I am so proud to be from Ohio. NOT.

I felt the comments were all quite gentile. There was a small number of "If I want the baby you should carry the baby. And isn't it terrible that men should be financially responsible for the children they don't want" style comments and as much as I disagree with them they weren't as mouth-foamingly angry as I'd have expected.

It just seemed like the same old argument but with none of the snarkiness you'd expect on an internet site.

Plus, I'm not sure that the "mans right to choose also" argument is misogynistic. I just think it's naive.

Well, I don't want to point out specific comments because I don't think that's what Metachat should be used for. Maybe I should have focused more on the fact that someone should create an award to give to politicians who think up ridiculously crazy bills like this one.

I agree. I'm thinking it should be a small lead award, presented to the politician at high velocity.

[NOT TERRORIST]

To play the devil's advocate, I kind of like that our lawmakers aren't afraid to throw out laws that are totally nutso. It shows courage, and willingness to try things differently and provides an opportunity to inspire debate on certain subjects. I can't get myself too worked up over a proposal that isn't going to become law. That'd be like if my boss looked at all the projects I have half done on my desktop and was like WHAT THE HECK IS ALL THIS CRAP. Well, duh, it's not done yet. Wait until it's finished.

Well, I don't want to point out specific comments because I don't think that's what Metachat should be used for.

I have no problem with it. To wit:

Women can make huge changes in a man's life on a whim right now.

Um.... When a woman can get a man knocked up, get back to me.

I'm staying the fuck away from this right now.

Men are always tricking women into getting pregnant. We do it so that we can then avoid our responsibilities and not pay child support. We do it as part of a vicious but fun game we've been playing for the last century. You can win prizes. And beer.

You can win prizes. And beer.

This must be described in the "Man's Handbook", distributed at puberty.

The "Woman's Handbook" teaches us how to lure men into bed, pretending that we want a long term relationship, so that we don't look so slutty.

It shows courage, and willingness to try things differently and provides an opportunity to inspire debate on certain subjects.

Really? I thought it was an opportunity to pander to a certain small, but wealthy minority without risking much political capital. [CYNICIST]

Y'know, as someone from Michigan, I've been saying this forever— Fuck Ohio. It's only recently that the rest of the country has started to realize how fucking retarded they are.

Though the Great Lakes Brewing Company almost makes up for it. God, those are great beers.

Also, I've realized that I have to stay away from most abortion discussions lately, as they fill me with apoplectic rage.

Ohio fucks everything up.

One thing I have learned is to stay the hell out of *all* comments threads on Consumerist, even on the most innocuous-looking topics -- they consistently have a high percentage of asshole provocateurs, despite recent gestures in the direction of more forceful moderation.

Utterly idiotic.

when will I wake from this terrible dream.

You wouldn't think Consumerist would attract a lot of provocateurs, but I guess it does. Another blog I stopped reading due to jerky commenters was Apartment Therapy.

It's only proposed legislation. Save your huff for something real.

klang beat me to it, but I was going to say something along the lines of "fuck Ohio." Seriously, I've been there. And, come to think of it, I'm going there tomorrow. And while there are a few redeeming features, I still say "fuck Ohio."

I felt the comments were all quite gentile.

No, a few were Jewish.

One of the funniest moments in my highschool education was when Peter R--- mis-pronouced "gential" and said something about the "contagion of gentile diseases", and without missing a beat a Jewish classmate by the name of David P--- said "Oh, well, I guess I'm safe, then."

For some mefi action on the subject, see this post that I deleted because I'm a big jerk.

Peter R--- was a real Goy Wonder.

Too late.

RAGE.

SMASH!

Maybe I should make a MeTa about that, Cortex.

Ohio: high in the middle and round on both ends.

I like Ohio. And I hate to stop a good pile-on (and I hate even more to be the person who tries in vain to stop one), but Cleveland and Columbus are both great cities, and the rest of the state is not without its charms. As is so often the case, it's the suburban, exurban and rural dwellers (like the people served by that newspaper, and that representative) who are politically and socially reactionary.

(I also had a paragraph about problems in the ODH's statistical methods, but maybe now's not the time.)

Oh, and I'd totally expect Consumerist to have the kind of commenters they do--between the heartless, knee-jerk libertarians, the folks what thinks they're smarter than everybody else and the folks that think big corporations exist only to screw them, I'm surprised it isn't much worse.

