Re: The male pill
- From: mark_sobolewski@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 7 Sep 2005 05:48:17 -0700
Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > > Some persons in the men's movement are of the opinion that the introduction if a male birth-
> > >control pill will be a significant blow for men's rights by altering gender dynamics in our
> > >favor. I must disagree with this.
> >
> > > There is the assumption that such an invention would put men in total charge of their
> > >reproduction. But wouldn't women still find a way to get men to agree to having children?
> > > Though we may worry over the scenario where a woman decides in secret that she wishes to
> > >bear a child, that's very rare outside an already existing relationship - precisely where
> > >most men could be convinced in any case.
> >
> > Hello Fritz!
>
> This is the same as my (and this thread's) first message. 'Fritz Wuehler' iis a remailer's name; from now on I'll show up as 'Hal (Nomen Nescio)'.
>
> At least, though, you responded this time; disregard the other one, if it shows up.
>
>
> > > In addition, another consequence may well be that the use of this pill becomes practically
> > > mandatory for men - that women will come to expect it.
> >
> > News flash: It already is even thought it doesn't exist yet!
> >
> > Men are already almost punished for becoming fathers under the
> > current system especially with a single mother where he has
> > mostly obligations but very few rights. This is like saying
> > that seat belts are mandatory. Maybe, but do you feel
> > better driving around at 75 mph without one?
>
> This really makes no sense. Your seat belt analogy comapres pregnancy to dying in a car accident!
I wasn't talking about dying in a car crash so much as the pain
of an "accident" in such a case. My point was that the
potential for "accident" already exists so more safety features
can pretty much only help.
Granted, there may be some people who drive like a maniac when
they got airbags on their car, but I think those are largely
in the exception. If anything, the presence of more safety
features only heightens awareness to people about the
situation.
> > >This further emboldens them into disclaiming any control over their own reproduction. After
> > > all, it is women that get pregnant and that's God's law not man's.
> >
> > Once again, they're already largely doing this as the law almost
> > claims that babies pop out of men's penises.
>
> I know. And the male pill would only confirm that nonsense.
That's like saying if a car has seat belts, why not just drive
recklessly
since an accident may occur anyway? :-)
Ok, I know, bad analogy but I was just playing a little.
My point is that men already are being screwed by the system
so there's not many ways it can get worse from that angle.
> > > I don't believe the male pill to be inherently bad (and I do believe technologies can be
> > >inherently bad). I do think that we can't expect technology to solve our social problems and
> > >we shouldn't try to evade responsibility for getting done the changes that we desire by
> > > just hoping that a new invention will come along and our problems will just automatically
> > > be solved. It's lazy.
> >
> > Agreed. Many social problems should be addressed directly and
> > in the long term, I think that happens. But if a deux-ex-machina
> > exists,
> > why not take advantage of it?
>
> You are comfortable, I see, with women having all the power as long as men can get sex without paying CS. That's also why you defend prostitution, right?
Er, no. I think the current situation is abominable and a good
indication of precisely
how morally and economically bankrupt feminism is. That said, if you
live in a lawless society, buy a gun and protect yourself. The
advocation
of protection technology is by no means an endorsement of a risk.
I do think that this technology combined with the current legal
situation
will help to educate men about feminism overall as i pointed out above.
The use of such technology is pregnant (pardon the pun) with the
assumption that men cannot trust women.
> Feminism will continue to run rampant as long as we can't put our feet down; no goal can be won without sacrificing something.
That's a rather pessimistic philosophy. If you have little left to
lose, then
the goal by defininition cannot be _lost_ without sacrificing
something. :-)
(Or is what I just said pessimistic? :-)
Seriously though: An increase in men's rights as we discuss them would
be largely a good thing just as the MBC technology would be a good
thing because
it would empower men. Most importantly, it would empower men who
at least had some grasp of basic men's rights issues in the first
place.
That gives it a double endorsement.
> Hal
> NEVER trust a woman
regards,
Mark Sobolewski
.
- Follow-Ups:
- The male pill
- From: Nomen Nescio
- Re: The male pill
- From: Hyerdahl
- The male pill
- References:
- The male pill
- From: Nomen Nescio
- The male pill
- Prev by Date: Re: The male pill
- Next by Date: Re: Women's Rights at Work
- Previous by thread: The male pill
- Next by thread: Re: The male pill
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
