Abortion is a done deal

[French Patriot]

17 hours ago, Machjo said:

I don't think you understand the political reality in Canada. Abortion will not be criminalized in the forseeable future. In other words, when I say I'm pro-life, I mean it within the present poltical reality, that we should toughen our sexual-assault laws to deter unwanted pregnancies in the first place. For example, we could consider imposing a heavy fine if it's proved on a balance of probabilities that a person coerced another into sex and beyond reasonable doubt that they had sex.

They hardly investigate many assault and rape charges and treat our victims to more victimization.

Canada is good, but we have a ways to go. As any victim of a pedophile priest.

Regards

DL

 

[French Patriot]

17 hours ago, Machjo said:

self-exclusion from fornication

Good luck selling that.

Even the ancients, who were a lot brighter than we think, who tried to sanctify sex, failed.

If people will not abstain for their gods, they will not for themselves.

I think that either the new generations of the males you put stats up on above are either really wimpy these days or my generation was a lot tougher.

Even not the best sex was good sex.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

17 hours ago, Goddess said:

I think they should just go all the way and make child support mandatory from the 6th week of pregnancy, since it's a human already.

They should allow 6 week old fetuses to be insured and women should be able to collect if they miscarry.

They should not be able to deport anyone pregnant, since it is a US citizen.

Who is going to be charged with murder for all those fertilized embryos that get thrown in the garbage after IVF treatments?  The couple? The doctor?  The lab techs?

If you're gonna do it, do it all the way, then.

The tax payers are not interested in supporting unwanted children who will just add to the social costs because of their unhappiness levesl, povertu and criminal tendencies.

Have you not noticed how that group is over represented in our jails?

Do you want more neighbours of that ilk? Are you willing to pay a lot more in taxes to bring them to our normal standards? 

I am not as the results are dismal.

BTW. The embryo or zygote is a potential human from the moment the egg reacts to fertilization. Not at some other arbitrary time.

How many women are you ready to see die from botched abortion procedures in some dirty back room?

What Number of babies saves equals what number of dead women?

Regards

DL

[Goddess]

1 minute ago, French Patriot said:

The tax payers are not interested in supporting unwanted children who will just add to the social costs because of their unhappiness levesl, povertu and criminal tendencies.

Have you not noticed how that group is over represented in our jails?

Do you want more neighbours of that ilk? Are you willing to pay a lot more in taxes to bring them to our normal standards? 

I am not as the results are dismal.

BTW. The embryo or zygote is a potential human from the moment the egg reacts to fertilization. Not at some other arbitrary time.

How many women are you ready to see die from botched abortion procedures in some dirty back room?

What Number of babies saves equals what number of dead women?

Regards

DL

You're preaching to the choir. 

[French Patriot]

1 minute ago, Goddess said:

You're preaching to the choir. 

I was not sure given the tone of your post and some of the weird comments and misuse of the term "murder".

Regards

DL

[Goddess]

I was pointing out the idiocy of "no abortions under any circumstances".  There will certainly be no consequences to men - like having to pay child support from the 6th week of pregnancy.  And the pro-lifers don't seem to care about the millions of fertilized embryos that are thrown in the garbage from IVF treatments, which tells me they are not truly pro-life, just anti-woman.

[Machjo]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

I was pointing out the idiocy of "no abortions under any circumstances".  There will certainly be no consequences to men - like having to pay child support from the 6th week of pregnancy.  And the pro-lifers don't seem to care about the millions of fertilized embryos that are thrown in the garbage from IVF treatments, which tells me they are not truly pro-life, just anti-woman.

Though I'm pro-life, I'm not pro-life in the conventional sense of necessarily wanting to ban abortions, but rather in the sense of wanting to deter unwanted pregnancies in the first place. From a male perspective in a country in which banning abortions is out of the question for most, male reproductive rights apply only before conception (unlike female reproductive rights that apply both before and after conception). For that reason, if men truly want to better protect their reproductive rights without banning abortion, it makes more sense to focus on laws around sexual intercourse itself (the final cause of unwanted pregnancies).