But Apartment Therapy? Weird. Maybe my ideas about that site are misinformed.

Plus, I'm not sure that the "mans right to choose also" argument is misogynistic. I just think it's naive.

I could go for a law like that.

If it came with a requirement that any father who denied such permission had to go through a simulated pregnancy.

Implant a fluid sac in his abdomen and increase its weight every week so that he's always carrying as much weight as she is. Give mild psychoactives and nauseants to induce simultaneous cravings and puke-a-thons.

At the appointed time, have him undergo a simulated delivery approximating the mother's. If she has a clean, easy one, all he gets is pain induced, an epidural to combat it, and a mild beating -- just something serious enough to keep him in the hospital for a day or two and walk funny for a while. Or maybe just pass a baseball through his anus.

If she gets an episiotomy, he gets a nice big cut somewhere tender.

If she gets a c-section, so does he.

If she dies, they open some veins in the delivery room and bleed him out.

And if she survives, they roll some dice. Snakeeyes and he gets enough serotonin antagonists to induce a really serious bout of major depression.

I expect permission to be forthcoming.

Save your huff for something real.

I think most people are huffing about the moronic comments, not the legislation. Of course the law's not going anywhere, but morons, we have to live with.

What Miko said.

Not to mention, it's far more productive to huff about proposed legislation (if you do it right) than to keep your damn mouth shut and complain about a bill after it becomes law. We do far too much of that already.

the pup's got a point. (although voting for this bill would be political suicide).

As much as I'd love to say I don't think the law is going anywhere, I can't. I said the same thing about that South Dakota thing, too, and they managed to surprise me (and not in a cake and cheering way. More like in a bucket of spiders and curdled milk on the doorframe way)

Yeah, kellydammit, I also believe (like pup says) that the only way to keep society on the rails is to get loud early about asinine shit.

Little things matter; they're the harbingers of big things. If some wingnut floats an idea and doesn't hear a peep, they get emboldened to float a stupider idea.

Meanwhile, everyone else thinks "huh, no one else is making a peep about that dumb idea- the whole world must be in favor of the idea, and I'm just a freak for thinking it's not so hot. Better keep my mouth shut, or everyone'll think I'm a freak."

Better to be the freak and speak. Speak, freaks!

I agree that people should make their dissatisfaction with this idea known, but at the same time, I'm not losing sleep. Any legislator who voted for it would alienate so many people that he could kiss his office goodbye. The loud dissatisfaction is just a way to remind them.

This reminds me of the post someone made not long ago of this video.

People who are for making abortion illegal get really uncomfortable when it comes time to throw the "criminals" in jail.

Sometimes I think the whole modern world is a joke that a particularly cruel, insane and vengeful god is playing on me, but then I just shake it off and realize that women are chattel. I'm so silly.

Women can make huge changes in a man's life on a whim right now.

I don't get it. What's wrong with this statement exactly? There is a perception among some men that we are held financially responsible for our children while holding few rights in regard to raising them. Meanwhile, the father is also told he has no rights in regard to terminating the pregnancy. I don't understand how men not getting pregnant invalidates their feelings regarding their money or their DNA.

Also, is it really uglier than, say

If you men want rights concerning fetuses and child rearing, go figure out a way to conceive and then get back to me

??
Yes, lady, I expect certain rights regarding my children. Don't you expect certain rights regarding your cats?

Or, closer to home -

If she dies, they open some veins in the delivery room and bleed him out

That's an oddly gross and demeaning (to everyone) thing to say as support for reproductive rights.

Touchy issue with lots of stakeholders. A little Hulkitude from all sides can be tolerated, I hope.

There is a perception among some men that we are held financially responsible for our children while holding few rights in regard to raising them
God, I tried so hard to avoid jumping in here, but I just can't - this tipped me over the edge.

