How do women have less rights than men?

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

I want to start with 3 disclaimers.

1. This is a genuine question. I want to understand your perspective. This is not intended as an attack.

2. I am not anti abortion. I am not for abortion either. I am for people making their own choice. My personal opinion is that effective contraception should be mandatory for everyone at all times until we sort out some of the problems in our society but I'm not trying to force that on anyone.

3. I'm not here to change your stance. I am asking you to explain how you feel. I am confused and want to understand.

So here's the question. My sister came back from school all upset that she now "has less rights than a man" because "abortion rights were abolished" I could tell this really hurt her in a genuine way. But, in earnest I don't understand how that is the case or why she thinks that.

Let's set aside the fact that we live in Virginia and abortion is still legal. No one banned it. It's still exactly the same as it was. Say it was illegal to have an abortion. How does a woman have less rights than a man?

As things are with abortion being legal, it takes 2 people to have sex and start a pregnancy. Rape is illegal, no one has the right to rape so that's a valid point but not relevant here.

If abortion is legal, when a man and a woman have sex and the women gets pregnant, the woman has the choice to either trap the man in 18 years of financial slavery or kill his child. Regardless of his opinion either way. He has zero say. That strikes me that the woman has more rights than the man. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but just that's the reality of the situation.

If abortion is not legal, both the man and the woman have no choice and must become parents. That strikes me they have the same rights. (Albeit, no right to make their own choice)

If abortion is/was illegal, what right does a man have that a woman doesn't? Under what circumstances does a man have a right the woman doesn't?

Please explain that to me.

[NamerOfStars]

They don't- here in the US, at least; there are certainly places where they probably do. They have MORE. The problem is that five decades of Feminist indoctrination have left vast swathes of society utterly convinced that "woman=victim", and that's all there is to it. Consequently, ANY infringement on the rights of women, specifically, is considered an "attack" on them, regardless of the legitimacy of that infringement, or even the breadth of its application.

Consider the Nagarwala case from just the other year. I was monitoring it VERY closely, because I, like many others, expected the court to rule against her on the grounds of bodily integrity violation, which would logically open the door for a case that would protect our sons, as well as our daughters. I didn't anticipate the level of judicial cowardice we got, but oh well; it was kind of a long shot anyway. Note, however, that all the states that passed laws to that effect in the aftermath of the trial only protected girls.

From a purely social engineering standpoint, it's a masterstroke; exploiting people's natural sympathy for women to ensure they have the deck stacked in their favor, and when they're forced into serious competition with people who've had it stacked AGAINST them and lose, claim that it's due to discrimination, thereby ensuring you always have a meal ticket (because the bulk of the population sees a continued need for your shystery) and that women always feel helpless and weak, in need of your "support". From an ethical perspective, it's an abomination.

[HighValue]

1. Abortion was never in the constitution, therefore it should never have been a federally guaranteed right. It is supposed to be decided within each state. the teacher is LYING to her by telling her it was banned. Typical of liberal teachers. they lie a lot from what I have seen IRL.

2. Women actually have more legal rights than men. Less time for jail sentences for the same crime, more rights to assets during divorce, not held accountable for rape when the victim can't legally give consent. (Millions of women are guilty of rape by having sex with a man under the influence of alcohol when they meet at a bar or club and are not prosecuted.)

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

Okay, I just want to say most men who go out get drunk and have sex with someone would do the same thing dead sober.

I agree there is a double standard, but I don't agree there are millions of women raping drunk men at bars. Most of those are consensual. But, a lot of cases of men "raping" drunk women are consensual too.

I had a girl take me out of a party saying let's go have sex, it was 100% her idea. Honest truth I had wanted to for years and never asked, been at plenty of parties where she was shitfaced. Never even tried to make a totally respectful responsible approach.

But I wasn't gonna tell her no. She was dead set on it and very convincing. So we did. She didn't want a relationship, so she set me up with her friend. Probably the third date her friend asks me "so why did you date rape Thumbalina?" (Name has been replaced with fictional character)

And I was like... excuse me? Who told you that. Long story short the first gal cleared it all up. She told her friend she was drunk and regreted it. Her friend assumed that meant I took advantage of her but she solved the problem by being honest that it was her idea.

I think we should either ban drunk sex unless there is prior (sober) written consent or hold people accountable for their own (drunk) choices.

Rape is bad. And wrong. And illegal. But if you give consent it isn't rape. Even if you regret it afterwords.

We need to either say drunk conscent doesn't count, or that it counts the same and should be held to the same standards as sober consent.

