"What’s the effect on men who co-conceive and then the pregnancy ends in abortion? And who even are these men?... A man might not necessarily know he helped cause an abortion. Moreover, amid continuous attacks on abortion rights, the urgency among researchers has logically been to demonstrate the benefits of abortion access for those who can become pregnant. Despite this gap in the literature, the data we do have on male abortion beneficiaries indicates that the benefits extend well beyond the person having the abortion."
Writes Andréa Becker, a medical sociologist, "Men Benefit From Abortion. Why Do We Mostly Study Women?" (NYT).
Becker is intent on using the words "benefit" and "beneficiaries." But when a woman gets an abortion, it's because she's chosen it, which probably almost surely means she believes she will benefit. What's the basis for assuming that the man benefits? But Becker hammers "benefit" and "beneficiaries":
... male abortion beneficiaries experience increased income benefits.... benefits of abortion for adult men.... 'Everybody benefits when individuals can control their own reproduction, but the benefit can be invisible for cis men'...
And the lack of benefit for the unborn can be even more invisible — so invisible that the medical sociologist doesn't notice that she's talking about it.
Back to the men:
... the lack of knowledge and cultural attention obfuscates the benefit that abortion access has for the partners of pregnant people.... It’s easy to imagine the benefit of shifting some of the focus onto men’s role in abortion.... shedding more light on the invisible benefits of abortion for men could be a powerful opportunity....
It's not just the benefit to men that Becker cares about, it's the benefit to the pro-abortion side of the argument that can be derived from highlighting the way abortion benefits men.
But stressing the benefit to men makes abortion rights sound like part of the patriarchy! How much are men pushing abortion out of their own self-interest? Hugh Hefner and Playboy Magazine were early and big supporters of abortion.
And sometimes an abortion is the opposite of a benefit for men. What about the man who believes the abortion murdered his child?
I think there is good reason — both in principle and as a matter of politics — for those who favor abortion rights to downplay the benefits to men. You know, sometimes when you see what you think is a great argument and wonder why it isn't getting used, it's because it unleashes even better arguments on the other side. It may not be that you're extra good at noticing arguments. It may be that you're bad!
पोस्ट्स
६२ टिप्पण्या:
A man might not necessarily know he helped cause an abortion.
The verbal gymnastics required to rationalize the truth, brings a giggle, then tears.
Medical sociologist? Okey dokey.
The casualness with which major publications throw around the term "cis" one would get the idea that it's a word.
Some other words: "men," but "pregnant people." How come the dad's a man but the mom isn't a woman? Because, of course, woke is primarily about erasing women. Take that patriarchy!
the lack of knowledge and cultural attention obfuscates the benefit that abortion access has for the partners of pregnant people
Wait! I thought pro-life was a thing men pushed on women (sorry, pregnant people) because men don't get pregnant. Isn't that the whole point--that men don't want abortion because abortion benefits pregnant people. (whew, got it right that time!)
History has continuously proven to be a twisting screw. What's left becomes right, what's right becomes left. What's old becomes new, and what's fresh becomes stale.
These days Althouse is finding stories showing how the left is splitting and freezing as the screw turns.
Benefit, detriment? Hmm. What about communication to find out what the specific, individual men actually want? What about avoiding stereotypes of men?
If a society wants widespread prostitution and brothels it can go there (see Latin America, south Asia, etc.). Whether we want "free love" or "sex positive sex workers" or straitlaced morality preaching that all sex should babies society can go there.
Benefits have costs and involve tradeoffs. Generate a comprehensive analysis.
"Northerners Benefit From Slavery. Why Do We Mostly Study Southerners?" (NYT).
I suppose this is obvious but easy access to abortion benefits men trying to get into women's pants because they can say, "If you get pregnant, you can just get an abortion."
All this linguistic pot-stirring around the concepts of sex and gender has made our language impotent and weird! And ugly.