Firstly, I fully support the rights of women to decide what to do with their bodies and would support any partner of mine in any decision she made in this area, regardless of whether I agreed with it or not. But there are times when (a very small minority of) women use deception and deceit to become pregnant for reasons relating to or along the lines of "trapping" men. Of course, if you have sex with someone, you have to accept that the possible outcome is pregnancy, but what about when someone you trust and with whom you have an on-going relationship deceives you that birth control is all taken care of, then ends that relationship once they have achieved the implantation of their lifelong meal ticket? Is it right that any person should be forced to financially support not the resulting child, but the child's mother for the next 18 years? Is it right that the father of that child has no say in how the child is brought up or any right to even see that child? Of course it's not and no right-thinking person would say otherwise. For some reason, those same people will say, however; that it's not only OK for that deceit to occur, but will place the entire blame on the poor, trusting schmuck who is left not being allowed to hold the baby but having to support it's mother.

Note: this has not happened to me, but I do know at least two men to whom it has. This shit is real and it literally destroys people's lives, albeit not as much as an unplanned pregnancy that a woman can't terminate affects her life.

Please ignore the above comment - it is a badly-worded rant that I should delete but won't because that would be an abuse of my power.

i would delete that if i were you, because none of this so far as anything to do with a man being able to force a woman to have an abortion or women being forced to be nothing but baby farms YET because how easily is this going to wander into would-be-father rapists breeding an army territory and fuck all if i'm going to continue because i'm in a bad enough mood already without people acting like this is some credible sticking point worth the bother--

Fuck.
Because men need more rights and no one should have control over their own body.
Duh.

Then delete this one.

Dano, men have the right to fight for custody over actual children and i can't believe i'm even dignifying this thread with a comment.

FUCK.

Parties that want to be legally bound together can't in the US but we're credibly debating this pile of crap?

Wait, why can't we forcibly sterilize everyone again?
"Please, delete me let me go--"
Wait, that was the passing spirit of Elvis.
Good lord, sometimes you all make want a drink.

*chills out*

It has been made clear since 1985 that unprotected sex can transmit HIV. I will cut the residents of the countries who refuse to provide this information--and who refuse to provide family planning info-- some slack, but not anyone else. Don't breed them if you have neither the means nor the ability to raise them. Birth control works both ways.

*points at America and laughs*

Ha HA! You guys live in a pretty fucked up country.

Wow, I only read the headline as the rest of the article would have induced a heart attack but wow. For a country that values it's freedoms you guys sure have an odd way of protecting them. I can't believe this is even being discussed as "proposed" legislature. Doesn't this violate a few of those amendments and that constitution thinger I'm always hearing about?

if you have sex with someone, you have to accept that the possible outcome is pregnancy

That's pretty much all there is to say about it. The moments before having sex are the point at which men are choosing whether or not to take the risk of pregnancy. That is the risk both people take - as they say, if you don't want to go to Chicago, don't get on the train. It can always happen, even when a woman is using birth control (recently on MeFi). Perhaps deception even enters into it sometimes, but that's the sad reality and the risk of human relationships. All we can do is determine the level of risk we're willing to live with, and it sucks when things go badly, but there are choice points at which this problem can be prevented.

Once a woman is pregnant, the choice to continue the pregnancy is hers, because she is the one physically carrying the child - which is why it's pointless to debate this until the day the embryo can be transferred from the body of a woman who doesn't want it to a man that does want it. Until then, we can't give anyone else "a say" in what happens to her body; if we did, we might as well give people in kidney failure "a say" in having rights to your kidney. It's inconvenient, but it's a fact of biology until we can somehow make other arrangments. One day, maybe, biotech will make that happen.

After birth, both parties have legal responsibilities to the child for 18 years. They can give up this responsibility through legal adoption. They can do that together if they agree. If they disagree, the woman wants adoption and the man doesn't, he can choose to contest that decision. I found this article just now detailing the rights of birth fathers, and cautioning that law is different state by state, so it gets complicated.

If there's a divorce and child custody issues result from that, and he's unhappy with the custody arrangement, he has recourse to the courts and to any number of groups advocating for father's rights.

To men who are unhappy with court bias, and I have also heard from a few, I can say only that they need to band together and work through the same legal channels that govern all family law to create change, the same way women did and do in the women's movement. There may indeed be bias, and there may need to be change. But if change is wanted, someone will have to make it happen.

Still, for every man I know that feels wronged by reproductive or custody law, I know two or three women who had to raise children alone because of disappeared, unreliable, or deadbeat fathers; I'm pretty sure that the problem of child abandonment, where it exists, is still a burden placed on women more often than men. That's not to say it never happens to men, but men are certainly not the majority of people it happens to.

