<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Forced Fatherhood: Are Men Being Treated Equally?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/</link>
	<description>Tell her it wasn't you...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 20:13:25 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Living it</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-10840</link>
		<dc:creator>Living it</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:45:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-10840</guid>
		<description>What the man in this situation is paying for is the woman&#039;s choice to keep the baby. If the woman chooses to give the child up for adoption, she and the bio father are no longer responsible for the child. If she has an abortion, no one is responsible for the child. The situation we are discussing is a woman choosing to have and keep a child against the father&#039;s wishes. In what other situation is a person held responsible for a situation in which they have no control? In every other decision in our society, if you make the decision, you have the responsibility. 
The statistics that in state&#039;s where there are stricter child support laws there are fewer unwed pregnancies are just that: statistics. There is no telling how many confounding variables there are in these unfiltered studies. It could also be argued that if there were NO child support laws there would be fewer unwed pregnancies because women are not stupid and do take into account financial aspects when it comes to decisions like abortion and adoption. And also in tricking men into having a baby.
There should be legal protection for men not wanting to have a child just like there is legal protection for woman to have an abortion because having an unwanted child is worse than an abortion.  If having an unwanted child weren&#039;t worse than having an abortion, than there would never have been an abortions right movement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What the man in this situation is paying for is the woman&#8217;s choice to keep the baby. If the woman chooses to give the child up for adoption, she and the bio father are no longer responsible for the child. If she has an abortion, no one is responsible for the child. The situation we are discussing is a woman choosing to have and keep a child against the father&#8217;s wishes. In what other situation is a person held responsible for a situation in which they have no control? In every other decision in our society, if you make the decision, you have the responsibility.<br />
The statistics that in state&#8217;s where there are stricter child support laws there are fewer unwed pregnancies are just that: statistics. There is no telling how many confounding variables there are in these unfiltered studies. It could also be argued that if there were NO child support laws there would be fewer unwed pregnancies because women are not stupid and do take into account financial aspects when it comes to decisions like abortion and adoption. And also in tricking men into having a baby.<br />
There should be legal protection for men not wanting to have a child just like there is legal protection for woman to have an abortion because having an unwanted child is worse than an abortion.  If having an unwanted child weren&#8217;t worse than having an abortion, than there would never have been an abortions right movement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sarah</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-10662</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:41:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-10662</guid>
		<description>Everyones comments on here are very interesting. As a young woman working on my career its always been important to me to think of birth control. Of course this is not the same for every woman. I have known girls whos only goal in life is to have a baby, whether they are in a realationship or not. I think some of you have come off the issue slighty and were talking about women in forced pregnancies or who were raped. This is not the issue, it is whether men should take responsiblity for the baby if they wanted it or not. People have talked about men and women taking responsibilty for thier bodies and birth control and there are for and against arguments for all types of birth control. But in a moment of passion these things can get forgotten, it takes a strong person to insist of the man wearing a condom if you are in love and he doesn&#039;t want to. The issue is what happens if the woman gets pregnant (and wants to keeps it) and if the man doesn&#039;t want a child.  My view is, if the man wants to be in the childs life then the cost should be 50/50, if the man wants nothing to do with the child then he should not have to pay. A woman has a choice over whether to keep a child or not (either adoption or abortion) a man does not have this right. He should have the right to either be there and pay (what he can, not to bankrupt himself) or to leave.
This may not be a popular view but in my option it is the fairest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everyones comments on here are very interesting. As a young woman working on my career its always been important to me to think of birth control. Of course this is not the same for every woman. I have known girls whos only goal in life is to have a baby, whether they are in a realationship or not. I think some of you have come off the issue slighty and were talking about women in forced pregnancies or who were raped. This is not the issue, it is whether men should take responsiblity for the baby if they wanted it or not. People have talked about men and women taking responsibilty for thier bodies and birth control and there are for and against arguments for all types of birth control. But in a moment of passion these things can get forgotten, it takes a strong person to insist of the man wearing a condom if you are in love and he doesn&#8217;t want to. The issue is what happens if the woman gets pregnant (and wants to keeps it) and if the man doesn&#8217;t want a child.  My view is, if the man wants to be in the childs life then the cost should be 50/50, if the man wants nothing to do with the child then he should not have to pay. A woman has a choice over whether to keep a child or not (either adoption or abortion) a man does not have this right. He should have the right to either be there and pay (what he can, not to bankrupt himself) or to leave.<br />
This may not be a popular view but in my option it is the fairest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-9853</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-9853</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the comment, Bostonian.

