Quote: (10-17-2014 04:25 AM)turkishcandy Wrote:
I share every common manosphere beliefs, except for abortion. I'm in my early 20s and like most of you I've chosen a path of fuck&dump style dating and I intend to do so until I no longer can (I hope until my mid 40s). What I don't get is why a group of men who have mostly dedicated themselves to bachelor life are against abortion. When you knock a girl up by accident, you have 3 choices.
1) Marry her, be a family man and give up your freedom. Spend your resources while doing so.
2) Don't marry her. If she sues you, pay child support for a child you will never see. If she doesn't sue, live the rest of your life knowing you have a child somewhere you abondoned in every way.
3) Get abortion.
Now why would a bachelor guy want to eliminate the 3rd option for himself? I dated girls in countries where abortion was illegal or/and condemned (like Poland) and also in countries where abortion was okay or/and legal ( like Turkey, Serbia). The former is just a pain in the ass. A broken condom can lead to your life getting screwed unless you can convince a Catholic girl to come with you to Germany to have an abortion without her parents knowing. Dating in a country where abortion is a last resort but still a resort is a load off your mind when you are rawdogging or blowing up condoms like balloons.
Guys in the manosphere who are against abortion are mostly concerned with female empowerment, promiscuity and ''murder'', but I sincerely think you guys lack a pragmatic approach to this issue. You might thank to god abortion is still legal and morally okay to have in your country when that day comes and your random hookup knocks on your door with a positive pregnancy test.
Yeah. I was, and am to a degree, the same way from about 14 until my mid to later 20s. I just turned 30, if that helps.
I have always known that the whole pro-life v. pro-choice argument is flawed. If you look at bio-ethics the argument boils down to when we, as a group that can be defined as consisting of a minimum of two human lives (mother +baby) to the entire social group and every strata within, define a human life to be morally valuable.
That is what the bio/medical ethics of it all says. But isn't that kinda a fucked up way to look at it?
Well...maybe or maybe not.
We routinely determine when and how and why a human life shouldn't be considered morally valuable. We do this with our enemies or with capital punishment, for example. But the difference, and I hate the word innocent in these arguments because we really don't know if that fetus will be morally good or bad and it can't be innocent or guilty when it lacks the ability, is that we are dealing with a minimum of two human lives where one is in complete control over every element of the other.
If an abortion is needed to save the mother, then I don't think most pro-life people are going to argue against it in that case. I sure wouldn't. I live in the south and I have never seen any hardcore lifer argue that abortions shouldn't be allowed when the mother will die or in the case of rape or incest. That is all a liberal fantasy as far as I can tell...and I am a liberal.
Where it starts to bother me, and this is really since I have gotten older and thought seriously about what it would mean to have a family other than simply freaking out over a broken condom or a gf missing a period, is how callous women seem when discussing it.
So many western women talk about abortion as if they are getting a haircut because, "I just don't have the time/patience/energy/ of having long hair and OMG...it totes will ruin how beautiful my awesome self is..grrl power."
The fact that western women can be so callous with human life is really fucking disturbing to me on a moral level. Even more, they as individuals and as a group not only have the power to carry (us men create it) a life but they have no problem destroying it over casual reasons.
It seems to me that you can make a naturalist argument for why women should have this moral right. But then I would want to argue that us men, being stronger and being the protectors and providers, should have the same moral rights over women. I am not exactly sure how to make that argument but it has been made before in history based on naturalism and related philosophies.
I am tired cause I haven't slept, so this may not be making as much sense as I hope but I have wondered based on what I wrote above if the future won't see children throwing off the paternalism of their mothers in the same way that women through off the patriarchy of men and if or when this happens maybe children would subjugate women and outlaw abortion in similar ways to how women are now trying to subjugate men through their hypergamist alpha/beta paradigm.
Wow. That got long. Simpler version. I largely agree.
Women these days think they can shop for a man like they shop for a purse or a pair of shoes. Sorry ladies. It doesn't work that way.
Women are like sandwiches. All men love sandwiches. That's a given. But sandwiches are only good when they're fresh. Nobody wants a day old sandwich. The bread is all soggy and the meat is spoiled.
-Parlay44 @
http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-35074.html