Where do you stand on this one...

[Marilynsbigsister]

I'm not going to NC but will be slightly oblique about circumstances as quite identifying . Two very young 20 yr olds in a relationship. Been together 3 months. Male at Uni but lives at home, female working also living at home. The boy has mentioned to his parents (actually his mum mostly) that cracks are starting to appear because she is keen to move on to the next level and is putting the pressure on to get a flat together and 'settle down'. Boy has told her 'definitely not at the moment' his plans include post graduate study abroad for a couple of years . Anyway, the dilemma.. 2 days after the 'settle down' conversation, there was a contraception failure. Condom split, (apparently it was not just a small tear but from top all way to base. ) Boy has been taught from early on that he must be responsible for his own fertility and insisted on condoms as he is adamant he doesn't want children yet although gf is on the pill. Boy is now beside himself with worry, he begged his gf to go with him to get morning after pill. Gf reaction has been to refuse saying that if she gets pregnant against all these odds then it is meant to be . Boy is the sort to do the right thing. Would give up career goals of he had children to support. I know all the ins and outs because mum is close relative. Mum believes gf is manipulating her son into parenthood because this happened literally a couple of days after discussing settling down. What is the right thing to do if she is pregnant. ? Does he give up his plans and support a child he does not wish to have, took precautions to avoid and made his feelings very clear BEFORE conception. Or does he suck it up, leave Uni and get a job to support the child and learn never again have sex with someone he doesn't want to have a child with. ? For my part I have met the gf a few times so not enough to form an opinion except that she is much more mature than her boyfriend. (My relative is livid and truly believes she 'doctored the condoms - which would be impossible - she is too angry to be logical !)
BTW she was due AF on Monday. Apparently there are pts that are accurate to a few days late so all a bit tense in female relatives household at the moment.

Fuck's sake.

ThisisMrsNicolaHicklin, you are making a very important point there: Young men have the same level of control of their fertility as their great granmothers - ie don't have sex if you don't want a baby.

I was of course aware that young women have now control of their fertility, it has never really hit home that young men really don't unless they wish to be celibate or permanently infertile.

It might actually reign in the wish of many privileged young men to "sow their wild oats" with girls they consider beneath them and later marry a girl they consider the right sort.

Well aint he a catch! He's called her a manipulative fruitcake (is that an official medical term for mental health issues?) and told her that if she is pregnant as a result of both of their actions she'll be dealing with it alone and to expect very little financial support from him for his own child. I'm sure your sister is very proud.

Agree, RudeElf, she was presumably not the right sort and since he can't openly be snobbish about her he defames her as a fruitcake.

Now we have a generation of young men who are stuck between the chauvinistic ideals of every previous generation of men and the reality of
the situation that until some invents reliable reversable male contraception they have the same level of control of their fertility as their great granmothers - ie don't have sex if you don't want a baby.
I don't envy them

This is the first time I have seen this issue phrased in that way but I think it sums it up very nicely.
Somehow, the attitude 'He choose to have therefore he should pay' has stayed the same even though the advances of medicine have enabled women to have a hell of control on their own fertility but men don't.

It IS very sad to hear young men talking about freezing sperm and having a vasectomy (which can be reversed but not all the time) because of that.
Would we ever think it's OK for a woman to make herself infertile to avoid pregnancy???

"I was of course aware that young women have now control of their fertility, it has never really hit home that young men really don't unless they wish to be celibate or permanently infertile."

This is incorrect. Women now have more control over their fertility than they would have had prior to medical advances. Men have the same control they always had. They dont have "no" control.

Some women ARE manipulative though. It's not unheard off that some women will get pregnant on purpose wo the agreement of their partner. Maybe by saying they are taking the pill but being very careless or not taking it. I'm sure I even read about some women damaging the condoms so they don't work well (Actually I've read even from women who are married with a guy who doesn't want anymore children).....

This woman was acting 'weirdly' to say the least (looking herself in the bathroo, refusing to say if the test was positive or not, refsuing to do another etc etc). Could be because she felt overwhelmed and lost etc... It's still manipulative behaviour though.

Whilst reliable birth control that cannot easily be tempered with by a partner and that can be taken secretly now exists for women, no such thing has been invented for men.

Better?

They do have the same control as women did 100 years ago, no sex if no baby is important.

Would we ever think it's OK for a woman to make herself infertile to avoid pregnancy???

Erm yes, because it happens all the time. There are threads about it on MN where women have been refused sterilisation by their doctors despite very much wanting it. (Another example of someone deciding they know better than a woman what is best for her) members of my family have been sterilised for this exact reason.

