From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: The EvilPatriarchalConspiracy of Freedom of Choice for Men - NOT!
X-To: J H WOODYATT
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 03:58:00 GMT

bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt) writes...
>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?

Why, thank you for the compliment, James!


>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.

You agree, yet you fail to see the relevance?  You *certainly* consider it
relevant that forcing *women* into reproductive responsibility is unethical.
Why the lack of concern, then?


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

>How?  What psychoactives have you been ingesting?

None, actually.  To answer your question, I would ask you - What things
that you currently do, could you *not* do, if you had $500-$1000 a month
*less* to do them with, especially if you *NEVER WANTED* to be forced to
go without it.

I certainly call *that* a loss of freedom, though I grant that it is
"freedom" in the American sense, ie., you lose the freedom to choose
what is right for your life.



>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.

I never made any point about genetics.  Why do you think that I have?


>-----

>[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?

What are *you* rambling about, Mr. Woodyatt?  My answer was that while a
woman certainly has the right to make decisions for herself, I do not
give *anyone* the right to make decisions *for me* and what *I* choose
to do with MY life.


>-----

># > 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.

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

Why is it funny to say that the only rights which are worth having, have
been fought for?


>Look, Mr. Steeves... no one is likely to force you to remain pregnant
>against your will.

You accuse *ME* of being on psychoactive drugs?  I never spoke of being
forced to remain pregnant!


> *YOUR* reproductive freedom is not in very
>terrible danger in comparison to women's reproductive freedom.

Oh, really?  Why not take a gander at the messages from the people
attempting to 'inform' us that a man's consent to the sex act is consent
to forced fatherhood?

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Gravity: It's more than just a fragrance.  It's the LAW!"
   - Will Steeves, President, GOiDS "R" We, Inc.

 * SLMR 2.1a * My other car is a Galaxy Class starship.
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,soc.women,talk.abortion,alt.feminism