How about we refer to males who present as male, using the word "men." And vice versa, regarding females. Only use qualifiers for the outliers, like "gay men" or "trans women". So the impregnators are "men" (not cismen or cisgender men), and the impregnated are "women" (not pregnant people).
Let the people with weird sex/gender practices get the weird "rainbow" language, and leave us "normies" alone!
Whoa, this sentence stopped me in my tracks and I had to read it twice...so subtly thought provoking. "And the lack of benefit for the unborn can be even more invisible — so invisible that the medical sociologist doesn't notice that she's talking about it. "
Whoa, this sentence stopped me in my tracks and I had to read it twice...so subtly thought provoking. "And the lack of benefit for the unborn can be even more invisible — so invisible that the medical sociologist doesn't notice that she's talking about it. "
You know who benefits from abortions?? ABUSERS. REAL men take responsibility....IF they are TOLD about it.
I think if I were 20 again I would be gay. It just seems like it would be so much easier.
I would have missed winning the lottery with a perfect wife of almost 50 years, 2 perfect children and 4 perfect grandchildren.
But I won a multi-fecta lottery there and odds of that seem pretty low.
Play it safe, go gay.
John LGKTQ Henry
Transgenders activists have almost stolen the word "woman" by first referring to them as cisgender and now as "birthing people."
Now the activists are trying to steal the word men by referring to them as cisgender. Well, screw that. There are no cis men or women. There are, however, normal men and women. Take that word choice as you want...
I always had that suspicion that most times, when abortion was in play, if you will, it involved a man breathing a big sigh of relief. Why?... I'm going to go on another limb and say married men and women hardly ever abort their pregnancy.
I could be wrong about that. I don't know. Nobody came forward claiming to be pregnant with my baby.
If the opposite was true, would we have the courts having to get involved in compelling fathers to contribute their fair share in raising the child, under penalty of garnished wages?
It has always appeared to me that men are abortion on demand biggest friend.
I was pressured into going along with an illegal D&E abortion in 1970. My fiancée became pregnant despite a condom and timing. She was 19 and freaked. Threatened suicide. We went on to have two fine sons, but over half a century later I still cry on that little girl's due date, and I'm shedding tears now. Had we found any support or encouragement ... several lives would have been much different.
Those regrets will go with me to my grave.
Haha, very good. Yes, let's talk about how abortion benefits men.
Lately we hear only from those guys who totally, totally would have wanted that baby back in '83 when they were just starting grad school. Or when they were married to someone not-the-mother. It otherwise Just Not ready For This.
Heh.
9 out of 10 masculinists stand for #NoJudgment, #NoLabels, and empathetic inclusion of their feminist counterparts to secure reproductive rites, "burden" relief for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes in a forward-looking, ethical religion that shares/shifts responsibility, and to keep women appointed, available, and taxable.
Play it safe, go gay.
Yeah, the parade of [unPlanned] cubs enjoy the luxury of playing in gay revelry, albeit with purpose, but the lions and lionesses take personal responsibility to look after the pride.
the lack of benefit for the unborn can be even more invisible
Life is a burden, spare the baby. That said, demos-cracy is aborted at The Twilight Fringe, under an ethical standard, in darkness.
What jumped out at me is the implication in the headline quote here that the women don't have agency and pregnanacy is entirely the man's fault "in the overwhelming majority" of cases. How is that, exactly?
In any case the writer seems to be trying to have it both ways throughout her argument.
What jumped out at me is the implication in the headline quote here that the women don't have agency and pregnanacy is entirely the man's fault "in the overwhelming majority" of cases. How is that, exactly?
In any case the writer seems to be trying to have it both ways throughout her argument.
People have an amazing ability to not notice arguments when they are inconvenient to the narrative they want to tell.
Prof A: "And the lack of benefit for the unborn can be even more invisible — so invisible that the medical sociologist doesn't notice that she's talking about it. "
One of your best statements ever; and that’s saying a lot.
"We don’t often hear abortion stories from cisgender men like Mr. Lavallee, even though they are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the world’s unplanned pregnancies, and so often benefit when an abortion occurs...."