I do think that many of our laws ignore the complexities of sexual coercion (a potential source of unwanted pregnancies) especially when a male is the victim and a woman the aggressor due to ignorance about the fact that sexual coercion is over 90% psychological and less than 10% physical; so yes, a woman can easily subdue a stronger man. Sexual coercion (whether verbal or emotional, whether involving unwanted touching or blackmail, whether involving a weapon, alcohol or other drugs, or the use of physical force) are at epidemic levels when you look at the stats. As for the comment about men suffering coercion being wimpy that French Patriot made above, consider the impact of childhood sexual abuse on the adult. Some think the effects magically disappear at maturity. Even the stats for childhood sexual abuse are surprisingly high and a victim of childhood abuse will not always have learnt how to defend his boundaries in adulthood, which in turn can make him more vulnerable to coercion in adulthood too

Also, while coercion in adulthood can sometimes sit on the' low' end of the spectrum (begging, nagging, pouting, unwanted touching, which can trigger panic attacks in an adult victim of childhood abuse), I've  experienced it on the medium end  (sexual assault through the use of physical force, though I admit I'd contributed negligently to makiing myself vulnerable to it) and even on the high end too (threat of suicide with a knife to the stomach) as an adult. As strange as it might seem, I  actually found the low-end coercion more traumatic than the sexual assault through the use of physical force probably because I was already emotionally numbed by the time I'd experienced the physical assault a few years later.

My two greatest fears from the sexual assault through the use of physical force were contracting an STI and impregnation. Just because a man is physically stronger than a woman, he still doesn't normally expect a woman to sexually assault him, so she can exploit the element of surprise if he negligently makes himself vulnerahble. It takes more than a few seconds to recognize what's happening, decide whether to give consent going forward and if not, then to resist, acknowledge counter-resistance, and then decide how much force he's prepared to use, how much he's prepared to risk causing physical injury to the woman, and how to proceed to fight a woman so as to cause her minimal injury while she is fighting back. Ironcially, had she punched or kicked me, I might have reacted sooner and with more force; but because she was not trying to inflict any physical injury on me, I needed more time to process what was happening and decide how much force was appropriate. In hindsight, given the risk of impregnation and of contracting an STI, I probably had every legal right to use lethal force if necessary; but at the time, I was stunned by what was happening. I was confused since I'd never experienced anything like it before. The assault could all be over within seconds before a man  even has the time to process all of that information, especially if he's sleep-deprived for example. And yes, a man can experience arousal, an erection, orgasm, and ejaculation without consent.

The threat of suicide by stabbing herself in the stomach was the worst form I'd ever experienced in my life even if the woman was pointing the knife at her own stomach. It's a cruel mind game to think that your refusal to do something that's well within your right to refuse could cause another person's death, especially if she's acting like she actually could do it. No I would not have been to blame, but it's still a terrible mind game to experience. In that particular case, she was not coercing me into sex but rather to keep me in a sexually and emotionally abusive relatinship.

Then there's the issue of sexual assault being difficult to prove when everything surrounding the assault other than the assault itself is legal. Furthermore, once a male victim impregnates a female aggressor, he will have no say in the pregnancy from that point on. That means that male reproductive rights must start before conception, not after conception.

I'll take the example of Canada's laws against sodomy up until the 1960s. Not one charge ever involved an act of sodomy between two consenting adults in a private room with neither reporting the other to the police even though it was still technically illegal. I presume that the reason has to do with the fact that such incidences would never have even made it onto the police radar. Each and every case involved an act in public or one in which either participant reported the other to the police. Some US states still have fornication in the books as a misdemeanor offence punishable by a small fine of a few hundred dollars, usually applied when the prosecutor suspects sexual assault, prostitution,  or solicitation for sex but can't prove that beyond reasonable doubt.

