'Men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies'

[Glasstree]

Hello, this is my first post in feminism (I've NC so I can join this board but am a long-standing lurker, occasional poster, but I really want to stop passively lurking and join the conversation).

I came across this twitter thread and it made me stop and think about how the abortion debate is framed, particularly her take on why men don't use condoms and putting the responsibility for unwanted pregnancies firmly on men's shoulders.

twitter.com/i/moments/1040468130433097728

I know this is probably not a new way to conceptualise this for lots of feminists, but it feels like a bit of a lightbulb moment for me and I wanted to share and discuss some of her ideas. Personally, I think there should be less emphasis on PIV sex and more education for everyone on other methods of contraception like the rhythm method etc. Also for sex education to include discussions which recognise boys and men are responsible for their ejaculations and their consequences. Perfectly happy to be told I've got this all wrong, I'm sure there's lots I haven't considered, but it's really important to me as a parent to think about how I'm educating my children around sex and relationships.

How many unwanted pregnancies could women create if there were no men?
Zero
Therefore men ARE responsible for 100% of unwanted pregnancies.

Erm how many unwanted pregnancies could women create if there were no women? Your logic is illogical.

There was a thread the other day bemoaning the congratulations men get when their partner is pregnant. Lots of indignation over his 3 minutes of fun getting all the credit. Apparently the congrtualators were correct. As passive vessels just waiting to be filled with their holy grain of life thry really do deserve all the credit.

Assuming consensual sex, a woman is capable of using or asking him to use contraception. If neither of them use protection it is both their responsibility and blame if she gets pregnant. If one of them lies to the other so the baby is only unwanted in one side its clearly that person's responsibility only.

My guess is the poster of that thread intended for it to be controversial to get a discussion going. I think it's important to note the context in which she's writing - Trump's America. Abortion rights under threat, women's access to contraception they're in charge of under threat, apparently many men evading financial responsibility for unwanted pregnancies. Even if both men and women are each 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies (and I think there is some truth that men are always responsible, but women are not always in control of the situation), there is such a massive imbalance in the consequences and so too many men are not behaving responsibly with impunity, simply for their own gratification.

Erm how many unwanted pregnancies could women create if there were no women? Your logic is illogical.

Erm...how many women would there be if there were no women?

Batteriesallgone I absolutely agree with this.....

The financial impact then. If we got the child maintenance system properly sorted in this country demand for male contraception would probably shoot up

.....100%

If men were held responsible for the care of any child they made, more men would take responsibility for their fertility.

Of course men are 100% responsible for pregnancies. All pregnancies, not just unwanted ones. Women don't get pregnant from sex unless it's sex with a man!

Oh fgs - more infantilisation of women.

Or maybe it's infantilisation of men not to hold them 'jointly and severally', as it were, 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies? Obviously there's no way to make them bear the physical effects, but do they generally take a fair share of the other consequences- financially, impact on career, childcare? Do they (in the context of Trump's America in particular) care equally about restrictions on availability of contraception and abortions?

How is it infantilising women? I'm not saying that women need someone else to take responsibility for their contraception. We don't need to have sex with men in order to have babies - how do lesbian parents do it?

A man and a woman don't need to copulate in order for the woman to become pregnant, IVF clearly demonstrates that.
the statement Men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies implies that women are 0% responsible, they are just passive victims. surely the correct statement would be that men and women are jointly and equally responsible for a pregnancy, unwanted or not, if they copulate? If either person does not want a baby, then they abstain.

How is it infantilising women? I'm not saying that women need someone else to take responsibility for their contraception. We don't need to have sex with men in order to have babies - how do lesbian parents do it?

What point are you trying to make? Saying men are 100% responsible for pregnancies is completely mesningless in the context of why women should take responsibility for not getting pregnant.

Lass Saying men are 100% responsible for pregnancies is completely mesningless in the context of why women should take responsibility for not getting pregnant

I hope you mean not ALL women in this context?

Should a 12 year old take responsibility for not getting pregnant when her male relative is impregnating her against her will?

I agree with the twitter feed on two aspects:

Women can have multiple orgasms without getting pregnant or getting anyone else pregnant.

Pubertal males and beyond have the propensity to engender a 100% capacity for fertility. What really annoys me are men who witter on about over population as if it's females who do this. No mate. Your sperm is the problem. Get yourself sorted if you really, really, really feels about over population.

How can men be responsible for 100% of all pregnancies?

Men cannot create a pregnancy on their own.

Women cannot create pregnancy on their own.

Surely you have to say a man is 100% and a woman is 100% responsible?

Both have joint and several responsibility (except in the case of rape as has already been stated).

Women should take full responsibility for their own reproductive health.

If they can't or don't want to use any of the female contraceptives then they have to make sure that the men they have sex with use contraception.

If the man says no then it's down to the woman to refuse sex, unless she is happy to risk pregnancy. If she has unprotected sex then how is the result 100% the man's responsibility?

It's a joint decision not to use contraception, other than in the case of rape or deception.

Women should take full responsibility for their own reproductive health.

Reproductive health is much more than just pregnancy.

Are you suggesting that once a 10 year old starts their periods they should take full responsibility?