He's going to travel when his child needs nappies and clothes? What a deadbeat dad. People assume that only people on benefits act like that, but this thread has proven that even the so called educated and intelligent men in society can be irresponsible idiots. Its fair enough to sort out some sort of compromise (e.g. part-time work and part-time study), but for him to swan off travelling for 2 years and leave his baby.... I wonder how many unsupported children this pathetic excuse for a man is going to produce in his lifetime?? He clearly wasn't mature enough to be having sex at all.

I do actually think this is a good thing I hasten to add. Have sexual relationships with people you trust.

rude they have LESS control than women now.

Men can use a condom
Women have hormonal contraception, use barrier protections (just liek men), use a coil. They can have the morning after pill, they can have an abortion.

It is totally ok for a man or a woman to decide that they don't want to use x methods of 'contraception' or to avoid/terminate a pregnancy.
However, there is no denying that men have little vhoice apart from condoms, which has others have said is NOT reliable, whereas women have MORE of choices that are MUCH MORE reliable.

Which is why when there is an unwanted pregnancy or the risk of an unwanted pregnancy, then the decision should be taken TOGETHER rather than always saying 'it's only the woman choice'.

yes better reni. I really object to the idea that men have no control. It isnt true. They do. Women just have more options available to them. Men havent lost control because of the control women have gained. The fact that women have gained more choice does not mean that men have gained those choices. Those choices do not exist to allow men to avoid consequences they dont want to deal with. whatever results from sex with a woman (regardless of what choices she made after conception) is a choice the man made and accepted when he had sex.

That's different though Rude. We are talking of sterilisation as a routine way of avoiding pregnancy, a method to be used by young men before they have even enter a time when they will consider having a family.
A method that can not always be reversed, far from.

Not something that one would like to have after having x children etc....

It's not because some women want to be sterilized that all wokmen should have their tubes tied 'just in case' to avoid pregnancy.

And btw, no one has said that they have LOST control.
What people are saying is that they have LESS control and therefore are at the merci of the woman's decision, in the same way that women were at the merci of the man's decision to use a condom before.

rude they have LESS control than women now

And? Why is this a problem? How do you propose solving that problem? Are we removing access to hormonal contraceptives, abortion and MAP? Or are we giving men control over what women do with their bodies? Which is it?

I'm going to shout this loud MEN DO NOT HAVE LESS CONTROL THAN THE PREVIOUSLY HAD! Women just have more than they previously had. Men have not lost any control in the process of women gaining more.

Not something that one would like to have after having x children etc

Two of my family members that chose sterilisation had (and have now) no children. One was in a LTR one wasnt.

What people are saying is that they have LESS control and therefore are at the merci of the woman's decision, in the same way that women were at the merci of the man's decision to use a condom before.

these are two different situations. If a man didnt want to use a condom the woman is not at his mercy, she can opt not to have sex. (Unless we are talking about rape which is an entirely different discussion)

If a man has already opted to have sex then he has accepted what may result. He is not "at the mercy" of the woman. He accepted his consequences when he had sex. Whatever happens, he has agreed to it.

I think it is a good thing, fewer young male snobs fucking around with girls they never mean to have more than a sexual relationship with.

It means relationships can be a lot more equal and will rely on mutual trust.

I agree with lumpy, I'm horrified at the misogyny on this thread.

How terrible that women might actually have some control over something and shock horror, more than men, how can this be? Oh the poor, poor men.

Any control women have over their fertility is not without consequences, contraceptives, abortion, pregnancy and childbirth all have big consequences for women. There are consequences for men IF a women gets pregnant when he's used a condom, unlikely, he has a moral responsibility to the child. The bar is usually pretty low for men anyway, a token payment and eow visits usually suffice.

Which is why when there is an unwanted pregnancy or the risk of an unwanted pregnancy, then the decision should be taken TOGETHER rather than always saying 'it's only the woman choice'.

I'm not following your 'logic' for why men get a say in what a woman does with her body following conception just because medical advances give women more options. They have given women more options. Men have the same options they always had. Women's options dont suddenly become men's "make life easier for me" options.

The woman also has a much bigger change to her life in case of an unplanned pregnancy, especially if he then does a runner, so it is good that she also has more control than he does.

Or these men could just stop shagging women that they don't give a shit about?

Technically, though, men do have less choice. Because in the past they had that very well known option of "deny paternity" which was taken by a lot of men. That's gone now due to DNA testing.

Its not a fertility choice though, is it? The child still exists, they just got to deny it was theirs despite knowing full well it could be and knowing that it was a possibility when they had sex.