Now imagine a hypothetical scenario in which fornication were an offence in Canada punishable by a heavy fine (let's say maximum 2000.00 dollars (to double for each repetition of the offence)). It would probably end up working like the old sodomy laws. In other words, whenever it would involve two consenting adults in private, the police would have no way to even know about it. However, this would keep people on their toes. The moment one partner seems hesitant or even mildly resistant, the other would now have a reason to think twice about pushing the matter because if she reports him (or he her), he could pay a heavy fine if they can prove even just fornication. Sure a woman could make a false accusation, but the man would be getting involved knowing the rules ahead of time. For good measure, we could even guarantee the accused the right to an inquisitorial trial without rape-shield protection so as to ensure adequate due process against the falsely accused.

Even if a woman sexually assaulted a man and then accused him of assault, he'd have little to worry about since a prosecutor would still need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he'd at least consented to the act. If a man fears that a woman could make a false accusation, then don't consent to sleeping with her: Sex isn't a fundamental human right. The same would apply in reverse if a woman tries to pressure a man into sex.

Also, stricter laws around different addictions could help too. For example, some studies have shown that gambling addicts face a higher risk of entering prostitution (a risk factor in unwanted pregnancies obviously). Adopting stricter self-exclusion laws requiring a casino to scan ID cards and fingerprints could help to keep the self-excluded out. This in turn could reduce the risk of a gambling addict gambling her way to prostitution and so increase  the risk of an unwanted pregnancy.

Of course I'm writing this from a male perspective (reproductive rights prior to intercourse) rather than from the female one (reproductive rights both before and after iintercourse); but I do think that stricter laws around sex itself would deter more sexual assaults and other forms of sexual trauma and this in turn would probably calm relations between the sexes in our modern Western culture. It would also reduce the need to ban abortions since fewer unwanted pregnancies would occur in the first place.

[French Patriot]

6 hours ago, Machjo said:

if men truly want to better protect their reproductive rights

If they did want to protect that right, and their children, it is not shown when 50% of all households are manned by single women.

I think women can do a better job of protection reproduction than deadbeat dads, given the vile male history.

Regards

DL

[Machjo]

6 minutes ago, French Patriot said:

If they did want to protect that right, and their children, it is not shown when 50% of all households are manned by single women.

I think women can do a better job of protection reproduction than deadbeat dads, given the vile male history.

Regards

DL

So why so many single moms? If it's because of too many cases of sexual coercion (whether men coercing women or vice versa), then making fornication an offence punishable by a heavy fine that doubles for each repetition of the offence could serve as a more effective deterrent given how much easier it is to prove than assault and other forms of coercion. Such a law might deter some cases of careless sex too.

If it's because of too many addicts selling sex, then more effective regulation of the gambling, alcohol, and nicotine industries could help people out of addiction.

And for the record, I do believe that even if a woman coerces a man into sex or even sexually assaults him, he should still accept responsibility for the child not because the assault was his fault, but just because he's the father.

Like I said, I'm less concerned with banning abortion and more concerned with reducing the rate of unwanted pregnancies in the first place.

Sexual assaults and other forms of coercion are too difficult to prove on their own. Given the social harms of promiscuity (STI's, unwanted pregnancies, trauma from assaults, divorce, brokenn families, distressed children, etc.(it would make sence to toughen our sex laws. I disagree with the idea that sex is a fundamental right. Our laws treat it as equal to a walk in the park. Sex has consequences and so our laws should reflect that.

[French Patriot]

28 minutes ago, Machjo said:

So why so many single moms? If it's because of too many cases of sexual coercion (whether men coercing women or vice versa), then making fornication an offence punishable by a heavy fine that doubles for each repetition of the offence could serve as a more effective deterrent given how much easier it is to prove than assault and other forms of coercion. Such a law might deter some cases of careless sex too.

