A Father’s Right To Not Choose? by Q. Reyes – Artistic Warfare #17
April 12, 2009 Q. Reyes 21 Comments
I don’t want to get into whether a woman should have a right to choose; and by “right to choose,” I am speaking of abortion, or baby cancellation, or birth rescheduling, or family planning, or whatever you might want to call it tomorrow. I’m speaking of a father’s right to choose, or actually, a father not having a right to choose.
Yeah, of course a man can protect himself BEFORE having sex in order to avoid pregnancy. So can a woman. A woman is even more powerful, at least to me, since she can demand that some sort of caution be taken before sex. I don’t want to talk about who’s to blame for the pregnancy. I want to fast forward to that point where some people think they have a choice to make.
Okay, the choice is here. Are we having a baby or not? Let me rephrase that question, “Am I having a baby or not?” Realistically, a woman does not care if the man wants the baby or not. That’s the truth. Of course she’ll cry if she wants it and he doesn’t. I think that’s pretty normal, but does it really matter?
Let’s say a woman is making the choice to keep the baby, but the father does not want it. What rights does the father have legally to make this different? Or let’s reverse the roles. The man wants the baby and the mother does not want it, now what? What can a man do, besides trying to convince the woman not to abort the baby? Nothing.
Oh, but don’t let the baby be born, because whether a man chooses or not to have the baby, he will have to pay child support for at least eighteen years. How’d you like them apples? Is that really fair?
I’m not for abortion, whatsoever. Maybe when there’s rape involved. Just like the story I was told recently about a twelve year-old girl that was raped by her uncle and became pregnant. The twelve year-old girl is keeping the child, even though the father’s a rapist relative. She feels that regardless, that’s her baby. I disagree with her and I wish there was something I could do, but it is what it is.
So I’m posing the question, “Should a father have the right to choose”? And, if a man does not have a say on whether a woman has a child or not, “Should he be liable to pay for the woman choosing to keep the child against his will”? I think if a woman has the right to choose, so should the man. And if the man doesn’t have a right to choose, neither should the woman. Isn’t that fair? Why should it be otherwise?
In my opinion, a woman should have the right to choose, but so should the man. If you’re married, then that’s a different story, since when you’re married, at least in California, you’re responsible for your spouse’s choices. So if she chooses to have a baby, then that automatically makes you responsible.
An unmarried couple are at a puppy store (no, I’m not comparing babies to animals, so shut up), and the woman wants to get a puppy and the man doesn’t want to. The woman gets the puppy anyway, and then forces the man legally to pay for the dog food; I don’t think that’s fair.
Like I said, not that babies are puppies, but what’s worse than that comparison, is that some women use babies as a method of control. They think, and they’re right, unfortunately, that they can keep a man with a baby. They sure can. At least for eighteen years they earn the ability to make that man’s life miserable. Is that really about the baby? Who benefits from these choices? Men, women, the baby? No one does. That baby grows up to recent his absent father, and goes on and makes his own bastard children. I’m sorry, it’s the truth.
If woman does not want a man to have a right to choose, then a woman should make the choice to not have sex with a man in the first place. If a woman enters into a sexual situation, willingly knowing that there’s the possibility of pregnancy, she’s giving up the right to make an individual decision on a situation that will affect more people than just herself.
One woman’s right to choose affects two other people besides herself. A man and a baby are at stake. It’s not fair she gets to choose what’s best for three people. Either we all choose, or no one chooses.
—
Q. Reyes is president of the Newt Gingrich fan club, California Chapter. Q. Enjoys long walks on the beach, red-flavored drinks, and the occasional ninety-nine cent burger at any fast food joint that offers them.
Martha Thomases
April 12, 2009 - 6:32 am
In my opinion, if there is no legal abortion, with the decision entirely left to the woman and her doctor (and any other people she may freely choose to involve), there is only one other fair course of action.
Before every act of intercourse, the man should have to pay (to a state-run fund) a year’s child support. Even if they are using birth control, because birth control has been known to fail. That way, if there is a pregnancy, there will be funds available to raise the child. And if not? That’s the price you pay, my man.
If you don’t want to be on the hook for 18 year’s of child support, don’t play. That’s the deal you’re offering women. It’s only fair you take it, too.
pennie
April 12, 2009 - 8:00 am
Women have been subjugated to male-dominated choices, rules and laws for thousands of years. Thankfully, we have arrived at a place where after years of struggle,women have won the right of self-determination over their bodies. Unfortunately, for some, that war will never be over and still a matter for debate.
