a 2400 ghz 2 core processor. I have 4 gb of ram, you have 6 gb of ram.

Now in this example there is NO way of determining which computer is faster because we lack required information pertaining to speed, ie: bus speed, hd capacity and buffer speeds, ram latency etc.




Me: "Smarter isn't easily quantifiable, and it's subjective, so that isn't a good standard. I think a measurable difference exists in power. Here is a study saying that men have more of the stuff that is responsible for information processing, which I claim equals power"

You: "I hate to break this to you, but no where in that study do they give any of the information REQUIRED to decide which sex is smarter (or mentally more powerful)."

To further the computer analogy, given two systems with the same processor, regardless of any other differences, they are of equal power, because the instruction sets that can be computed by them are by necessity the same. This doesn't preclude one computer from being faster (clock speed, FSB, etc) or more capable (HDD space, RAM, GPU etc.). Power just means that. Power. Don't get all physics on me about power equations because I'm talking about power in the sense that it means aptitude in relation to our brains. And in the argument of which sex has more aptitude over a wider variety of subjects, that's not really an argument because it's proven that men do.



For someone to claim that one gender is smarter or more powerful than the other is a sign of gross insecurity. And not AT ALL what this thread is about.


I'm not claiming that one sex is smarter than the other as people keep commenting. Smarter doesn't mean anything. I have a smartphone. My dog is regarded to be smart. One of these things doesn't remember my phone number and the other one doesn't recognize me. My dog can eat the phone if it wishes, while my phone just sits there. That's physical power. I can speak into my phone and it knows based on what I say who I want to call. That's processing power.

And I'm not saying that's ALL this thread is about. I'm saying that because of innate differences in the way men and women are created leads to a world where men and women are treated differently and have different responsibilities. That IS what this thread is about. So far, my view (that women and men should be treated differently) seems a whole lot more like what I and pretty much everyone else since the dawn of time experiences than others' views (that men and women should be treated exactly the same). And yet I'm the one "grossly insecure" for stating the, umm.... patently obvious. (



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 





the reason men and womens' reproductive rights are not, nor should they be, equal is because men and women are not inherently equal. Men are more "powerful" (a real argument against, anyone?...anyone?) and as such have more responsibility than women when it comes to the human experience, as evidenced by nearly every single man, woman, Neandertal, and half-ape ever to walk the earth ever....


I think first of all, that you are confusing "sameness" with "equality," as well as "inherent equality" with "legal equality." Are women citizens? Are citizens equally protected under the Constitution? Can the arguments protecting her "privacy" be equally argued for him? (see pg. 68, posts #1 and #3.) Those are the questions, not a historical record of man's vs. women's accomplishments throughout history! I could argue that traditional roles evolve through time and struggle, and that religious, economic, and political power wielded by men throughout recorded history distort that record rather than reflect it. But that would be beside the point. Enough of that already.

And my point regarding the basis of the Constitutional guarantee of liberty were not meant to deprive it of historical context, but free it from a limitation to that context. Enough said, I think.


edit on 23-9-2010 by joechip because: forgot the word "be"



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   


Wow, never thought of that argument coming out of men lol.
reply to post by die_another_day
 


Which argument? With no reply to tag or quote, this comment, besides being (probably) sexist, is swirling in a vacuum of meaninglessness.



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by joechip



Wow, never thought of that argument coming out of men lol.
reply to post by die_another_day
 


Which argument? With no reply to tag or quote, this comment, besides being (probably) sexist, is swirling in a vacuum of meaninglessness.


I think it's socially accepted in most of the world that men should be the ones working and responsibly choose whether or not they can support a child. After all, they are part of the "process."



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   


I think it's socially accepted in most of the world that men should be the ones working and responsibly choose whether or not they can support a child. After all, they are part of the "process."
reply to post by die_another_day
 


I considered, for a moment, to allow this statement's internal contradiction and hypocrisy to sit there like a turd on the floor, but what I am doing here if not attempt to educate?
It is most certainly NOT accepted that "men should be the one's working..." Nor is it reflective of the reality of modern life.