Until then, we can't give anyone else "a say" in what happens to her body

Ultimately, yes, the final decision must (can only) be the mother's. And, yes, the law is stupid. But asserting the father has no say sounds ridiculous to me. A kidney is very different than a baby.

Surely we can figure out a way we can legally insure the father is at least consulted before abortion. (Perhaps there already is? I'll admit ignorance.) I'm all for organizing, Miko, but I'm also for allowing men to express their frustrations without vilification. In fact, I expect the latter is all that's really needed.

Express away, nobody's vilifying.

I personally don't think a fetus is much different from a kidney before viability, at least not in any way that can be considered meaningful legally.

I have nothing to express, myself, and don't feel vilified. I'm just still trying to figure out why "women can make huge changes in a man's life on a whim right now" makes people angry.

So until the fetus is viable, a woman is within her rights to not even inform the father she had an abortion, or that a pregnancy had even occured?

women can make huge changes in a man's life on a whim right now" makes people angry.

It doesn't make me angry, it's just that it impies men didn't make a choice and are simply the victim of women's choices. They did make the choice to have sex, risking pregnancy and everything that follows. Which changes women's lives quite a bit too, obviously. I don't think women's reproductive decisions are generally "whims," either.

So until the fetus is viable, a woman is within her rights to not even inform the father she had an abortion, or that a pregnancy had even occured?

I'd say yes, and furthermore, that it happens a lot.

In fact, IANAL, but I'm not sure there's any legal requirement that she ever inform the father, even if she carries the baby to term. Anyone?

I have nothing to express

Meaning in regards to abortion or custody issues, because I have no personal experience with them.

Thanks, Miko, I get it now.

[Deleted rant about assumed-male spaces on the internet: Miko said it better, as always.]

I know the law is a mess concerning men's family rights, as well. I am just extremely wary of legal interference in women's health and their rights to their bodies.

Things get way complicated enough after there's a kid.

I really feel for people who get stuck in these situations, though, so I hope to not come off as heartless or unsympathetic to men who suddenly find themselves with weighty problems. These events are kind always going to be wrenching.

I welcome an extraterrestrial invasion, in hopes that all humans will band together against a real other, instead of dividing ourselves by sex, or by race, or country of origin, or by what we think about blah blah blah. Sure, my little fantasy is immature and unrealistic, but it sure beats all this we're-all-one-side-and-of-one-mind posturing. We're all different, and we're all the same. My close friends are going through a divorce, relatively amicably and with the best interests of the kids in mind, and they each (yeah, I'm friends with both of them, so?) wonder why they married in the first place; both of them cite sex along with the feeling of "settling for" one another. Everyone's unhappy. I'm sorry this isn't very on-topic but it makes me sad (what I wouldn't give for a custody battle) and to be strictly on-topic I would have to say, "You're right, this doesn't belong on Consumerist." But the guy will lose custody and pay child support, and though he understands (no, he, like most men in this situation, doesn't consider himself a victim of his wife's machinations; if he's a victim at all, it's of a whole host of influences and choices, equally his and hers) he will doubtless resent it from time to time; the girls will move with mom off to Albany, the grandparents will struggle to normalize holidays. What a mess.

I think the intent of "my uterus, my choice" is to keep lawmakers and other strangers from interfering in this difficult decision, not to keep the concerned and interested possible father out. I'm not sure everyone who engages in this discussion takes that into consideration as they project themselves and their experiences onto those of others and onto the "general" "consensus."

That's not to say I don't believe in a fight, to preserve the rights of pregnant women or to update laws that may victimize some men in an increasingly equal economy, but many who engage over this subject spend their time talking past one another, intentionally or not, out of anger or disdain or fear or hatred, none of which are emotions we should have to explore when we talk about kids.

I'm all over the place, but this makes me sad, so I hope you'll forgive me.

Find me one of these mystical "whims," Hugh.
i hear they can change a man's life.

Who said "whim?"

i did.
i want to invent a Whim, like lazy susan that can bear a man's weight with ease, and advertise it with "Why turn on a dime when you can twist on a Whim?"
Or something like a better butcher Segway.
"Change your life on a Whim!"

Get more Vim with Whim!

Have you decided whether or not the new penis is worth breaking in, eth?

i haven't felt like breaking any penises until just a bit ago.