I’m thinking that although I speak only for myself, if female columnists and contributors on this website were polled, the majority would heartily approve of the right to make choices where their own bodies are concerned. Yeah, the ultimate choice is the woman’s to make. So deal with it beforehand. Martha’s contribution makes sense to me but I would raise the stakes–escrow accounts for years of support. Maybe that would be a great means of birth control. We’re all aware there are so many ways of expressing love–or attaining mutual pleasure–that don’t involve inserting a penis into a vagina.
It is a biological fact that women conceive, carry and bear the babies. Doubt it will change for the majority of us. People–both men and women– being who and what they are often make rash decisions. If men know there are are only two outcomes when a penis is inserted into a vagina–pregnancy or not–a 50% chance depending on the timing of a woman’s cycle and birth control used, then if I was a man with possibilities of serious consequences stemming from that act, I would be real careful with that insertion thing. Lots of prior Q and A–or choose some of those alternative paths to love and pleasure. Same for the woman, but your column, Q, is focused on how men are subject to the woman’s ultimate say.
True, some women use sex–and it’s outcomes–as a weapon. Think this has to do with those aforementioned thousands of years of subjugation? Hmmmmmm…..
It was all we had. In some relationships it still rings true. Only these days, thankfully, women have some means of relief we didn’t before.
John Tebbel
April 12, 2009 - 8:05 am
It’s a class thing. Rich folks can have all the abortions they want anywhere in the modern world. If authoritarians turn the screws here it’ll just make suicide the American contraceptive of last resort, like the old days. I remember them if you don’t. Don’t make me go back there. Nothing there but sorrow.
pennie
April 12, 2009 - 8:40 am
@John,
I agree with you about the historical class aspect of abortion. But Q. stated: “I’m not for abortion, whatsoever. Maybe when there’s rape involved.’
He and I have a real basic disagreement. I’m not going to change and from his arguments, neither is he. The days of the back alley coat-hanger mutilations and murders for those women who couldn’t afford medical relief are not that long ago–and in some countries, still all too real.
At it’s base, this issue is all about male privilege, women’s rights, class, race, and more. No middle ground here for me. None.
Keu Reyes
April 12, 2009 - 11:10 am
When I say I don’t agree with abortion whatsoever, that doesn’t mean that I’m against a woman’s right to choose. I mean, I may not agree with Catholicism, but that doesn’t mean that I want people to stop attending Catholic mass. People, male or female, should do as they wish with their bodies and life.
I’m speaking of the legal element of a woman’s right to choose. And yeah, I agree women have, and continue to be oppressed in many, many ways, but I don’t think this makes it right.
I see it like this, when a man and a woman agree to have sex, they are both entering into a contract. They are exchanging bodily fluids, with the possibility of pregnancy.
What happens after that sex, is where the choice becomes skewed. Why should a father that does not want a child pay for it? Or better yet, what about a father that wants to keep the child, why can’t he keep it, even if the mother doesn’t want it?
I think a woman should have a right to choose, but with that choice comes big responsibility. A father should be able to choose as well. He should choose whether he wants to be a part of that decision or not.
It sounds harsh, but it’s really not. Maybe the legal system shouldn’t be meddling in people’s personal choices to begin with.
Mike Gold
April 12, 2009 - 11:24 am
Martha: You you think that asshole who raped his 12 year old niece would have paid into the fund?
Fact is, there already is a fund and men and women are paying into it, whether they know it or not. We pay in our support of clinics, in our higher medical bills and premiums, in welfare, in Head Start, and in schooling.
There’s two immutable facts of life: people are going to fuck, and some of them are going to have babies. The pious fuck like bunnies; the bible belt has an “illegitimacy” rate higher than that in the inner cities. I’m tired of paying for their hypocrisy.
And those bastard pharmacists who won’t fill prescriptions they don’t like for religious reasons? Put those assholes in jail and throw away the key. I’ll bet their attitude towards HIV changes right quick.
pennie
April 12, 2009 - 1:33 pm
@Keu: When you write, “When I say I don’t agree with abortion whatsoever, that doesn’t mean that I’m against a woman’s right to choose,” you are stating completely opposite stances.
Fundamentally, if you are against abortion, you are negating a woman’s right to choose. Can’t have it both ways. Don’t believe me–Ask almost any woman. If you say you believe in a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body, one of the major issues, if not the most important for women,is pregnancy and abortion. As Mike Gold wrote: “There’s two immutable facts of life: people are going to fuck, and some of them are going to have babies.”