I'm not a cop. I don't carry a breathalyzer. How am I supposed to draw the line on who is too drunk to think clearly and make their own choices?

Its absolutely wrong to take advantage of drunk people. But if it was their idea that isn't taking advantage. That is just doing what they asked you to.

[Anonymous]

Men have the right to refuse the physical use of their bodies to keep another alive.
Women, when abortion is outlawed, don’t get that right. As a matter of fact, she is told that once she chooses to share her body with another, she must also be willing to share her body with others, whether she likes it or not.
Men are not asked to do this.
Is it really equal to force both men and women into parenthood when the man doesn’t have to subject his body to the same things the woman does?
Is there a reason why we ignore the pregnancy and childbirth itself in these discussions about equality?

[Agagagagaga]

“Men are not asked to do this.”

Because we can’t honey. We don’t have a uterus for the fetus to gestate in. 🤦‍♂️

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

So, really the issue isn't with the law but with biology?

I could say women have more rights because I don't have the right to have a child by myself via donar.

Women definitely do have the right to refuse the physical use of their bodies to keep another alive. No one can legally make you pregnant against your will. You have the right to refuse to get pregnant.

If abortion is/was banned you just wouldn't have the right to back out of the decision. Men and women would both be obligated to care for the child they created.

If you are saying it's unfair that the lady has to carry the baby inside of her and give birth to it and the man doesn't, I agree. But that isn't a new thing. That is a biological injustice that has always been the same.

So, I understand how that is unfair. But I don't understand how that is new or different based on the Supreme Court decision to let the issue of abortion be decided democratically.

Personally, I would rather suffer for 9 months and then have to raise a kid than have to work extra hours as a construction worker for 20 years to pay the bills. I would definitely say that many men do not have the right to refuse the physical use of their bodies to keep their child alive.

And, no one is saying they shouldn't have to pay their fair share.

Essentially you are saying "its not fair that women have babies and men don't, therefore we should have ADDITIONAL legal rights."

That is a fine stance. It has been that way for a long time. But that's "a woman's right to choose" men have never had that.

So I still don't see how you would have less rights. You would suddenly have the same rights, (with the only difference being biology,) where you used to have more rights.

Your point is valid. But your frustration seems to be with biology and not anything to do with equal rights under the law.

[Opinion Owner]

@Agagagagaga
Did you read the words that preceded those ones? What about the ones that followed. I believe you would have understood my point a little better had you read that entire post. 🤔

Maybe

[Opinion Owner]

@lost_in_the_woods
“I could say women have more rights because I don't have the right to have a child by myself via donar.”
That’s not actually true. I didn’t know for sure so I looked it up. Apparently, single men can find themselves a surrogate to have a baby for them. So you do actually have that right.
“You have the right to refuse to get pregnant.” Let’s say the condom breaks, do you believe my mere refusal to get pregnant will work to prevent it from happening? Because that would be AWESOME.
“Men and women would both be obligated to care for the child they created.” Because forced parents are the best parents. 🙄
“If you are saying it's unfair that the lady has to carry the baby inside of her and give birth to it and the man doesn't, I agree.” I don’t think it’s unfair. It is what it is. Like you said. This is how it’s always been. My issue arises when people who
will never have to subject themselves to pregnancy and childbirth telling me all the things I should and shouldn’t do when it comes to pregnancy and childbirth. I will never, ever, try too tell you how to deal with your erectile disfunction or prostate cancer. The joys of bodily autonomy.
Abortion should be decided personally. Not federally. Not at the state level. Personally. The people involved. The lives it directly affects. That is where the decisions should begin and end.

Cont…

[Opinion Owner]

@lost_in_the_woods
Cont…
“Personally, I would rather suffer for 9 months and then have to raise a kid than have to work extra hours as a construction worker for 20 years to pay the bills.”
Wait! So if I go through the pregnancy and give birth, I don’t have to work to support the child for the next 20 years? I got ripped off man. I worked after I had children. Apparently I was a fool.
“I would definitely say that many men do not have the right to refuse the physical use of their bodies to keep their child alive.” And for the record, working to pay for your financial obligations isn’t the same as someone physically living off of your body. This is just an attempt to minimize all that pregnancy and childbirth is.
The only reason you don’t see it as “less rights” is because it’s not you. I’m sure you would object to forced organ donations, would you not? Why? (Unless you support forced organ donation?🤔)
I’m not frustrated by the biology of it all. As I already said, it’s the people who want to regulate my biology that I find frustrating.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

Thanks. That was really helpful.

Now I understand. Some people only think about themselves. That clears it right up. I could respond to each point but like I said, I'm truly not here to change your mind. I agree it should be a personal choice. I do think the man should have the legal right to opt out same as the lady does, but I'm sure you still think you are entitled to his income.