I would ask, however, how you would feel if someone told a woman that if she doesn&#039;t want kids, she would have to be limited to those same choices, including abstention / permanent sterilization - and that if she did not, she would then be subject to the man&#039;s decision on whether there would be a child and whether she would have to pay money to the man and the child for 20 years into the future.

It is unfortunate if your friends have husbands who would prefer to put their wives through a tubal ligation versus having a vasectomy.  I can&#039;t comment intelligently on the exact circumstances of their relationships, but all things equal, vasectomy is a safer and less invasive operation.

That, however, has little bearing to me outside a marital context where the couple has mutually determined they want no more children.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the comment, Bostonian.</p>
<p>I would ask, however, how you would feel if someone told a woman that if she doesn&#8217;t want kids, she would have to be limited to those same choices, including abstention / permanent sterilization &#8211; and that if she did not, she would then be subject to the man&#8217;s decision on whether there would be a child and whether she would have to pay money to the man and the child for 20 years into the future.</p>
<p>It is unfortunate if your friends have husbands who would prefer to put their wives through a tubal ligation versus having a vasectomy.  I can&#8217;t comment intelligently on the exact circumstances of their relationships, but all things equal, vasectomy is a safer and less invasive operation.</p>
<p>That, however, has little bearing to me outside a marital context where the couple has mutually determined they want no more children.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bostonian</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-9852</link>
		<dc:creator>Bostonian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:11:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-9852</guid>
		<description>If this guy on Dr. Phil did not want kids, why didn&#039;t he get a vasectomy?  Men rarely take responsibility for birth control.  Many of my friend&#039;s husbands refused to get vasectomies after their kids were born and their families were complete.  Their wives had to either stay on birth control or get their tubes tied.  If men don&#039;t want kids, let them either take responsibility by getting a vasectomy or wearing a condom, or just abstain.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If this guy on Dr. Phil did not want kids, why didn&#8217;t he get a vasectomy?  Men rarely take responsibility for birth control.  Many of my friend&#8217;s husbands refused to get vasectomies after their kids were born and their families were complete.  Their wives had to either stay on birth control or get their tubes tied.  If men don&#8217;t want kids, let them either take responsibility by getting a vasectomy or wearing a condom, or just abstain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gill</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-9599</link>
		<dc:creator>gill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 16:25:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-9599</guid>
		<description>Dude, it&#039;s the equivalent of me wanting to buy something (like a house) and taking out a loan and then forcing my ex girlfriend to pay half or more. Paying child support for an child i had not agreed to having is bloody expensive, particularly when it often means supporting the mother more than the child. the rules are screwed up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dude, it&#8217;s the equivalent of me wanting to buy something (like a house) and taking out a loan and then forcing my ex girlfriend to pay half or more. Paying child support for an child i had not agreed to having is bloody expensive, particularly when it often means supporting the mother more than the child. the rules are screwed up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HappyDad</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-5407</link>
		<dc:creator>HappyDad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 02:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-5407</guid>
		<description>Sorry for this, and I am embarrased, but I had to correct myself a third time. I typed too fast, and didn&#039;t correct it carefuly.

(Final Version)

I am amazed how Caroline and Virago won’t even consider the fact that this is unfair to men. We men are able to consider their side. Their opinion that men need to pay support for the kids no matter what, that the man knew what he was doing and should be careful, and that they have a right to control their body, in regards to abortion.
Virago and Caroline don’t seem to hear the main issue.
That men have less rights and protection under law, policies, and social dogma.
Women can have unprotected sex and if they decide they don’t want to have the baby, they can abort whether the man wants them to or not, even when there is no medical reason to abort.
However, on the other hand, if the woman says she will take precautions to not get pregnant, and will take responsibility for anything that happens, there is no obligation on her part by law, policy nor even social expectation, to follow through. She has no responsiblity to follow-up with abortion or to at least accept 100% financial and custodial responsibility to support the child, if she does become pregnant.
Of course, we are big boys, and if we lay down, we know we will be held responsible if a baby comes from it.
I think this post was making the effort to say we understand the situation, but that it is not fair and that men aren’t treated equally to how the women are treated in these situations. Its as if the woman has no responsiblities to live up to, from sex that creates a pregnancy, unless she wants to. However, the man will have responsibility whether he wants to or not.