In what way, exactly? Any woman and most teenage girls can acquire and use contraception if they intend to have sex and don't want to get pregnant. Is she saying that most unplanned pregnancies are the result of rape, and therefore that the wishes of rapists ought to be something we give a damn about?
Actually, yes, sort of - or so it's always seemed to me. The Sexual Revolution, contraception, unrestricted abortion - all these "advances" remove from women the source of what used to be a great power: the power to bestow or decide not to bestow on (the vast majority of law-abiding) men something that men really wanted. Now, women are just expected to give it up.
Heinlein, noted sexual libertine, once had one of his female characters say words to this effect: "I think that if I had been raised in your culture, I would want an emerald bracelet rather than dinner and a show." We've created a society in which women are supposed to value their innate sexual power so little that they'll do it for any tiny reason, or no reason at all, with no strings, no standards, no nothing. Or else they're "not sex-positive."
The terminology used by these evil clowns is remarkable. “Benefit?” Really? In one sense the word points to the obvious: the man avoids the burdens of fatherhood. But in another sense it completely obscures the other aspect: the man is denied the blessings of fatherhood. We are left with a shriveled impersonal calculus centered on dividing —“equitably”?—some sad notional pie of “benefits” to be derived from extinguishing another life.
If that’s how “medical sociologists” frame things, I want no part of it.
A man protects innocent life. A worthless SOB murders his innocent child. That’s all I have to say about that.
"...even though they are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the world’s unplanned pregnancies...."
What?
How did we get so fucked up as a society?
And how was the LGB cohort dumb enough to throw in with the Ts and Qs?
Look, let's get this clear -- in a HUGE number of cases, it is the MAN who is demanding that the woman abort. "Her choice" has nothing to do with it. HE demands it, HE threatens to end the relationship if she does not, HE takes her to the abortion facility, and then a week later, HE dumps her, leaving her alone to pick up the pieces.
Abortion is patriarchy through and through.
"We don’t often hear abortion stories from cisgender men like Mr. Lavallee, even though they are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the world’s unplanned pregnancies, and so often benefit when an abortion occurs...."
Why is this?
1: Feminism, as practiced by its "leaders" hates men. They don't WANT men to benefit
2: The whole "if men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament" argument falls apart once you start talking about the "benefits" to men
3: The man has no choice. Taking about him as important would make this an inequity
4: The men who benefit the most from abortion are the users. Highlighting that a big source of abortion support comes from men who want to use women and then toss them away, and who would have a harder time doing so if abortion wasn't easy and promoted, would help to expose the moral wretchedness of abortion
In '99 my neighbor was going to jail. His wife asked me to drive her to the sentencing because she didn't feel she'd be in a fit state. She wasn't. On the way home, she vented her spleen about all the injustice in the world. In that spiel it came out she was 3 months pregnant and she said she was going to have to get an abortion because her husband was in jail. I didn't speak up. Couple days later I saw her and she was still fairly upset. Maybe even more upset. Only later. I realize she just come back from having her abortion.
To this day I regret not saying don't have an abortion. Not saying let me raise that baby.
"What's the basis for assuming that the man benefits?"
How can this NOT be obvious?
Male beneficiaries are all the men who do not want a child and do not want to be legally or financially or otherwise responsible for that unwanted child, especially if the pregnant partner is not a wife or long time girl friend, who, may, in many cases, have been a one-night stand or some other transitory relationship.
"But when a woman gets an abortion, it's because she's chosen it, which probably almost surely means she believes she will benefit. What's the basis for assuming that the man benefits?"
Really?
So much is wrong with that statement I couldn't unpack it all in one comment.
When I hear someone extol the virtues and benefits of abortion, I feel a strong urge to see it applied to them. Retroactively.
OTOH, there are people who should be encouraged not to reproduce.
The gadflys impersonating the handmaid's tale characters know what oppression of the patriarchy is all about - can't we all just get along.