Women are on the verge of outnumbering men in the workforce for the first time, a historic reversal caused by long-term changes in women's roles and massive job losses for men during this recession. Women held 49.83% of the nation's 132 million jobs in June and they're gaining the vast majority of jobs in the few sectors of the economy that are growing, according to the most recent numbers available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

www.usatoday.com...

And to be able to "responsibly choose whether or not they can support a child" is the goal of men's reproductive rights. Operative word, "choose."
And finally, that you can argue to deny men reproductive rights, while retaining your own, on the basis that men are "part of the process," illustrates a disconnect between rights and responsibilities that cannot be glossed over with a poorly thought out one-liner.



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by joechip
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 


Are women citizens? Are citizens equally protected under the Constitution? Can the arguments protecting her "privacy" be equally argued for him?



Are women citizens? Legally or inherently? Legally circa 1776 or 2010?


the basis of the Constitutional guarantee of liberty

Which has evolved since the 18th century to cover additional people in some ways and restrict other people in other ways. The literal "Constitutional" guarantee of liberty is in itself a historical context.

What about affirmative action? This is preferential treatment of women and minorities through institutional coercion is it not? To quote you again:


Are citizens equally protected under the Constitution?


Are they? If they are, and women are in fact full citizens , then how do you explain Executive Order 11375?


"It is desirable that the equal employment opportunity programs provided for
in EXECUTIVE ORDER No. 11246 expressly embrace discrimination on account of
sex."


Another quote from your post:

traditional roles evolve through time and struggle, and that religious, economic, and political power wielded by men throughout recorded history distort that record rather than reflect it.


History is his story. While my argument is that these "traditional" roles can be malleable at a certain level, at a more basic level, say that of reproductive rights, they are immutable. Nobody is saying women shouldn't be able to learn to read, but scribes traditionally have been men have they not?


religious, economic, and political power wielded by men throughout recorded history distort that record rather than reflect it


power wielded by men throughout recorded history distort that record


power wielded by men throughout recorded history


wielded by men throughout recorded history


by men throughout


by men


CWATIDIDTHAR? Keep shifting your argument back and forth between "women are treated fairly" and "women are treated unfairly." Maybe there's a woman in here who has less of that ol' white matter stuff who'll be less able to connect all that disparate information of yours:

-Women are equal under the Constitution!
-Well, not really the Constitution by itself, but all that the Constitution stands for!
-Well, maybe not ALL that the Constitution stands for, but they're still equal because the Constitution ain't history!
-Ok Well, maybe the Constitution is a little bit history, but they're certainly equal under, like, you know, recent history!
-Well, maybe not exactly equal under all of recent history, but there's no way they're not equal today! Men haven't been oppressing women recently!
-Ok well maybe men have been oppressing women a little bit all along but not like, exactly today! Ya, thats it! They're not oppressed now! Now is like, totally fair for women and like, you know, completely unfair for men! These women get to have kids whether men like it or not! We should take some of their reproductive rights away so men get some of those rights! I mean it's not like we're oppressing them right now, like, you know, taking away their rights or something!


Look, I'm done. Presenting a valid reason why A.) Men and women aren't equal, or the same, or similar, or even equal (again), or similarly equally the same and B.) how this relates to the larger picture of reproductive rights isn't going to convince you and your circular logic. Go ahead and delude yourself into thinking that you're right and I'm wrong because I'm A.) God fearing and B.) Fully acceptant (even actively engaged) of my responsibility as a father and a man.

I'll continue to have healthy relationships with women because I'm respectful of the qualities and the inferiorities in both myself and them. I call it being wise and just. I know I'm not the final arbiter of law. I never claimed to be. I know that I can't change nature. Why on Earth would I want to?



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 


"Would you like some fries with that?"
Really, now. I can't believe that I bothered to read that garbage. The only reason I'm responding, and the only point I'm responding to after having answered every point you made, already, is your implied assertion of moral superiority, and personal attack on my character, merely because we disagree over an issue.



Go ahead and delude yourself into thinking that you're right and I'm wrong because I'm A.) God fearing and B.) Fully acceptant (even actively engaged) of my responsibility as a father and a man.