What about kids in general, and women’s pressure on their men to insist on children. I bet if honestly polled, a vast majority of husbands, even happy fathers, will admit that they either never wanted even one child, or decided they didn’t want anymore children after one or two, but their wives strongly pushed for the children, and after arguing and saying no, you have two choices, divorce or say yes and deal with it. Many men are the rational ones and don’t want to destroy their marriage or existing children’s family, so they submit.

Men have become emasculated by our laws and their effect on our society/culture. It is supposed to protect the children, well it does, but at what cost.  This forced fatherhood adds many more babies to the population, because we men are able to be trapped and/or controlled by women, using the children. And most of us learn to deal and love the children as it is not their fault.
We are subject to emotional, irrational women and their control on us.

Men, husbands, and fathers deserve better representation, and we need to fight our fear of fighting back and saying this is enough. We have a right to be protected. This, in some ways, reminds me of the slavery guilt. We are being punished by laws that were created because of men, who in the past did not take care of their responsbilities and treated people (women or blacks) incorrectly. Now, we feel guilty and allow the government to set morality laws on us that are not fair. Just like white men need to quit feeling guilty for crimes of our fathers and fight back on legislation, policies and social dogmas that are not fair, so too should men fight back on legislation, policies and social dogmas that are simply unfair and bad for our culture and society.
If we are all equal (and we are), then lets be equal. White, black, woman, man... EQUAL!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry for this, and I am embarrased, but I had to correct myself a third time. I typed too fast, and didn&#8217;t correct it carefuly.</p>
<p>(Final Version)</p>
<p>I am amazed how Caroline and Virago won’t even consider the fact that this is unfair to men. We men are able to consider their side. Their opinion that men need to pay support for the kids no matter what, that the man knew what he was doing and should be careful, and that they have a right to control their body, in regards to abortion.<br />
Virago and Caroline don’t seem to hear the main issue.<br />
That men have less rights and protection under law, policies, and social dogma.<br />
Women can have unprotected sex and if they decide they don’t want to have the baby, they can abort whether the man wants them to or not, even when there is no medical reason to abort.<br />
However, on the other hand, if the woman says she will take precautions to not get pregnant, and will take responsibility for anything that happens, there is no obligation on her part by law, policy nor even social expectation, to follow through. She has no responsiblity to follow-up with abortion or to at least accept 100% financial and custodial responsibility to support the child, if she does become pregnant.<br />
Of course, we are big boys, and if we lay down, we know we will be held responsible if a baby comes from it.<br />
I think this post was making the effort to say we understand the situation, but that it is not fair and that men aren’t treated equally to how the women are treated in these situations. Its as if the woman has no responsiblities to live up to, from sex that creates a pregnancy, unless she wants to. However, the man will have responsibility whether he wants to or not.</p>
<p>What about kids in general, and women’s pressure on their men to insist on children. I bet if honestly polled, a vast majority of husbands, even happy fathers, will admit that they either never wanted even one child, or decided they didn’t want anymore children after one or two, but their wives strongly pushed for the children, and after arguing and saying no, you have two choices, divorce or say yes and deal with it. Many men are the rational ones and don’t want to destroy their marriage or existing children’s family, so they submit.</p>
<p>Men have become emasculated by our laws and their effect on our society/culture. It is supposed to protect the children, well it does, but at what cost.  This forced fatherhood adds many more babies to the population, because we men are able to be trapped and/or controlled by women, using the children. And most of us learn to deal and love the children as it is not their fault.<br />
We are subject to emotional, irrational women and their control on us.</p>
<p>Men, husbands, and fathers deserve better representation, and we need to fight our fear of fighting back and saying this is enough. We have a right to be protected. This, in some ways, reminds me of the slavery guilt. We are being punished by laws that were created because of men, who in the past did not take care of their responsbilities and treated people (women or blacks) incorrectly. Now, we feel guilty and allow the government to set morality laws on us that are not fair. Just like white men need to quit feeling guilty for crimes of our fathers and fight back on legislation, policies and social dogmas that are not fair, so too should men fight back on legislation, policies and social dogmas that are simply unfair and bad for our culture and society.<br />
If we are all equal (and we are), then lets be equal. White, black, woman, man&#8230; EQUAL!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dad surprise</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-4413</link>
		<dc:creator>dad surprise</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:38:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-4413</guid>
		<description>I am a new father, and I did not want my girlfriend to go through with the pregnancy.  I made this clear to her, but I also realized I had nothing to stand on legally, so from the beginning, I told her that I realized it was her choice, but that I did not intend to change my future plans or to be permanently committed to her.  It felt cold, and it was difficult for me to tell her this, but I felt it was important to be straightforward.  I also told her that if she did choose to go through with it, I would be as supportive as I could.  (The details of what that statement meant have become the source of many intense arguments.)  So she had the baby.

