I agree with Cuppa here. The argument that men are free from the consequences of getting a woman pregnant is just not true
So it's men who have to deal with the physical reality of pregnancy, the sick leave, the nature of birth, potential surgery
It's men who have to deal with postnatal complications
It's men who have to take time out of work because a baby has arrived and needs caring for 24/7
It's men who end up sacrificing their standard pay for a lower level allowance (and don't try to go on a tangent about shared parental leave because everyone I know, me and DH included, found quite quickly that SPL is not the norm, in fact it's unusual)
In the event an unplanned pregnancy is forced to continue and the relationship has ended/was never a relationship, it's the men who end up being the primary parent and the one the child lives
It's male non-resident parents who end up paying the majority of the costs that come with raising a child
It's men who end up having to sacrifice earning potential because they need a part time job in order to fit around school and childcare
It's men who take a hit on their pensions from large amounts of time out the workplace looking after small children
It's men who lose their long term earning potential and prospects because men are discriminated against for having children and the flexibility that requires
How long before we get the NAMALT argument/but women are mean to poor men/but society isn't actually systemically oppressive to women, it's just women don't like the consequences of their choices argument?