But I will say, preventing a person from changing their biology or ending another humans life isn't regulating their biology any more than preventing murder is telling people how to live or regulating firearms.

You just have to be more honest about what you want. You want the explicit right to make the choice to have a child or not, without the fathers consent or imput, because you are the one who has to squeeze it out.

You think having the same (lack of) legal rights is unfair because we have different biology.

Honest arguments are actually more powerful. It's not that I don't understand your points, it's not that they aren't good points.

It's just that you are twisting words to make it out that you have less rights when the reality is you want women to have an additional right that men don't.

Maybe you can't even see that. But when it comes down to it we as humans can not control that some people have wombs and some don't. That is not "unequal rights" that is biology.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

The argument to say people with wombs should be the ones to decide weather to carry a pregnancy or not even though it effects three lives only one of which is their own is a valid argument. But even if you ignore everything but the fact that it's your womb, that's what you're demanding. It's an ADITIONAL right that women are used to having. But if you can't see past your own wants you don't even realize that men have never had that when it's taken away you feel you have less when really, now it's the same.

Its like I neighbor had a lawn, and my neighbor didn't have a lawn. Then they made a rule that all lawns must be mowed (which is enforced many places) and I cried that I had less rights than my neighbor because he doesn't even have to mow his lawn.

Its... childish at best.

The argument should be, it's my lawn and I will do what I want with it. Not, it's so unfair, he doesn't even have a lawn to mow so now I'm unfairly oppressed.

Believe it or not, you can give up your ability to get pregnant in the same way I could move somewhere with no lawn. You absolute have the right to not get pregnant. If you can't figure that out talk to your doctor. They will explain your options.

The question is, should women who fail to plan ahead or change their mind have the sole discretion to end the life of someone else's child as well as their own?

I'm not here to answer that. But you really haven't convinced me that banning abortion gives women less rights than men. It gives us the same rights, you just think that is unfair.

I agree that making irresponsible people who don't want kids raise a child is a bad idea. But hey, maybe now you can see why a man should have the same ability to cancel all obligations that a woman does.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

I don't see it being a problem for me personally, but you're wrong about the reason. I'm used to suffering, I don't feel so bad for moms because a lot of them choose to do it over 2 or three times so it must be worth it. I don't see it being a problem for me because I know how to keep it in my pants and not get in that situation.

That's the other thing abortion screamers ignore, Like, "what if the condom broke?" What if you didn't have irresponsible sex with only one potentially ineffective form of birth control?

That could solve so much for so many people. And it seems like the best option to me, because as a man it's always been my only option when women have had the right to choose for both parents after thr fact.

I believe strongly in equal rights for both sexes. That's why my personal belief is that either abortion should be illegal OR men should also be able to opt out of any responsibility. No one can legally make you pregnant. But if women get the right to choose to bail at that stage men should too.

If abortion is legal, you have no more right to take his income than he has to make you suffer pregnancy for a few months.

But you really helped me see your stance. You think it should be all your choice for all three, so therefor having the same options as a man is unfair.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

It's not really an issue of abortion. We agree on abortion. It's an issue of consideration or what I call baby think. "No fair, he is playing with the toy I want because mom made us take turns"

No, actually, that is fair. You just don't like it.

Better to say "hey, I want to have that, I think I should get the barbie doll because I'm a girl".

Or "I have the uterus so I should get to decide for the three of us"

I think that's a valid argument, but trying to twist that around to saying it's unfair to you to reduce you to the same rights a man has always had is a weak argument at best.

Life and biology aren't fair, so you want special rights to avoid those consequences, otherwise you think it's unfair. That makes sense, but if you can't handle that sometimes it doesn't work that way, thank God for making you a woman because guys are straight up used to having to work while women get free drinks. That's just life. I'm not demanding the right to not have to pay for mine and calling it sexist oppression.

[Opinion Owner]

@lost_in_the_woods
“I could respond to each point but like I said, I'm truly not here to change your mind.” He says before taking 4 pages to reply. 🤔
“I do think the man should have the legal right to opt out same as the lady does, but I'm sure you still think you are entitled to his income.” Don’t be so sure about the things you are “sure” about.
Regardless of the pages and pages you wrote out attempting to not change my mind, the fact remains that men will never be forced to use their body to sustain the life of another like they are trying to force women to do. You make a shit load of assumptions about my position that aren’t really grounded in fact, so I’m good to move on now.
Bye 👋

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

Well, that was a really hostile way to say you agree with me.