Why so many single moms? Because men will not step up to do what women do, which is take responsibility for their actions.

As to your main theme of coercion. There is none with consenting adults.

The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation and all you are proposing is a low level stoning for fornicators, while ignoring that they are lovers or at least well acquainted in most cases.

Shall we go back to when men were stoned to death for sex between consenting adults? 

Why not just do as the Muslims do and beat the fuck out of women for just being desirable and irresistible to weak minded men?

Regards

DL

[Machjo]

4 minutes ago, French Patriot said:

Why so many single moms? Because men will not step up to do what women do, which is take responsibility for their actions.

As to your main theme of coercion. There is none with consenting adults.

The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation and all you are proposing is a low level stoning for fornicators, while ignoring that they are lovers or at least well acquainted in most cases.

Shall we go back to when men were stoned to death for sex between consenting adults? 

Why not just do as the Muslims do and beat the fuck out of women for just being desirable and irresistible to weak minded men?

Regards

DL

Sodomy was illegal in Canada until the  1960's, yet not one person was ever charged, let alone convicted, whenever it involved two consenting adults in a private room with neither reporting the other to the police. Why do you think that was?

I'm under no ilkusion that a law against fornication would end it. Just like in the case of the old sodomy laws, the police would have no way of knowing whenever it involves two consenting adults neither of whom reports it to the police.

I'm also under no illusion that it would end abortions.

However, I do believe that it would greatly reduce rates of sexual coercion and assault. If one parrner reports the other, the police would only need to prove he consented, not that the other didn't consent, so a stronger deterrent and that would at least reduce the commonality of abortions.

Also, I'd have no problwm with scanning my ID card and fingerprint at a casino if it could keep a gambling addict out of prostitution and so again reduce the rate of abortions.

Even if abortions remain legal, we should still try to at least reduce their occurrence.

[French Patriot]

1 hour ago, Machjo said:

Sodomy was illegal in Canada until the  1960's, yet not one person was ever charged, let alone convicted, whenever it involved two consenting adults in a private room with neither reporting the other to the police. Why do you think that was?

Because Canadians are not stupid and know that the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.

1 hour ago, Machjo said:

reduce the commonality of abortions.

Have you not noticed the stats dropping on their own thanks to education and contraception?

1 hour ago, Machjo said:

Even if abortions remain legal, we should still try to at least reduce their occurrence.

Men are the problem and if you have heard or read of the material titled, The  Demise of Guys, you will see just how badly we are letting our young generation of boys and men down.

If you are serious about cleaning up our mess on the issues under discussion, your efforts, I think, might be better spent on the problem that research points to. It is an eye opener. 

Regards

DL

[Realitycheck]

4 hours ago, French Patriot said:

If they did want to protect that right, and their children, it is not shown when 50% of all households are manned by single women.

I think women can do a better job of protection reproduction than deadbeat dads, given the vile male history.

Regards

DL

50%? Provide some evidence to support this interesting claim.

[Machjo]

8 hours ago, French Patriot said:

Because Canadians are not stupid and know that the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.

Have you not noticed the stats dropping on their own thanks to education and contraception?

Men are the problem and if you have heard or read of the material titled, The  Demise of Guys, you will see just how badly we are letting our young generation of boys and men down.

If you are serious about cleaning up our mess on the issues under discussion, your efforts, I think, might be better spent on the problem that research points to. It is an eye opener. 

Regards

DL

Yes, society is letting our men down. When society promotes sexual liberation as some fundamental human right, you end up with hosts of irresponsible men sleeping around with no understanding of the consequences. It's time we stop teaching men about rights and start teaching them about responsibility but in a non-judgmental way. This must include also teaching men how to recognize problems and where to turn for help when they need it.

For example, some men may turn to compulsive promiscuity (a potential source of unwanted pregnancies) as a maladaptive coping mechanism for trauma yet might not recognize it since we're taught that that's just how men are.