Putting the trans-asininity aside, men are responsible for unplanned pregnancies? Did they screw themselves? Of course, not. Was there another person involved? Certainly - a woman. It's amazing how the abortion fetishists don't think women have any responsibility for their own unplanned pregnancies and that men are simply at fault, and yet argue that women need to control their own bodies, but only after they've gotten pregnant.
The linguistic impediments to understanding the author's point are reminiscent of the mud at Passchendaele.
Abortion benefits a married man who gets his lover pregnant.
So we live in a society where the ability to evade responsibility for the results of one's actions is a benefit. O-kay. It may be a benefit for the individual but hardly for society.
Nary a word about the trauma - surgical and emotional - experience by the woman from an abortion. If a miscarriage is traumatic, and it is, then there is a degree of trauma that comes from ending a pregnancy. The later the termination, the greater the hurt. I'm not referring to feelings of guilt; it's a sense of having lost something intimately connected to you. Oh. Wait, I'm a guy. I couldn't possibly know, right?
"...even though they are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the world’s unplanned pregnancies..."
How could he possibly know this? Except in the case of rape, every instance of consensual intercourse involves two persons, a more accurate description would be that men are equally responsible with their partners for all of the world's unplanned pregnancies.
Jeffrey Toobin tried to benefit from an abortion. He offered to pay for Casey Greenfield's abortion after he got her pregnant.
https://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/baby-drama-cnn-star-jeffrey-toobin-offered-casey-greenfield-money-abortion-sources-article-1.446944
It’s easy to imagine the benefit of shifting some of the focus onto men’s role in abortion.... shedding more light on the invisible benefits of abortion for men could be a powerful opportunity.
I wouldn't call these benefits, ah, "invisible." Was it really a mystery to anyone why noted cad and exhibitionist Jeffrey Toobin tried to bribe his colleague's daughter to abort their baby? I think the reason there isn't much focus on the benefits of abortion to men is that the most visible beneficiaries are such obvious scumbags. One could dig up or carefully construct more sympathetic cases, but they're still likely to get obscured by the blazing cadfishness of the Toobins of the world.
A New York Times writer provided a nauseating article a few years ago celebrating his girlfriend's abortion. He described a celebratory dinner the night before. At one point, she declined a glass of wine, "Because it might hurt the baby." I wondered how much she knew about what she was about to do. He, of course, was despicable.
More free p@say and less child support, baby!
Of course men benefit from abortion. Arguably men benefit the most, and lose and suffer the least.
It’s a total deal for men, which is why it’s such a Feminist Totem.
Wait, what?
Yeah, if the guys who don't like abortions would just, like, get with the program and realize the bennies to them . . .
How much would it take to get the average low-IQ young woman to undergo voluntary, irreversible sterilization at a young age? That would eliminate most of the problem
right there, and free them for lucrative careers in hair care or as warehouse order-pullers.
The benefits for horny guys and taxpayers are obvious.
$50 K?
Bart Hall, I wish there was more I could say, but I'm sorry for your loss.
"'"We don’t often hear abortion stories from cisgender men like Mr. Lavallee, even though they are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the world’s unplanned pregnancies, and so often benefit when an abortion occurs....' In what way, exactly? Any woman and most teenage girls can acquire and use contraception if they intend to have sex and don't want to get pregnant. Is she saying that most unplanned pregnancies are the result of rape, and therefore that the wishes of rapists ought to be something we give a damn about?"
I took it to be a reference to transgender women! Just being inclusive — at the cost of confusion.
When a man and a woman produce a pregnancy, both are responsible. In some cases, one party is not responsible for the actions that lead to the pregnancy — basically, that's about rape.
Oh, Victimhood!
Such sweet balm.
You know, sometimes when you see what you think is a great argument and wonder why it isn't getting used, it's because it unleashes even better arguments on the other side.
Let's cut them some slack.
This whole "trying to make an argument" thing is new to them.
We should celebrate their attempts to go beyond calling everyone "sexist".
...men are responsible for unplanned pregnancies?"
Uh, yeah!