If you read my reply you would see I didn't try to change your mind because I actually agree with your stance.

I'll call it a win win.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

The reality is men don't have a uterus and that is unfair.

But both men and women should have the same rights when it comes to abortion because it effects both of them for at least 18 years not just one of them for 9 months.

If you think both parties should be able to opt out, you support equal rights. If you think neither party should be able to opt out you support equal rights.

If you think one party should be able to opt out and one should not you don't support equal rights.

The way it has been for 40+ years was that women had more rights than men. It's still that way in most of the country.

Some places have banned either party from opting out and a lot of people disagree. They have valid concerns, but saying men have more rights than women because now neither one can opt out is just childish whining.

If you think it's unfair that men don't have to give birth to have a baby, you're right. But that isn't a legal issue that is a biological one.

[Opinion Owner]

@lost_in_the_woods
You need a win? It’s all yours 👍

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

Honestly, I just want my sister to know she is as strong and free as any man.

The sad truth is I can't take on the government by myself and win, but if we can stop making it me vs you and start making it us vs the government we can all have more rights, more freedom, more wealth, more happiness.

I hate the idea that she somehow has less rights than me. She doesn't. And I don't want her to feel that way.

But you helped me understand the problem is a lot of people believe their situation is unfair and rightly so, and then jump straight from that to saying it must be inequality.

I wish it was so simple. But the truth is guys never had that right. Women did and now they don't in some places. I don't have a strong stance on abortion either way, but I do have a strong stance on equality for all. I am more worried about the fact that my cat has essentially no rights under human laws when she is Honestly so much more capable of being independent than I am. I really care about equal rights, so it hurts me to know my sister feels like she isn't given the same rights as a man.

I guess the solution is to explain that biology and the government are two separate problems. We can't change biology. And so far as the government goes, guys don't have any more rights than women do when it comes to abortion. In fact, we have always had less. Now women have less than they did so we have the same.

But most importantly, no one took away the right to have an abortion. The Supreme Court stopped enforcing the decision to tell legislators they can't make laws against it. That's totally different. They didn't ban anything, they put the power in the VOTERS hands. As it should be.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

If you want abortion to be legal, elect state lawmakers who agree and it will be.

If that isn't the right to choose, I don't know what is. Democracy is supposed to work that way. It's not supposed to be a small group of people in fancy robes telling the rest of us how to live. So I actually agree with the courts decision to put the choice back in the hands of voters.

And for the record, if 51% of the population is female, and they all go vote for legislators who will make/keep abortion legal, that's whatt will happen.

You know, unless you are one of those "crazies" who believes in election fraud.

Women actually DO have the power to choose. They just have to do it democratically now.

I'm not here to fight you. I'm here to figure out why you think you somehow have less rights than a man and how I can explain to my sister that she is powerful and actually does have the right to choose.

Abortion is literally still legal. I only care because she is feeling like she is somehow less free or important or empowered than a man and I don't want her to feel that way.

It's the same rule for all of us. And, it's literally still allowed. It's literally still 100% the woman's choice and the man gets no say. Clearly women have more rights in that situation than men.

I don't have a problem with that. I really don't care about abortion because I don't see that being a situation I get myself into. My sister is gay, so I'm not sure why she cares either...

I just want to understand and get this straightend out so women aren't walking around feeling less when they have every right a man does and sometimes even more.

[Anonymous]

Uninformed. Women have always had the exact same rights as men under the 5th and 14th Amendments. Abortion rights were not abolished.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

That's the honest truth right there.

My sister also thinks tucker carlson hates gay people because he supports the Hungarian presidents foreign policy decisions.

She is gay, she is in hungary, I get that orban or whatever his name is makes her life harder than it needs to be, but that doesn't mean anyone who agrees with him on anything hates gay people too.

I sent her a clip of Tucker interviewing a lesbian about how she was banned from Facebook for her anti-pedophilia group. She didn't rely. =/

Tucker doesn't hate gay people. He had Glen Greenwald on the show all the time. They are obviously good friends.

But man that propaganda train is strong.

I just want ladies to know they have every right I do and they have my encouragement to use them as they please. I don't want anyone to feel less.

[Chazmatazz269]

They don’t. All rights are guaranteed equally by the US Constitution. Women actually have MORE privileges, and if you believe in “natural rights” they actually have MORE rights. If legislation suggests to you “rights” or privileges, then women have MORE rights and privileges. They also have fewer responsibilities as required by law in order to receive the same rights and privileges. The curious thing that most women don’t want to address, let alone admit, is that despite their claims that feminism has “always been about quality” feminists have NEVER demanded equal responsibilities and sacrifices for women, OR equal rights and privileges for men. If they’re not fighting for those things, they are NOT about equality. Since they never have and they never will, feminism has never been about equality and it never will be.