Late to the thread but this
Woman doesn't want to take responsibility (fair enough). Neither does man (fair enough) so woman says then we're not having sex. No pregnancy.

Surely the power lies with women? No condom no sex.

Exactly the same power lies with the man. He can also say no condom no sex if he's serious about not risking pregnancy. But it seems totally acceptable that a man would go bareback unless a woman asks.

No of course not.

What I meant was that any woman who is sexually active should take full responsibility for her own health.

Any man who is sexually active should take full responsibility for his.

I cannot see how it can be argued that a man is 100% responsible for making sure that a woman doesn't get pregnant.

He can use condoms, or not. That is totally his choice surely?

However, once he has told the woman wants to sleep with it is her whether to go ahead or not surely?

Why are so many women acting like they are passive here with no choice other to accept whatever a man decides to do?

I'm not following this argument at all.

This men are 100% responsible thing is totally unconnected to the realities of contraception. It's a nonsense statistic; as Arthuritis has pointed out, women are equally 100% responsible for pregnancy.

Of course both parties have to take responsibility. Ultimately, however equal the relationship, however feminist the attitudes, it is always the woman who bears the brunt of consequences of pregnancy. Therefore women must take responsibility for their own contraception.

@QuentinSummers

Isn't that the point though?

Both partners are equally responsible? In which case how is the twitter feed correct in saying men are 100% responsible?

Does that mean women have 0 responsibility?

So the woman takes no responsibility for letting some man put his cock in her, knowing no protection was used? Well that’s the most stupid thing I’d read today.

Woman aren’t stupid uneducated little things, we KNOW how babies are made and we can protect our bodies against pregnancy so why wouldn’t you? If a woman doesn’t want to take the pill or similar then no condom= no sex!

In my single years I had a few sexual partners and never had 1 refuse to wear a condom and I also took the pill as well as I was not going to end up with an unplanned pregnancy. Why because I’m not stupid and wanted to do all I could to protect myself against pregnancy

Men & Woman are both responsible for making sure protection is used

However, once he has told the woman wants to sleep with it is her whether to go ahead or not surely?

That doesn't make any sense.

He can use condoms, or not. That is totally his choice surely?

I would argue not a choice but a responsibility. Surely.

A man knows he's fertile for all of his life once puberty starts. That's were the conversation should start.

Apologies for all the euphemisms, I'm a little uncomfortable being direct when talking about this subject but I was very strongly struck by this point.

Quite apart from the actual efficacy (which I have been led to believe is much less than claimed by the author) portraying a failure to properly use pull out contraception as a selfish or lazy act does seem rather strong. I will never know exactly what it is like for a man to climax (barring some sort of cybernetic singularity) but, for me, having to significantly modify my actions when I'm close would be quite challenging and something of a mood killer under any stimulating circumstances.

Expecting a man to act mechanically with perfect timing and precision during a very close, intimate moment (unless the differences between the sexes are far greater than I'm aware) seems very unrealistic and I would even propose that someone pouring such scorn upon a man failing to use this method may have never really experienced truly great sex. Personally, I think it's a silly way to prevent pregnancy, considering the conditions it's used under.

@placemats

Sorry I'm on my phone and for some reason it randomly deletes words on this site.

What I was trying to say was that basically either partner can decide what contraception they are willing to use (or one at all). It is then up to the other partner as to whether they accept these conditions and to then only proceed if they are in agreement.

With regards to choice/responsibility - I agree that it is responsible to use condoms however if a man refuses to use them it doesn't mean that the woman HAS to go ahead and risk pregnancy (or disease) as the twitter page suggests does it?

Same goes for the man too. So if he wants to use a condom but the woman says no, she's on the pill so it's fine, but the man is being responsible and doesn't want to continue without he doesn't have to does he?

Either party can say that they are only prepared to have sex if their partner agrees to do as asked. They can't force the other party to do something that they don't want to but they can refuse to have sex.

There are lots of men who really don't get what pregnancy means other than: shit I need to share my time and money. Or run away. Or pretend to be a partner.

Same goes for the man too. So if he wants to use a condom but the woman says no, she's on the pill so it's fine, but the man is being responsible and doesn't want to continue without he doesn't have to does he?

That's like something out of the 80s during a drunken post pub crawl chat with a cup of tea.

Biology dictates this. It can't be denied. If men don't want to get their partner pregnant then men can desist in sexual relations. Simple.

Neither a man nor a woman can create a pregnancy without the other so how can one party be 100% responsible for the pregnancy?

With reference to the twitter post a man could ejaculate 10 times a day - without a woman present no pregnancy will occur so, unless he is a rapist, the woman has consented thereby making her equally responsible for any resulting pregnancy.

If men don't want to get their partner pregnant then men can desist in sexual relations. Simple.

Yes of course. And if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant then she too can desist in sexual relations!

I hope you mean not ALL women in this context?

Should a 12 year old take responsibility for not getting pregnant when her male relative is impregnating her against her will?

The article wasn't referring to children and neither was this thread until you brought them up.

What I meant was that any woman who is sexually active should take full responsibility for her own health

Any man who is sexually active should take full responsibility for his

Absolutely. It's so obviously correct.