If you'd read the thread, you'd know that I am likewise actively engaged in my responsibility as a father. As a matter of fact, I had my child in the fully responsible institution of marriage. And I must have done something right as the courts awarded me equal custody, which my ex supports completely. Nice try with the stereotyping.
Your conception of God may inform your perspective, but I never attacked your religion, merely its relevance to the law, and for you to state that my position is that "you're wrong" because of your religion is quite simply, weak.

Congratulations, you've joined the contingent of angry people, who,unable to honestly argue this issue, resort to stereotyping and character assassination, as well as repetition and obfuscation.
Don't bother to reply. You have been written off as unworthy of my time and energy, and as you have, in your failure, attempted to make this personal, ignored.



edit on 23-9-2010 by joechip because: edit for better syntax




edit on 24-9-2010 by joechip because: clarification



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 


So what are you dude some sort of maninist or maleinst....... because that is perfect now the feminists and the maleinists can get married and play there own little power games to eachother..... Hopefully canceling eachother out.
........... Oh wait that already exist's were they cancel eachother out, its called bad marriages, soon to be no marriage. Known today as divorce, or in lawyer talk, easy money. Or as seen from above another day in human to human relations.



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by joechip



I think it's socially accepted in most of the world that men should be the ones working and responsibly choose whether or not they can support a child. After all, they are part of the "process."
reply to post by die_another_day
 


I considered, for a moment, to allow this statement's internal contradiction and hypocrisy to sit there like a turd on the floor, but what I am doing here if not attempt to educate?
It is most certainly NOT accepted that "men should be the one's working..." Nor is it reflective of the reality of modern life.



Women are on the verge of outnumbering men in the workforce for the first time, a historic reversal caused by long-term changes in women's roles and massive job losses for men during this recession. Women held 49.83% of the nation's 132 million jobs in June and they're gaining the vast majority of jobs in the few sectors of the economy that are growing, according to the most recent numbers available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

www.usatoday.com...

And to be able to "responsibly choose whether or not they can support a child" is the goal of men's reproductive rights. Operative word, "choose."
And finally, that you can argue to deny men reproductive rights, while retaining your own, on the basis that men are "part of the process," illustrates a disconnect between rights and responsibilities that cannot be glossed over with a poorly thought out one-liner.






Hey I'm just noting the mentality of the rest of the world.

Americans seem to be more rebellious in general... in almost everything.



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 


So what are you dude some sort of maninist or maleinst....... because that is perfect now the feminists and the maleinists can get married and play there own little power games to eachother..... Hopefully canceling eachother out.
........... Oh wait that already exist's were they cancel eachother out, its called bad marriages, soon to be no marriage. Known today as divorce, or in lawyer talk, easy money. Or as seen from above another day in human to human relations.


Don't you kind of wonder why you're struggling to coin a term to describe this condition?

and to the OP:

Me: "Men have more power and responsibility than women when it comes to this. Here's a bunch of supporting evidence as to why this is so, scientifically, historically, and legally."

You: "Law isn't history!"

Me: "Sigh.... What I'm saying is that because I have this power that I gave lucid, supported arguments for, I have a responsibility to be a steward of life and the family."

You: "I'm a great father! My ex and I share custody"


You really are an idiot with an internet connection. You have refuted exactly none of my points, and as mentioned previously, have resorted to deflection instead of responsibility in your arguments, as well as your duties as a father. Do us all a favor and tell us who your kids are, so that we may know who to keep our children away from. I can only assume that they will be the neighborhood providers of drugs and promiscuity.

In short, /facepalm

............................................________
....................................,.-‘”...................``~.,
.............................,.-”...................................“-.,
.........................,/...............................................”:,
.....................,?......................................................,
.................../...........................................................,]
................./......................................................,:`^`..]
.............../...................................................,:”........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`........_/
..........[.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,],.~”;/....]
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”............../
...,,,___.`~,......“~.,....................`.....]............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-”
............/.`~,......`-...................................../
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........].>-._...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,__......`,.................................
...................`=~-,,.,...............................
................................`:,,...........................`..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_..........._,-%.......`
...................................,



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by joechip
 


There is a lot of pages, you are part of that contingent of repeaters as well.