They come attached to all this other stuff and i haven't found any stuff i fancy, but i haven't been looking.

i should probably go stuff hunting, huh? Hunting for stuff that doesn't have to do with penis, most probably.

Your comment is great, Hugh.

It seems to me that there's a fairly good way for men to be involved in these decisions, and that's to talk about it with their partners before anyone's pregnant. Preferably before anyone's even sleeping together. And then only sleep with women whose values line up with your own, whether that means no abortions ever, 50-50 mutual reproductive decisions with lots of discussions about it in order to determine what makes sense, no babies ever and you don't even want to know about it if it happens, starting a joint abortion fund now, whatever.

This would require: Only sleeping with women you were able to be open and honest with, knowing what you would want in these situations, making a good-faith effort only to sleep with women you trust to uphold their half of whatever agreement you come to, and seeking out women who were responsible, mature, confident, and honest enough to tell you what they think during that conversation rather than just saying what they think you want to hear. Which also requires making sure you interact with women in a way that encourages them to be honest, open, and confident in your ability to actually hear what they are saying.

Of course people are still going to change their minds (on both sides), and people are still going to be manipulative (on both sides), and people are still going to be conflicted (on both sides). And I do think we have bad laws/precedents in place that are based on stereotypes of both men and women ("Women always love babies! Men can never be good parents!"), that should be reconsidered.

But men who want women to behave in an honest, open, collaborative way on this issue need to take it upon themselves to seek out and engage in honest, open, collaborative relationships. If you want her to respect your opinions on the matter, then you need to build relationships of mutual respect, on all issues, from the beginning, and you need to build relationships in which these things are talked about openly.

You do not need to exert more control over women's choices and bodies. You need to show more respect for them if you want your choices respected.

This whole thing is just very similar to parental notification laws. There's no need to legislate notification for people who are in good relationships, whether romantic or parental. There's a huge need to protect women who are going to be beaten, disowned, shamed, or otherwise seriously hurt (the leading cause of death for pregnant women is homicide), whose bad relationships put them at risk if they were to notify the father or their parents.

Laws cannot force people into mutually respectful relationships. We all need to take that responsibility for ourselves. Laws can, and should, protect vulnerable people's rights, and honor people's autonomous choices.

(Talk all of those "you"s above as editorial yous; they weren't directed at anyone in particular.)

I really liked ROU Xenophobe's comment because it seemed to take into account that we're not just talking about a baby here, we're also talking about a pregnancy. Too often it's treated like a 9 month temporary inconvenience when it really does change (and sometimes harm) a woman's body permanently. Maybe I'm too close to the subject having spent the month of February immobilized lest I stroke out, but damn...it's no small thing to harbor a human in your gut. Nobody should have the right to make you do that. Nobody.

As to the whole subject of women "trapping" men by having babies, well...that does happen. In fact, it happened to a good friend of mine. But MAN did we all see it coming. In fact, at one point I even got a little tipsy and warned him to wrap it up. He, however, made the ancient mistake of choosing a woman based on hotness and not on intelligence, integrity, blah, blah, blah and then believing her when she assured him that she was on the pill. Even though she already had a kid. So my advice to any man who really, really doesn't want to have kids is simple...don't fuck crazy chicks. And if you must, then wrap it up. Double bag it. Then pull out at the last minute anyway, just in case. Maybe squirt some spermicide in there. Whatever it takes.

don't fuck crazy chicks. And if you must, then wrap it up. Double bag it. Then pull out at the last minute anyway, just in case. Maybe squirt some spermicide in there.

*laughing* Hold still honey, here comes the spermicide.

But hey, live in the moment, and have a great time!

(it's great advice, jrossi4r, it just sounds so hysterically unhot.)

It's supposed to be unhot. I'm trying to scare you all away from the loony cooch!

OK, no fair. jrossi managed to say exactly what I was trying to say, *and* she was funny while doing it. I call foul. :-)

Yeah - I wanted no part of this thread, but that comment was a cracking good read, jrossi!

Well thank you. I plan on giving my son that exact speech the minute he hits puberty.

I can't get over the fact that women still have babies with Eddie Murphy.

Ha, too funny TiPSy.
But then i'm way overtired and been catching up on old Savage Loves on and off all day (recipe for cackly bursts of laughter)