Now the reality of being put in this situation goes beyond any statistics or philosophical musing about the idea.  It introduces problems and issues that completely alter my life forever, and puts an incredible amount of psychological stress on me.  Paying child support or whatever is the least of my concerns.

After acceping what was happening, the natural thing I felt to do was to shower her with affection, and after the baby was born, I just tried to stay positive and make the relationship work.  But any time she senses that I&#039;m needing space away from her, she starts lashing in with these really hurtful remarks about how she doesn&#039;t know if she can count on me.  And I wonder what exactly she expected?  She thought she could just force me into this and everything would just fall into the place the way she liked it?  What about my life, my future plans, my hopes and dreams?  All gone so I can help her have the future SHE dreamed of.

I don&#039;t want to say my story is a catastrophe because I am still trying to live with it and make something positive out of it.  But I do feel I need more emotional support.  It is hard for me to talk to anyone, with the programmed attitudes people have about deadbeat dads, without any consideration of what it feels like to be forced into a lifelong responsibility that you made perfectly clear you did not want.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a new father, and I did not want my girlfriend to go through with the pregnancy.  I made this clear to her, but I also realized I had nothing to stand on legally, so from the beginning, I told her that I realized it was her choice, but that I did not intend to change my future plans or to be permanently committed to her.  It felt cold, and it was difficult for me to tell her this, but I felt it was important to be straightforward.  I also told her that if she did choose to go through with it, I would be as supportive as I could.  (The details of what that statement meant have become the source of many intense arguments.)  So she had the baby.</p>
<p>Now the reality of being put in this situation goes beyond any statistics or philosophical musing about the idea.  It introduces problems and issues that completely alter my life forever, and puts an incredible amount of psychological stress on me.  Paying child support or whatever is the least of my concerns.</p>
<p>After acceping what was happening, the natural thing I felt to do was to shower her with affection, and after the baby was born, I just tried to stay positive and make the relationship work.  But any time she senses that I&#8217;m needing space away from her, she starts lashing in with these really hurtful remarks about how she doesn&#8217;t know if she can count on me.  And I wonder what exactly she expected?  She thought she could just force me into this and everything would just fall into the place the way she liked it?  What about my life, my future plans, my hopes and dreams?  All gone so I can help her have the future SHE dreamed of.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t want to say my story is a catastrophe because I am still trying to live with it and make something positive out of it.  But I do feel I need more emotional support.  It is hard for me to talk to anyone, with the programmed attitudes people have about deadbeat dads, without any consideration of what it feels like to be forced into a lifelong responsibility that you made perfectly clear you did not want.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-4003</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 18:21:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-4003</guid>
		<description>Hi Caroline,

Thanks for the follow-up.  I&#039;ll agree with you that it is quite possible that &quot;the condom was in his pocket and he didn&#039;t want to wear it.&quot;  That is a scenario that is not unheard of.

But I will also say that stating that that was PROBABLY what happened in any given case is far from fair and probably inaccurate.

There are many other circumstances that could lead to the result of a man being forced to pay a large percentage of everything he makes for the next 18+ years and they also include the also possible scenarios of:

- his partner having misled him about birth control
- his partner having misrepresented her intentions if a pregnancy occurred
- his having used the condom but it having malfunctioned
- her having taken the contents of the condom without his knowledge and used them to cause a pregnancy

Or any other variety of circumstances.  Some will occur more commonly than others.  None of them are impossible.  In all cases, regardless of how honest and responsible (or irresponsible) the man has been (or the woman) the end result if a pregnancy occurs is...

...she has complete control over the decision about whether to have a child and whether this man will be forced into parental obligations.

And she enjoys this right and he this forced obligation even if the circumstances were such that he was very honest and responsible and she was very dishonest and very irresponsible.