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
Human being status is granted at birth, so of course when that happens he must provide for what he made.


Again, nice try, but you're falling at the first hurdle.

It's physically impossible for a man to create a human being, if human being status is granted at birth. Only a woman can legally create a human being, by opting to go through with the birth of the child.

It's 100% the woman's choice, and 100% her responsibility.


You cannot accept the legal definition of a human being, and then go back and use the biological definition of the beginning of human life when it suits you. That's intellectual dishonesty.





edit on 24-9-2010 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 



Don't you kind of wonder whyyou're struggling to coin a term to describe this condition?





Oh mister smarty pants.....No I don't wander any such thing...I know why....Do you know why you wonder, that I would wonder, why I would be struggling to coin such a term?


edit on 24-9-2010 by galadofwarthethird because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by livefreeordieinnh
 


Just have to say - - - I find your posts highly intelligent and introspective.

Depth of understanding is always a pleasant surprise in these type discussions.



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 



By depositing his sperm he has made the choice of responsibility of his actions. Period!


By allowing Sperm to be injected inside of her, she has made the choice of responsibility for her actions.

If you don't want to have a child, then you shouldn't be having Sex. No Abortions, No Adoptions.


Because That would be Equal. You made the Decision *AT* sex.

And if you didn't want to become pregnant... TOO BAD. you made the Choice, so YOU deal with the Consequences.


As opposed to what we have now... where *SEX* means "You are Responsible" for a Man.

And *SEX* means, "You don't have to be responsible for your actions, but you can FORCE HIM to be responsible for them." for a Woman.

Annee... I don't know if you know this or not... but the World does not revolve around your Feelings.... just because you have a Vagina.

-Edrick



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   
You see, here is the thing about the Utter Stupidity of the Feminist Movement, and why they don't even know what the word "Equality" MEANS.


IF everything were EQUAL... then the Decision to be a Parent would occur (as you state) *WITH THE CHOICE TO HAVE SEX*

Men would be Required to be Responsible for their Choice.

And So Would Women.




Right Now.... the MAN is Responsible for Any Child that occurs from the Sex that he Chooses to have.


But the Woman is Not.


She can Abandon her child, She can hire someone to shove a coat-hanger through it's brainstem while it is still inside her.


No Responsabilities... No Problem.


But the Man is a "Dead Beat" if he even THINKS of not giving this woman Money for FREE for 18 years.



You know what I think would make everything Equal?


If Abortions, and Abandoning a child for Adoption were LEGAL, but cost $600 per month, for 18 Years.


-Edrick



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   
You know that When you put a child UP for Adoption... SOMEONE ends up Taking Care of it.


They end up taking care of *YOUR* Responsibility, and Decision to have Sex.


A Responsibility that You Welched On.... and Got to walk away from... Because you Have a Vagina, instead of a Penis.



And you Call this.... "Equal"




That is the Funny Part.


-Edrick



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


Edrick while I agree with what you are saying, there are feminists that do go for true equality like BH. She is a feminist but wants true equality. She might take offense at just saying feminist.



posted on Sep, 24 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 



Edrick while I agree with what you are saying, there are feminists that do go for true equality like BH. She is a feminist but wants true equality. She might take offense at just saying feminist.


While I agree with what you are saying, and thank you for your thoughts....

I think that calling an "Equality" Movement "Feminism" is a tad too Sexist for my tastes.


What does Feminism, Mean, anyways?

Well, if we look at the two parts of the word... Feminine and Ism... we can see that Feminism is not about Equality... but about FEMALES.



Feminism is not about Equality.


They just SAY that it is, so that they can attempt to Shame you for not being "For Equality" if you disagree with their "Agenda"


It's kinda like the whole "Anti-Semite" thing, Really...

"Well you Just hate Women....."

Indeed.

-Edrick



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 71  72  73    75  76  77 >>

log in

join