We either have the right to choose what to do with our bodies or not. And women should not have to ask, beg or grovel.We should not be penalized, back-alley’ed or murdered. Nor should there be a male-dominated society wrapping arcane distinctions like, “in this case, it’s okay but not in these cases…”
The one place I agree with you was your last statement: “Maybe the legal system shouldn’t be meddling in people’s personal choices to begin with.”
That, right there, is the point. A government, try as it might, for as long as it might cannot legislate morality nor should it tell it’s citizens how, when, and why to make love and to whom. Nor should it enforce laws or rules on more than 50% of it’s citizens concerning how they deal with a basic bodily function like reproduction. No more than insisting that teenagers should just use abstinence. Yeah. That’s the ticket–to real bad scenarios.
As we used to say several decades ago, if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
Martha Thomases
April 12, 2009 - 1:55 pm
@ pennie: that was Flo Kennedy. I miss her.
@ Keu: If you don’t want to pay for babies you don’t want, don’t fuck. If you don’t want the woman with whom you’re involved to have an abortion, have this conversation before you fuck. It will delay your gratification, but that’s the way it is.
In the meantime, I’ll be in charge of what goes on in my own body (to the extent that’s it’s scientifically possible), thank you very much.
pennie
April 12, 2009 - 2:05 pm
“Some man designed this room I’m standing in. Another one built it with his own tools. But who says I like right angles? These are not my laws, these are not my rules.” -Ani DiFranco
And from another feminist: :
“Don’t compromise yourself. You are all you’ve got.” —Janis Joplin
M.O.T.U
April 12, 2009 - 8:44 pm
I’d like to address the women who TRAP men with their babies. Not woman who get pregnant and then demand child support for my money you roll those dice you take your chances.
No this is FAR worst. There was a news story some years ago that made me nuts.
An NBA star went to bed with a Hoochie Momma. I’d better explain that to the clueless among you (republicans) Black Ball Players get Hoochie Mommas they show up at the games and after parties looking to hook up with an NBA player and be his baby momma. White NBA ball players get groupies. These girls show up at the game and try and get autographs. Hey -they are groupies for white guys in the NBA. Those are a rarity in the game so they take what they can get.
This player I was talking about met a woman after a game and decided to take her to his hotel room for some fornication.
She told him:
1) “”I’m not looking to trap you. I just want to be with you.”
2) ” I do not want to have a child so you don’t have to worry I’m on the pill.
He told her:
1) I do NOT want to have kids.
2) I appreciate that you are on the pill but I would prefer to use a condom just in case.
They begat their fornicating and when they were done the young lady offered to take off the jimmy hat and clean him up. He thanked her but refused, he then went into the bathroom discarded the condom in the trash and game back to bed. She excused herself went to the bathroom with her purse to ‘tidy up’ She looked the bathroom door found the condom in the TRASH emptied it’s contents into a turkey baster and then proceeded to insert said baster into…you get the idea.
Why should this BITCH get a CENT? Does anyone really think that these kind of women would do this kind of horrible (yes horrible she wants a child so she can get PAID.He does not want a child at ALL. Like I said H O R R I B E) as I was saying, does anyone really think that these kind of women would do this kind of horrible SHIT if there was no pay check. Would bang robber rob a bank if he KNEW there was NO money there? F U C K N O.
Make stealing sperm a class A felony and have these bitches raised their kids with help from the state.
Keu, The Talent
April 12, 2009 - 11:26 pm
@ MOTU LMAO
“stealing sperm a class A felony” That brings up a good point. Sperm is a man’s property. An egg is a woman’s property. When these two properties combine, they make one new, joint property. It should be up to both of the owners to decide what to do with the property.
Martha Thomases
April 13, 2009 - 5:23 am
@ Keu: “It should be up to both of the owners to decide what to do with the property.”
And what rights does the landlady have? If you’re going to store this property in her building, she has the right to get rent.
Really, you guys. You have no clue about what it’s like to be pregnant. You certainly have no idea what it’s like to give birth (the best description I’ve heard – like shitting a watermelon – really doesn’t convey the muscle-rending, organ tearing nuances).
I tried really hard to get pregnant, and had a fairly easy pregnancy. I desperately wanted that child. And it was still really, really hard to spend those months with no drinking, no caffeine, morning sickness, swollen ankles and so on and so on. If I’d been forced to go through this by some egomaniacal man, I would have killed one or both of us.