I certainly would not paint all or most women with a dishonest / irresponsible brush.  But to say, without knowing any of the details of a given case, that &quot;he probably was too lazy to take the condom out of his pocket&quot; is to generalize and paint men with that very same brush.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Caroline,</p>
<p>Thanks for the follow-up.  I&#8217;ll agree with you that it is quite possible that &#8220;the condom was in his pocket and he didn&#8217;t want to wear it.&#8221;  That is a scenario that is not unheard of.</p>
<p>But I will also say that stating that that was PROBABLY what happened in any given case is far from fair and probably inaccurate.</p>
<p>There are many other circumstances that could lead to the result of a man being forced to pay a large percentage of everything he makes for the next 18+ years and they also include the also possible scenarios of:</p>
<p>- his partner having misled him about birth control<br />
- his partner having misrepresented her intentions if a pregnancy occurred<br />
- his having used the condom but it having malfunctioned<br />
- her having taken the contents of the condom without his knowledge and used them to cause a pregnancy</p>
<p>Or any other variety of circumstances.  Some will occur more commonly than others.  None of them are impossible.  In all cases, regardless of how honest and responsible (or irresponsible) the man has been (or the woman) the end result if a pregnancy occurs is&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8230;she has complete control over the decision about whether to have a child and whether this man will be forced into parental obligations.</p>
<p>And she enjoys this right and he this forced obligation even if the circumstances were such that he was very honest and responsible and she was very dishonest and very irresponsible.</p>
<p>I certainly would not paint all or most women with a dishonest / irresponsible brush.  But to say, without knowing any of the details of a given case, that &#8220;he probably was too lazy to take the condom out of his pocket&#8221; is to generalize and paint men with that very same brush.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: caroline schaefer</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-3996</link>
		<dc:creator>caroline schaefer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 22:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-3996</guid>
		<description>I may have gone too far in suggesting a vastectomy, I realize it&#039;s quite permanent.  The condom was probably in his pocket and he just didn&#039;t want to wear it.  Men and boys, please be responsible when you hop into bed with your girlfriend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I may have gone too far in suggesting a vastectomy, I realize it&#8217;s quite permanent.  The condom was probably in his pocket and he just didn&#8217;t want to wear it.  Men and boys, please be responsible when you hop into bed with your girlfriend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://www.colintimberlake.com/forced-fatherhood-equal-rights-reproductive-paternity-roe-v-wade-matt-dubay-v-wells/comment-page-1/#comment-3990</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:19:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.colintimberlake.com/?p=780#comment-3990</guid>
		<description>Hi Caroline,

There are a couple problems with your argument, as I see them...

One is that your attitude toward men getting a vasectomy if they want to have sex but aren&#039;t certain they want to have kids is based on an inequality I doubt you would apply to women.  Would you tell women to get their tubes tied if they don&#039;t want kids, and then hope they can reverse it if they change their mind?  Vasectomy is considered an IRREVERSIBLE operation.  The vas tube can be reattached but the chances of a man becoming fertile after a vasectomy reversal is in the neighborhood of 50%.

As well, forcing men to pay 50% of the cost for an unexpected child the man doesn&#039;t want to be a parent to isn&#039;t holding both parties 50% responsible for &quot;the outcome&quot; -- because the OUTCOME of having sex is a PREGNANCY.  A CHILD is the OUTCOME of a woman&#039;s unilateral decision to carry a pregnancy to term.  As long as women enjoy this choice, they can&#039;t also turn around and treat a child like the inevitable OUTCOME a man faces if he engages in the act of sex.

Anyway, thanks for reading and sharing your opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Caroline,</p>
<p>There are a couple problems with your argument, as I see them&#8230;</p>
<p>One is that your attitude toward men getting a vasectomy if they want to have sex but aren&#8217;t certain they want to have kids is based on an inequality I doubt you would apply to women.  Would you tell women to get their tubes tied if they don&#8217;t want kids, and then hope they can reverse it if they change their mind?  Vasectomy is considered an IRREVERSIBLE operation.  The vas tube can be reattached but the chances of a man becoming fertile after a vasectomy reversal is in the neighborhood of 50%.</p>
<p>As well, forcing men to pay 50% of the cost for an unexpected child the man doesn&#8217;t want to be a parent to isn&#8217;t holding both parties 50% responsible for &#8220;the outcome&#8221; &#8212; because the OUTCOME of having sex is a PREGNANCY.  A CHILD is the OUTCOME of a woman&#8217;s unilateral decision to carry a pregnancy to term.  As long as women enjoy this choice, they can&#8217;t also turn around and treat a child like the inevitable OUTCOME a man faces if he engages in the act of sex.</p>
<p>Anyway, thanks for reading and sharing your opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
