Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Enthusiastic Consent

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Enthusiastic Consent

    Ok, I have this concept floating around in my head but I can't fully form it. Maybe someone else can pick it up and run with it.

    Enthusiastic consent, as a concept, refers to whether 'yes means yes'.

    Can the same yardstick be applied to reproductive rights? The fact that I fucked you doesn't mean I give permission for you to get fertilised, I.e. It is not acceptable to lie about your contraceptive status. You are assuming that when I fucked you I was ok with that possible consequence, but did you get my "clear unambiguous enthusiastic consent' to provide you with child support for 18 years?

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    I could get behind that except the entire "enthusiastic consent" thing is rather silly and I can't endorse something that clueless about reality or human nature.
    but for that the concept is sound, no man gave consent to being financially raped for 18 years (or in some places life because child support only ends if/when the 'child' gets married.) even if they consented to raising the child themselves or with the help of the mother.
    in the case of a separation custody should logically go to the parent who can support the child on their own without aid financial or otherwise from the partner.
    "It is the greatest inequality to try to make unequal things equal." - Aristotle

    Comment


    • #3
      Angry Harry has an article on this on his UK web site and it is an interesting take on the whole thing. Go over and have a read.

      But my take on your comment is this............ when applied to unmarried people and those not in defacto relationships.....

      1. You both decide to do it and you both know the consequences of playing around if the usual precautions are not taken or they fail. She will get pregnant and if born, the baby when born is the responsibilty of both parties - the parents.

      And she is as much at fault as you are for this even though the Government , the media and the various womans' and other interest groups want to blame the male entirely for every baby born out of wedlock. Woman are never seen as responsible. They were just innocent parties who played no real part in it apparently. It is all those bad men again and now they should pay for their deeds perpetrated on these innocent females. At least this is how all these men are painted. It is almost as if she was not even present at conception.

      2. But then she decides if she will keep the unborn baby. Not you. You do not exist now.

      The law says you have no say over that as it is her unborn baby to do with as she wants until it is born or at least beyond the abortion stage. If you say - but I do not want the financial and other responsibilities of a baby and I want an abortion - the law says you still have no say over this even though it will be as much your baby as hers once it can no longer be legally aborted. She can elect to abort but you cannot.

      3. If she decides to abort the child the law says ok and, further, you have absolutely no right to stop her from doing so. She can kill your own child over your vehement objections and the law says, yeah we are fine with that, go right ahead we do not care what the father thinks. He has no rights here.
      So you have no right to require an abortion of her (nor should this be possible in practice)and no right to stop her from having an abortion. Seems then you have no rights over your own child at all pre-birth - and you do not.

      4. If she decides to have the child over your objections (you wanted her to abort because as an equal party you did not want to bear the responsibilities of children - the same responsibilities she could elect to avoid by choosing to abort ) the law says too bad. The baby you expressly did not want and which could have been aborted legally is now your responsibilty, at least financially. She is not bound to marry you - just to get paid by you for 18 years through child support laws and a court can decide how often you can see that child if you do not come to some agreement yourselves.

      5. The same can apply if you decide you both want the baby, ie. she is not bound to marry you - just to get paid by you for 18 years through child support laws and a court can decide how often you can see that child if you do not come to some agreement on sharing yourselves.

      She has all the rights and choices - not you - even though you are affected both financially and otherwise by her "yes or no" decisions. Why then if you have no say should you be responsible for the costs of a baby that she had the legal right to abort if you had an expressed desire not to have the baby.

      Clearly we should never ever force an abortion on anyone. But then you have no right to stop an abortion of your child either because the law effectively says, at that stage, it is really only her baby. The law wants it both ways. If unborn it effectively says it is not yours and you have no rights but if born you then have all the responsibilities of a parent whether you wanted the baby or not.

      What it comes down to is this. If a potential father says to a family court prior to birth, by formal submission or some other efficient means, that he wanted his baby legally aborted but the mother has decided to keep it which should of course be her clear right, the financial responsibility at that stage should then flow entirely to her unless the father agrees otherwise.

      Do you really think there would be so many single mothers around, some of them with 2, 3 and and even 4 different fathers all out of wedlock(no exaggeration here at all) if the fathers could opt out financially as outline above? There no doubt would not but then these same woman would simply not tell the fathers of the pregnancy until it became very obvious or, perhaps, not until the child was born in many cases.

      It does not matter what we as men think about any of this because it will never change except to even further favour the female.

      The Government does NOT want to bear the full financial burden of unmarried mothers who choose to have children in those circumstances when it can force the fathers to pay for it and thus reduce the costs to the taxpayers - whether the dads wanted these kids or not. Nor does the Government want to be seen to be depriving children one way or another of the funds needed to support the kids. From the Government's point of view, the more cash it can get from the fathers the less it will need to hand over in social security benefits to the mothers, if any benefits. Hence we see some very unfair child support financial formulas put in place. In many cases these place undue financial hardship on men when compared with the burden on the female who should have equal responsibility, financial and otherwise.

      If you want to screw around then you must protect yourself otherwise you may well end up paying for that quickie for the next 18 years and you can guarantee that will not change in your lifetime.
      Last edited by cam9999; 08-13-2014, 04:21 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        It also keeps men hardworking and compliant.

        Comment


        • #5
          If you don't trust the word of the woman you're about to sleep with...wear a condom when in doubt. If she insists she's on the pill or some other form of contraception, but YOU still have doubts...protect yourself.

          Excellent post, cam!

          Comment


          • #6
            My BF said he always wear condom on ALL his 'one night stand', he said he doesn't want to pay for child support.

            btw, I am anti-abortion, no way on earth I will have abortion. No, No and No, NEVER!
            If somehow one day accidently I get pregnant, I will have the baby. I am willing to risk my life and health to give birth to the baby if I have to.
            Let just say my BF run and leave me, I still don't care; I will give birth and raise the baby on my own.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Deidre View Post
              If you don't trust the word of the woman you're about to sleep with...wear a condom when in doubt. If she insists she's on the pill or some other form of contraception, but YOU still have doubts...protect yourself.

              Excellent post, cam!
              An unfortunate reality...We all need to protect ourselves from each other. With today's technology there is no such thing as an unwanted child...except as it applies to men. Things to think about.
              ethikē aretē--phronesis--eudaimonia
              virtue of character--practical/ethical wisdom--human flourishing

              It is not a battle to win but an attitude to share.
              AVFM Mission Statement
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by asiangirl View Post
                My BF said he always wear condom on ALL his 'one night stand', he said he doesn't want to pay for child support.
                Good thinking on his part, and also...there are diseases one should keep in mind if he/she has one night stands. I had a friend back in college who caught a std, from being reckless...and she'll have it forever.

                btw, I am anti-abortion, no way on earth I will have abortion. No, No and No, NEVER!
                If somehow one day accidently I get pregnant, I will have the baby. I am willing to risk my life and health to give birth to the baby if I have to.
                Let just say my BF run and leave me, I still don't care; I will give birth and raise the baby on my own.
                You're a good person, asiangirl. I used to be on the pill but I've read there's health risks to being on it, even the low dose ones...so, when if in an intimate relationship with a guy, and I found myself pregnant...I would have the baby, too. Don't want to be in that situation, though! lol



                Originally posted by Grumpy Old Man View Post
                An unfortunate reality...We all need to protect ourselves from each other. With today's technology there is no such thing as an unwanted child...except as it applies to men. Things to think about.
                Yes, it's sad and sobering, I suppose. But, it's the world in which we live. :/
                Last edited by Deidre; 12-21-2014, 05:55 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Deidre View Post
                  Good thinking on his part, and also...there are diseases one should keep in mind if he/she has one night stands. I had a friend back in college who caught a std, from being reckless...and she'll have it forever.



                  You're a good person, asiangirl. I used to be on the pill but I've read there's health risks to being on it, even the low dose ones...so, when if in an intimate relationship with a guy, and I found myself pregnant...I would have the baby, too. Don't want to be in that situation, though! lol





                  Yes, it's sad and sobering, I suppose. But, it's the world in which we live. :/
                  I did not mean to be a downer because all the women I have had the pleasure of sharing my life have not put me in the position and my three children have been such a blessing which the two women fully disclosed and I was an active and enthusiastic participant with.. Maybe that is the larger lesson from those who would take advantage.

                  Note: I'm not exactly being honest here...something I rarely share, my oldest son my fourth child, whom I held once in his life; his mother decided for reasons I do understand chose to exclude me from his life. It had nothing to do with anything I did but more she found a man to love and care for her. That is another story for another day. I hope he is well.
                  Last edited by Grumpy Old Man; 12-21-2014, 06:23 AM.
                  ethikē aretē--phronesis--eudaimonia
                  virtue of character--practical/ethical wisdom--human flourishing

                  It is not a battle to win but an attitude to share.
                  AVFM Mission Statement
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Grumpy Old Man View Post
                    I did not mean to be a downer because all the women I have had the pleasure of sharing my life have not put me in the position and my three children have been such a blessing which the two women fully disclosed and I was an active and enthusiastic participant with.. Maybe that is the larger lesson from those who would take advantage.
                    It's so nice to read/hear stories such as yours, I'm happy for you that things have worked out as they have.

                    I've only had sex in monogamous relationships, I'm not one to sleep around, and am always up front with men I've dated letting them know that I'm not on anything. It is so very disheartening to know that there are women who lie about that, ''trick'' the guy...and end up pregnant. The sad part is the child is the one who will suffer the most in such scenarios, should an 'unwanted' pregnancy occur.

                    noticed your edit: I see; guess she had her reasons. (And you weren't being a downer, btw. lol)
                    Last edited by Deidre; 12-21-2014, 06:48 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      No, because it's not about any sort of consistent logic. It is just about removing culpability from women.

                      And enthusiastic consent is not "yes means yes". It's yes means no. It's everything means no. It's everything is a rape.
                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_sY2rjxq6M

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by cam9999 View Post
                        Angry Harry has an article on this on his UK web site and it is an interesting take on the whole thing. Go over and have a read.

                        But my take on your comment is this............ when applied to unmarried people and those not in defacto relationships.....

                        1. You both decide to do it and you both know the consequences of playing around if the usual precautions are not taken or they fail. She will get pregnant and if born, the baby when born is the responsibilty of both parties - the parents.

                        And she is as much at fault as you are for this even though the Government , the media and the various womans' and other interest groups want to blame the male entirely for every baby born out of wedlock. Woman are never seen as responsible. They were just innocent parties who played no real part in it apparently. It is all those bad men again and now they should pay for their deeds perpetrated on these innocent females. At least this is how all these men are painted. It is almost as if she was not even present at conception.

                        2. But then she decides if she will keep the unborn baby. Not you. You do not exist now.

                        The law says you have no say over that as it is her unborn baby to do with as she wants until it is born or at least beyond the abortion stage. If you say - but I do not want the financial and other responsibilities of a baby and I want an abortion - the law says you still have no say over this even though it will be as much your baby as hers once it can no longer be legally aborted. She can elect to abort but you cannot.

                        3. If she decides to abort the child the law says ok and, further, you have absolutely no right to stop her from doing so. She can kill your own child over your vehement objections and the law says, yeah we are fine with that, go right ahead we do not care what the father thinks. He has no rights here.
                        So you have no right to require an abortion of her (nor should this be possible in practice)and no right to stop her from having an abortion. Seems then you have no rights over your own child at all pre-birth - and you do not.

                        4. If she decides to have the child over your objections (you wanted her to abort because as an equal party you did not want to bear the responsibilities of children - the same responsibilities she could elect to avoid by choosing to abort ) the law says too bad. The baby you expressly did not want and which could have been aborted legally is now your responsibilty, at least financially. She is not bound to marry you - just to get paid by you for 18 years through child support laws and a court can decide how often you can see that child if you do not come to some agreement yourselves.

                        5. The same can apply if you decide you both want the baby, ie. she is not bound to marry you - just to get paid by you for 18 years through child support laws and a court can decide how often you can see that child if you do not come to some agreement on sharing yourselves.

                        She has all the rights and choices - not you - even though you are affected both financially and otherwise by her "yes or no" decisions. Why then if you have no say should you be responsible for the costs of a baby that she had the legal right to abort if you had an expressed desire not to have the baby.

                        Clearly we should never ever force an abortion on anyone. But then you have no right to stop an abortion of your child either because the law effectively says, at that stage, it is really only her baby. The law wants it both ways. If unborn it effectively says it is not yours and you have no rights but if born you then have all the responsibilities of a parent whether you wanted the baby or not.

                        What it comes down to is this. If a potential father says to a family court prior to birth, by formal submission or some other efficient means, that he wanted his baby legally aborted but the mother has decided to keep it which should of course be her clear right, the financial responsibility at that stage should then flow entirely to her unless the father agrees otherwise.

                        Do you really think there would be so many single mothers around, some of them with 2, 3 and and even 4 different fathers all out of wedlock(no exaggeration here at all) if the fathers could opt out financially as outline above? There no doubt would not but then these same woman would simply not tell the fathers of the pregnancy until it became very obvious or, perhaps, not until the child was born in many cases.

                        It does not matter what we as men think about any of this because it will never change except to even further favour the female.

                        The Government does NOT want to bear the full financial burden of unmarried mothers who choose to have children in those circumstances when it can force the fathers to pay for it and thus reduce the costs to the taxpayers - whether the dads wanted these kids or not. Nor does the Government want to be seen to be depriving children one way or another of the funds needed to support the kids. From the Government's point of view, the more cash it can get from the fathers the less it will need to hand over in social security benefits to the mothers, if any benefits. Hence we see some very unfair child support financial formulas put in place. In many cases these place undue financial hardship on men when compared with the burden on the female who should have equal responsibility, financial and otherwise.