[Anonymous]

Pretty much the only thing that's going to be brought up is abortion. It's all they can bring up.

But they kind of refuse to accept that it's a heavily debated issue, and this is not something made up my MEN... because there are WOMEN who are also pro-life. They always forget this!

The debate is about the human fetus having the same human rights as anyone else, and we just want to err on the side of caution, whether it can feel pain or not. These abortion restrictions were not made out of malice, but certain feminists and activists want to make it about malicious sexism imposed by "sexist old white men telling women what they can/can't do with their bodies."

It's ridiculous.
I just don't see what they have to gain by "controlling women's bodies," even if that was their intention. It's not even an absolute ban anyway... not here in Florida at least.

[jshm2]

Your sister is wrong.

Abortion "rights" are little to do with women's rights, and more to do with children's rights and human rights legal protections.

The state recognises a pregnancy as an innocent human life. One with the potential of being a taxpaying citizen. Even if it has flaky, shitty parents. It takes both parents to create a child, therefore it's wrong that one gets to make the choice without involving the state laws.

[jimmy2]

I so glad Jesus brought the woman up to the man. It not what one person is more than the other. In the Bible the man will be judge on his marriage and family. More responseabilty but not more value. Both are equal worth each other

Abortions is a part of damage to a worman. I never found a woman who had am abortion that was happy and blessed. They were sad and depressed.

[NewsReader]

Excellent points. Women do have more "Legal" rights than men. So their whining makes no sense. Men are the ones who should be protesting for equal rights since we are disadvantaged.

[Sandeeppingping]

They don't bruv😂😂😂😂some women want killing babies and not taking responsibility for your actions as a right wtf😂😂

[joeldalton]

They don’t have less rights. Any woman (or manlet) who tells you otherwise is lying.

[MiseriaCantareAFI]

The supreme court literally just told them what they can and can't do with their own body

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

No. Actually that isn't true at all.

The court never banned abortion.

The court previously ruled that all states must allow abortion regardless of their own democratic (small d) legislation.

They then reversed that decision, which in no way banned abortion. It simply gave the voters the right to choose whether to allow abortion or not through elections.

The court never banned abortion. The court simply walked themselves back to their own lane. Their job is not to decide what is legal, their job is to decide if a law has been broken.

For abortion to be banned, state legislators must pass a law to ban it. For that to happen, the people in that state must elect legislators who want to ban it.

Texas has a ban. Not because of the Supreme Court, but because most Texans WANT abortion to be illegal and so they vote for people who agree with them.

California will never have an abortion ban because their voters want it to be legal.

The court didn't tell anyone what to do with their bodies. You are simply uninformed.

The court actually told states and voters they weren't allowed to democratically pass laws against abortion which was never actually the authority of the court to begin with.

They in no way banned abortion. They simply ruled that courts do not have the constitutional authority to tell the states what laws to make.

Texas VOTERS banned abortion in Texas. Because that's how democracy works.

If you don't like that, you gotta change the PEOPLES minds or move to a state where you would be in the majority.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

The court did not ban abortion. Saying that just outs you as not understanding what happened at all. But trust me, abortion is still legal in most states, and the ones that don't allow it have those laws because that is what the majority of voters want.

The court does not make laws. They simply adjudicate whether or not a law has been broken. Ruling that abortion must be legal was the court overstepping its bounds, so they walked that back and let the legislators decide as the constitution dictates.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

Also, for the record, men aren't allowed to have abortions in Texas either.

So what is the right Texan men have that women don't?

[Anonymous]

They don't. Technically women actually have more rights than men, at least in many states.

[Anonymous]

They don't women have the same or more rights.

[Anonymous]

Because most laws are made my men.

[Lost_in_the_Woods]

You have the right to vote same as I do.

Vote for women. Then women will make the laws. There are actually slightly more women than men so you have more collective voting power than we do.

Empower other women, I actually agree that we should have more female lawmakers, but do keep in mind that many of our current female lawmakers are strongly opposed to abortion. Don't think that just because they are women they will agree with you on everything. Doesn't work that way with men either. 🤣

But that's a sepetate issue.

If my mom makes a rule that both me and my sister are required to take care of the dog we wanted, that doesn't give my sister more rights than me, or me less rights than her because it was made by a woman.

The court decision was voted on by men and women. It was not in fact a law, and it was decided by both genders.

So that definitely doesn't make a case for men having more rights than women.