And I’m the pacifist in this group.
John Tebbel
April 13, 2009 - 6:16 am
Mike: Thanks. I can’t fix his argument, only offer what few grains I possess.
Sex with strangers: Bad. Pro sports: Carny scam. Human property: Yea, verily, and back to 1610 with you. Contraception: Good for me, good for thee, good for that one behind the tree. Masturbation: Better than making a baby that’s not wanted.
pennie
April 13, 2009 - 6:48 am
@MOTU,
A couple of relevant points/questions rising from your comment:
** Do we make decisions and rules for the majority of people or an exclusive few who would go to extreme measures for their own self gain through deception by taking advantage of a weakness or loophole?
The bottom line here remains that no matter the “he said/she said” aftermath–the player took the easy way out–he consensually agreed to insert his penis in her vagina. He didn’t have to do so. No force by the woman was involved was there?
In your example, the woman was a complete stranger.
** What basis was there for the player to take her words and intentions as honest?
** Could he wind up with any number of STDs as well a become a father?
** Was there any previous basis for her integrity or did he just follow the one-eyed wiggle?
** Is desirable, sexy and smelling nice a relaible means of judging character and integrity?
MOTU, If a complete stranger accosted you under the same conditions, and you are a grown man who understands one of the two outcomes of this sex act is either
** 1) pregnancy or 2) no pregnancy;
** and you are wealthy with a good deal to lose with only a few minutes of (possible) pleasure to gain, would you go for this offer?
I don’t know you at all. We’ve never met and possibly never will. But from the inherent intelligence of your columns and comments, I’m guessing you might act differently than the player. Could be wrong.
Think you know I LOVE to kid around but this issue is just so serious for women. Check out Martha’s comments. As she wrote above, the landlady owns the real estate, house and rooms. It’s that simple. As a man, you rent the space for a time,but that doesn’t give you proprietary ownership as well. You rent. Despite the need for some men to take ownership by law, control, or physical means, that is the ultimate truth for nearly every modern American woman.
Bottom line: if it looks too easy, consider the consequences.
Vinnie Bartilucci
April 13, 2009 - 6:59 am
“Before every act of intercourse, the man should have to pay (to a state-run fund) a year’s child support. ”
So…you’re suggesting a man pay before he has sex?
They have laws about that, don’t they?
——
The big issue today is people either don’t grasp that actions have consequences, and should they occur, they don’t care. Pregnancy is one of those consequences, and if you’re not aware of that, you’re really not paying attention.
Sex (and its reprecussions) are one of those things. She got pregnant? Sorry, frted, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it. Now if you can somehow prove that she lied about being on the pill, not wanting a baby, etc, we can talk, but I’m betting that therre were no recording devices running during that part of the proceedings.
AND BTW, in pro wrestling the folks who hang around to get with the wrestlers are known as “ring rats”. Just thought I’d share that.
MOTU
April 13, 2009 - 11:32 am
ALL and I do mean ALL of the above comments are well said and have merit . However-not one of you has dealt with this question:
Why should any woman who steals a man’s sperm with FULL Knowledge that he does NOT want a child be rewarded for this?
Why should he have to pay? I keep hearing the argument about the woman’s body and how BOTH played so they both are responsible. I agree with that totally.
However-if ONE party decides to TRICK the other party so they can get PAID why should the man be penalized for her deception?
BTW-the bullshit stamp answer is “It’s for the benefit of the child. The child comes first. I know from personal experience that a child brought into that drama has a VERY good chance of being FUCKED UP in the head. With regard to ‘he said’ she said,’ In the event that you meet some lady and you and she decide to do the nasty-simply commit to a signed agreement which states the terms up front in case something happens.
I had a women pull that it’s your baby’ shit on me some years ago. She told me she had put pin holes in the condom and that now she was pregnant with my child. What..now what was her name? Wait now I remember-what Ms. Golddigger Bitch Ho ( I always thought bitch was a funny middle name ) what Goldie did not know was that I did not put on the jimmy hat she brought but used my ow when I was in the bathroom
She went so far as to put my name on the birth certificate and went to court for child support. She told EVERYBODY she knew that this was my kid.
One blood test later as Michael Jackson’s says “The kid is not my son.’
Afterwards she told me she knew it wasn’t my baby but thought I would make a better father than the ‘other’ guy.
Now I was young and really did not get all that upset but Now I would loose my damn mind if someone tried that shit on me. Why is there no law for the women who commit this kind of Fraud? Do you know if you sign a birth certificate and DNA later proves you are NOT the baby father YOU still have to support that child until he or she is 18?