                        If you want to screw around then you must protect yourself otherwise you may well end up paying for that quickie for the next 18 years and you can guarantee that will not change in your lifetime.
                        I don't think anything could ever ever be fair unless abortion is completely gone. Every man and woman needs to know this. A lot of this is in my red pill story from months and months ago. I touched up all of this stuff and I am pretty passionate about it so I am gonna go with it some more.
                        Protecting yourself does not always work and it should never end in a father not having rights to tell a woman she can't abort his baby. He should have a right to tell her NO. Just like no one can kill a baby a mother is wanting to keep, no one can kill a baby a father is wanting to keep. That is, if the world was fair. Of course it isn't.
                        If both parents want it, good.
                        If just the mother wants it, good. Man should not exist and not pay child support etc.
                        If just father wants it, good. Woman must carry child and give man the child and not be obligated to pay child support either as if she doesn't exist.
                        All this aborting babies without a father knowing, all these cases of women giving up their babies for adoption without the father knowing or getting a right to his child, are all bullshit.

                        The thing is, is that it is not impossible to change and that it will never change. It might. Things have been looking slightly more pro life lately. I mean anyone who is educated about any of it knows it is all the worst of the worst. These things are babies and the way they are killed is crazy barbaric. They can be aborted at 24 weeks in my hometown. and the large majority of the nation. It forms a heart at 4 weeks, legs at 9 weeks, a penis or vagina at 12, and babies are able to be BORN AND SURVIVE at 22. But they are still legal to kill. Men can spend over 5 months knowing they are a daddy and know the sex of their child and it can be killed still, without their knowledge. It is entirely a lack of education that women are being told who go to these clinics. Keeping women in the dark about their health care? What the hell? Keeping men in the dark about their babies being murdered? It can stop if people raise awareness about it enough. If they really know how bad it is, it can go pretty far. It has within the last few years sense a lot of clinics have been investigated with hidden cameras on fake patients.

                        https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...728&permPage=1

                        http://liveaction.org/gendercide/ <even though this bugs me because it's all about aborting girls because they are girls, they should make the same big deal about aborting boys just because they are boys, both disgusting.

                        http://liveaction.org/rosaacuna/


                        planned parenthood accepts donations to kill "black babies" they lie on the news about providing mammograms, when none of them even have mammograms, they are just a big pool of lies and are being caught in them very often. If women knew this, they wouldn't support it as much as they do right now. The laws are all about womens feelings and that is true, but it can change if people expose it more. Once abortion is illegal, things could be more fair for men as far as paying child support, having rights to their babies etc, I am sure of it. Also people should start wanting vasectomies and tubal legations to be allowed for people who are 18+.
                        It is not fair that women have no right to get their tubes tied from the ages of 18-24, but get the right to kill their offspring. I wanted my tubes tied at 18 and was turned down. I know I am happy I didn't get one because I love my kid/s. But I would have been happy with my decision if I were to do that as well. It is not fair women protest all day that no one can tell them what belongs in their uterus, when it is their son or daughter in it. But they do not care to fight to get tubal legations at the age of adulthood. It makes no sense.

                        But lately a lot of people think other people reject abortion solely because it is a religious thing, and Christians are the ones who think abortion is bad because they are all gods children. But I think those Christians sometimes discredit the ones who know it is bad, with or without religion really involved. Honestly if you know anything about human biology and understand murder is bad, you would not support abortion. So I think it is highly likely for things to change soon. That and the abortion rates are at an all time low, or they were recently.
                        Last edited by Trustory; 12-22-2014, 08:06 AM.
                        The deepest circle of hell is reserved for betrayers and mutineers.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Murder of an unborn baby only happens when men do it i.e. newspaper headline - man kills woman and unborn baby.
                          flipside: War on women continues as abortion rights rolled back.
                          From a feminist moral point of view its a glitch in the legal system. No one ever should be charged (or have added charges) for killing an unborn baby.
                          Thats if they truly do not hate men.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            If enthusiastic consent was faithfully adhered, then a lot of men would have to ability to throw women in jail.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Jack H,
                              Have to agree with you.
                              cpb brought up an excellent point, pointing out very clearly the hypocrisy involved, but...
                              Thinking on it, its not just a matter of turning the tables on that silly law. For something like what was suggested, it requires we swallow the whole bullship about "enthusiastic consent" and sorry, I cant do that. Wont do that.
                              We are a rights group, but we will only debase ourselves by accepting a seat on the Titanic with the rest of the hypocrites and haters.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X