"Did they screw themselves? Of course, not. Was there another person involved? Certainly - a woman."
Uh, yeah!
"It's amazing how the abortion fetishists don't think women have any responsibility for their own unplanned pregnancies and that men are simply at fault, and yet argue that women need to control their own bodies, but only after they've gotten pregnant."
Men need to be at least equally responsible for birth control, but many men assume and expect women to bear the sole responsibility for preventing unplanned/unwanted pregnancies. Men who really, really do not want to conceive offspring should proactively wear condoms, even if their partners use birth control...as all forms of birth control have failure rates.
My earlier comment about voluntary sterilization might be taken as sexist by those with malice and suspicion in their hearts, so I need to clarify:
The reward for voluntary, irreversible sterilization should be available to guys too.
cisgender men ... are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the world’s unplanned pregnancies
Planned ones too. Right?
But the number of unplanned pregnancies NOT the responsibility of cicgender men is vanishingly small.
Loaded words adding nothing to the presented "argument".
It's amazing how the abortion fetishists don't think women have any responsibility for their own unplanned pregnancies and that men are simply at fault, and yet argue that women need to control their own bodies, but only after they've gotten pregnant.
No woman must be made to feel bad about, or responsible for, anything, ever.
Tangential to what Andréa Becker is discussing/wanting to argue (judging by a cursory look at her CV), and only because I just read it yesterday, law professor Gregory Sisk's essay from Sunday in the (Minneapolis-Saint Paul) Pioneer-Press is here.
"... (W)hen some advocates for abortion dismiss unborn children as the insignificant 'product of conception' or the clinical 'fetus' that can be discarded without moral consequence, I know they are talking about me."
Moreover, amid continuous attacks on abortion rights, the urgency among researchers has logically been to demonstrate the benefits of abortion access for those who can become pregnant.
Do you think there is much grant money available for researchers who study the fathers of aborted children?
I had considered that he meant cisgender men v. transgender men (former women), but I rejected that since I didn't think a transgender man could impregnate a woman. So, it wouldn't be, "...the overwhelming majority..." it would be all of men's role in unplanned pregnancies.
“No woman must be made to feel bad about, or responsible for, anything, ever.“
I’ve heard that here before, yes?
Once you start talking about rights in a cost-benefit analysis they lose their 'rights' feel. The whole point of a right is that you don't have to justify how you exercising that right might help others. Once things are framed as cost-benefit is very easy to balance away someone's rights. It is why the phrase 'endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights," is a philosophically critical statement. The Europeans don't get this. But fundamentally a liberal, individualist democracy, where people have individual rights can only really last with a natural law justification. Social utilitarianism as the basis ultimately leads to the government granting and taking away rights, though at that point we're really talking about granted privileges. Though I'm not surprised by a medical sociologist thinking in terms of social utilitarianism.
“No woman must be made to feel bad about, or responsible for, anything, ever.“
I’ve heard that here before, yes?
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.....
When a man and a woman produce a pregnancy, both are responsible. In some cases, one party is not responsible for the actions that lead to the pregnancy — basically, that's about rape.
Except, of course, when a woman rapes a man. In that cause the poor splooge stooge is STILL responsible for child support.
When you have Rights that do not have concurrent Responsibilities you end up with results that are disastrous for society.
Women, like Ann, just do not seem to understand this at all.
There are a lot of males that dodge responsibility as well. The male man bun simp libs that are on Ann's side never take responsibility for what they do.
Progressives in general just don't take responsibility for anything they do.
I don't see the benefit.
"How about we refer to males who present as male, using the word "men." And vice versa, regarding females. Only use qualifiers for the outliers, like "gay men" or "trans women". So the impregnators are "men" (not cismen or cisgender men), and the impregnated are "women" (not pregnant people)."
This is called "biology" when talking about any species other than our own. Are we perhaps reverting to a pre-Darwin, pre-Copernican universe?
(In any case, referring to men as "males" permits one to accent the "mal" part: because [cis-] men are mal-people.)
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा