From: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt)
Subject: Re: The EvilPatriarchalConspiracy of Freedom of Choice for Men - NOT!
Reply-To: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com
Organization: Abiogenesis 4 Less
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:41:40 GMT

goid@zooid.guild.org (Will Steeves) writes:
# bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt) writes...
# > Forcing women to become parents (in the genetic sense -- I don't want
# > to confuse you) against their will is not ethical, it *is* harmful (to
# > women's bodily integrity, and in general), and is in no way parallel
#                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
# > to any power granted to women today to force men to become parents
#   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
# > (again, in the genetic sense) against their will.
# 
# Why isn't it?  It is *not* ethical, and it *is* harmful (to a man's freedom
# in general), and *is* parallel to forcing a woman to bear and raise a child
# because it is an issue of *control*.

Damn, Will, you *are* a thick S.O.B. aren't you?

You try to make three points:

1.  Forcing men to become parents (in the genetic sense) is unethical.

I agree.  I fail to see the relevance.

2.  Forcing men to become parents (in the genetic sense) is harmful to
    men's freedom.

How?  What psychoactives have you been ingesting?

3.  Not clear.  You seem to be implying that forcing a woman to endure
    pregnancy and childbirth is equivalent to forcing men to become
    parents in a genetic sense.  Somehow.  You don't explain.

I need you to clarify before I can respond.

-----

[Mr. Denninger asked why women should have the power to prevent
childbirth after conception and men shouldn't.  I reminded him that
men don't do the gestating.]

# True, but the fact that she does the gestation, should ONLY give the
# woman the right to control HER OWN PREGNANCY, *not* an individual who
# is *not* contained by her bodily area.  Since you insist on using the
# bodily integrity position, then I'd agree with you in that it *should*
# be used as a valid argument to let a woman control what happens *in
# her own body*, but that this control should STOP as far as her bodily
# area is concerned, and *not* give her the right to control the choices
# of a possibly unwilling man.

What are you rambling on about here, Mr. Steeves?  Were you not
satisfied with my answer to your question?

-----

# > Getting a sloppy with the truth there aren't you Mr. Denninger?  You
# > make it sound like women have an unrestricted right to abandon their
# > born children, and that isn't true.
# 
# Not at all.  The fact that you use the bodily integrity position, only means
# that you can get away with *only* defending a *woman's* right to reproductive
# freedom by defending her "bodily integrity".  Men have no such issue, but we
# *DO* have the issue of FREEDOM OF CHOICE in regards to reproductive choices,
# and we sincerely intend to reclaim that right!

A fairly amusing conclusion considering the .sig quote I installed
this morning.

Look, Mr. Steeves... no one is likely to force you to remain pregnant
against your will.  *YOUR* reproductive freedom is not in very
terrible danger in comparison to women's reproductive freedom.

Get it?  (No, I suppose it's unwise to expect you to.)


-- 
+---------------------------+  ``Man has not a single right which is
| J H Woodyatt              |  the product of anything but might.''
| bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com |                           -- Mark Twain
+---------------------------+