How fair is that?
Bottom Line-you sleep with someone she gets pregnant you are BOTH responsible.
If you steal someone’s sperm with full knowledge that the man does NOT want a baby I think that’s another form of rape or at least Fraud.
By the way the girl who did that to me her real name was BRENDA (Golddigger Bitch Ho was her maiden) last year I was featured in the Black Enterprise most powerful people in Hollywood list issue.
She read the issue and found a way to contact me. If you know me I rarely hold a grudge. In fact there are only 2 people I hope DIE SLOWLY and one of those people killed my sister. The other person I wish would suffer a horrible demise is BRENDA. What she did was just so damn mean and for what? So I could take care of her and her other kids? Below is the call in its entirety I still have the old answering machine tape:
RIIIIIIIINNNNNNGGGGGG
Me: Michael Davis
Brenda: Hi Michael!! It’s Brenda from Pratt!! How are you? Do you remember me? I saw you in Black Enterprise!!
Me: How could I forget the girl who thought she could ruin my life with a lie.
Brenda: I said I was sorry.
Me: That’s the least of what you are. Look I have to go and fire my assistant.
Brenda. Why?
Me: She ignored the big sign hanging over every phone in my office,every phone in my 2 homes, every phone in my studio, and every pay phone in a 10 block radius from wherever I am at the time.
Brenda: Wow. Must be important what does the sign say?
Me: If Brenda from Pratt calls tell her I wish her pain and death.
Brenda: Wha…
She tried calling back a few times but finally got the message.
If you use means to trick someone into an 18 year paid relationship you are no better than a common criminal and the man should not be responsible for your greed.
Martha Thomases
April 13, 2009 - 12:13 pm
@ MOTU: Being the shy, genteel and sheltered person that I am, I’m unfamiliar with the extent of this condom-poking problem.
There is, however, an enormous problem for people of all races and classes when men don’t financially (or emotionally) support their kids. It’s also a problem when women don’t support their kids, but, because of the previously mentioned childbirth thing (it’s ever so much more difficult to deny a kid is hers), that’s not as common.
pennie
April 13, 2009 - 1:26 pm
@MOTU,
The two examples you use amount to nothing other than fraudulent acts. I believe each of the two women to be liable for prosecution, although I do make a distinction between the NBA player and you. The NBA player was looking in the cookie jar and had a choice. In your case, this was a pure case of deception in every way both before and after the act.
The common bond lies in two women who consciously set out to deceive two different men–one by altering a birth control device rendering it useless and the other by using a cooking implement to implant sperm–truly stuffing a turkey.
While I would hardly label either a case of rape (forcibly committing a sexual act on another without mutual consent) each is one amounts to clear cut fraud.
I’m not a lawyer but using a person of any gender to commit fraud is far different than the original intent and direction of the column. Brenda–and all the “Brendas” out there–deserves a world of judicial and psychiatric attention.
I stand by my thought that, fraudulent actions aside, a woman’s body is her own. In cases of fraud, a woman’s body is still her own but she needs to be held as responsible for her actions as any man for his.
Alan Coil
April 14, 2009 - 12:06 pm
For centuries, women have been property, and breeding organisms. Now they have the power to be free of that.
Men need to learn to deal with that. Don’t want to have to pay for a baby? Don’t have sex. Then there can be no discussions about whose baby it is, or how the pregnancy occurred.
Mike Gold
April 14, 2009 - 12:21 pm
Alan: Well, okay, but only if we legalize prostitution. Sex workers know the risks of the trade, and so do the consumers. Besides, it’s not the government’s business who we fuck. or why.
Certainly, not why.
Vinnie Bartilucci
June 2, 2009 - 11:06 am
A little late to the dance, but our favorite advice column, Amy Alkon, the Advice Goddess, had a comment in her latest column about this little practice…
“If you want to give your son some truly valuable sex education, tell him not to feel pressured to have it, to use a condom if he does, and to maintain custody of that condom at all times. There are unscrupulous women out there with full pincushions and empty turkey basters who will turn him into an unwitting sperm donor, visiting dad, and cash machine.”
http://www.creators.com/lifestylefeatures/advice-goddess-amy-alkon/bad-news-bares.html
Here’s another one from her blog about a woman who alledgedly found a third option – spit, swallow, or sue.
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2005/03/01/sperm_limits.html
Amy Alkon is amazingly funny, and deserves more readers.