I was lucky in one regard. Prior to meeting my ex-wife, I suffered compulsive masochistic auto-sexual behaviours that I struggled with (which I learnt with the help of a therapist many years later probably stemmed from my  childhood abuse). I initially thought the behaviour was just a biological need ingrained in my mind (though I still didn't discuss it with anyone and preferred to keep it to myself) but recognized that it might not be such a need as I seemed to gradually 'need' it less over time.

At least I was mostly in control of my intersexual behaviours as long as I avoided situations that could make me vulnerable to coercion (since even the mildest coercion could trigger panic attacks that tempted me to submit to the aggressor just to escape those nauseating emotions). I knew my weakness so took appropriate precautions like refusing to meet a woman alone and especially in private until she gained my trust that she would respect my boundaries.

I let my guard down with my now ex-wife one day and that led to an extremely abusive relationship for a few years after which I did turn to compulsive promiscuity as a maladaptive coping mechanism for trauma.

Now here's why I was lucky. I remembered how prior to meeting her, not only could I manage my intersexual behaviours but was slowly learning to manage my more violently masochistic compulsive autosexual behaviours too. In other words, even though I hadn't yet made the connection between my childhood experiences and my compusive masochistic sexual behaviours and even though I didn't understand their source, I could see that my behaviour was slowly improving. My self-confidence was slowly improving along with it. I was aware that I was healing even if I didn't understand the disease.

After that abusive relationship, I started to participate in ever more compulsive masochistic sexual behaviours with different women. Though I failed to link that behaviour to the abusive relationship, to recognize that I was suffering trauma (that I understood only years later with the help of a therapist), and to understand why I was behaving that way, I could at least recognize that it was not normal behaviour by contrasting it to my behaviour before I'd met my now ex-wife, and that at least gave me hope that I could change. My main obstacles were shame and ignorance. I felt shame at my behaviour so didn't tell anyone close to me and my ignorance prevented me from understanding the source of the behaviour, that I was not alone, and that help did exist. I eventually found help purely by accident.

Had I ended up in an abusive relationship with my ex-wife immediately after leaving my parents, I would never have experienced the brief healing period between leaving home and meeting my now ex wife and so would have had nothing positive to contrast my later behaviours with. This could potentially had led me to believe that my compulsive sexual behaviours were just normal. It was that brief healing period after leaving my childhood home that helped me understand the pathology of my later behaviour and so at least recognize that I needed help even if I didn't yet understand the disease and where to turn for help, but that awareness made me recognize and seek help once I finally found it.

A man who'd never experienced a brief healing period prior might not even recognize that he has a problem at all.

Compulsive promiscuity is not normal, healthy, well-adjusted behaviour and generally reveals an underlying problem. Unfortunately, our society teaches it as perfectly normal and healthy behavour under the name of sexual liberalization.

That's why I think instead of banning abortion, we should focus instead on addressing the causes of unwanted pregnancies in the first place.

Edited May 18, 2019 by Machjo

[French Patriot]

On ‎5‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 3:17 PM, betsy said:

 

What better world????  Will you stop daydreaming.....and open your eyes!   How are lives valued these days???

Don't blame it on guns, or knives.....or any weapons!    Point the finger at people who have no qualms de-valuing lives and sanctioning, promoting slaughter of the most defenseless and innocent human beings!

 

How we value lives highly as shown in the improving stats of that link.

I guess that you are just to stupid to know how to read stats.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

7 hours ago, Realitycheck said:

50%? Provide some evidence to support this interesting claim.

Google the demise of guys or find the stat yourself.

If you can find a better stat than that professor/researcher, I will happily look at it.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

2 hours ago, Machjo said:

It's time we stop teaching men about rights and start teaching them about responsibility but in a non-judgmental way.

First.

Thanks for sharing your anecdotal story.

I agree with all but the non-judgemental way.

If we do not collectively judge an abdication of ones responsibilities then those do abdicate their duty will not get it.

2 hours ago, Machjo said:

That's why I think instead of banning abortion, we should focus instead on addressing the cause of unwanted pregnancies in the first place.

That would reduce the presently shrinking numbers of those faster, but with a 9 billion person world, ---- with rape, incest and really stupid and out of control men, whom the majority is letting down, there will always be a need for abortions.

Regards

DL

 

[Machjo]

How do men learn to become really stupid and out of control men? I learnt first from my babysitter for well over a year when I was around seven and eight and then my ex wife for a few years, both sexually far more aggressive than I was even to the point of being aggressively coersive. That, combined with my own character weaknesses, is what finally made me stop caring about my boundaries and I won't deny that I then started to become more sexually coersive myself in turn.

The part that I lament the most was being too ashamed to tell anyone about my problem and not knowing where to turn for help.

That's what I meant by not being too judgmental. If a person who suffers such a problem fears being judged or doesn't know where to find help, then how is he to get help? It was sheer luck that finally led me to find help.

Also, it is false to assume that a trauma victim is necessarily self-aware. Though I recognized that my behaviours were compulsive and couldn't understand why, I somehow never made the connection between my behaviour and my childhood sexual abuse and the abusive relationship with my ex wife until a therapist pointed it out to me years later. I shamefully told him about my behaviour and shamefully asked him to help me with it.

At first, he asked whether my behaviour bothered me since none of what I was describing was criminal in any way, so I had to explain how I was acting compulsively seemingly against my own will.

He then started to dig into my past and helped me understand the link between it and my compulsive sexual behaviours. At first, I protested saying that my behaviour was due to my own weak character. He agreed, but then helped me understand how my past experienes contributed to my failing to learn the necessary character traits I needed to adequately defend my boundaries and how repeated failures finally led me to give up trying to defend my boundaries and to then just seek out the physical pleasures of life to fill the void left by the realization of my inability to defend those boundaries.

He himself was somewhat surprized at the degree to which I'd failed to recognize the link and the degree to which shame kept me from seeking help sooner. Apparently though common in other patients, that shame and lack of self-awareness seemed greater in me than most. As for not seeking help sooner, I had had poor experiences with incompetent therapists prior, so that might have contributed to my not seeking help sooner too.

That's why I think it is important to ensure men can feel comfortable seeking help and more importantly, know that help exists and where to find it.

[Machjo]

I'll also add that there's a reason it's extremely important to not shame promiscuous women either. They too might be acting compulsively as a maladaptive behaviour to trauma in some cases, they too might feel too ashamed to seek help, and they too might not even know that help exists and where to find it. Perhaps this is a problem sex ed classes could address, to help students with compulsive sexual behaviours to understand better what might be going on and how they can remedy the situation rather than just teach them that all sex is good and to just put a condom on it.

[Realitycheck]

2 hours ago, French Patriot said:

Google the demise of guys or find the stat yourself.

If you can find a better stat than that professor/researcher, I will happily look at it.

Regards

DL

So you have nothing. 

[French Patriot]

19 hours ago, Machjo said:

How do men learn to become really stupid and out of control men?

Watch The Demise of Guys and listen to the other links to experts in the field that pop up, and that should answer your question.

It is all tied to child rearing and how is a male child going to learn to be a man when he is fatherless and even if not, if average, he will only have his fathers attention for 20 minutes a week, if I recall correctly.

Garbage fathers produce garbage children.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

19 hours ago, Machjo said:

That's why I think it is important to ensure men can feel comfortable seeking help and more importantly, know that help exists and where to find it.

No argument on this.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

18 hours ago, Realitycheck said:

So you have nothing. 

I have a memory.

You are the one with nothing.

Regards

DL

[Ell]

It is sick to think that Dad's who don't support their children after getting a woman pregnant are called "Dead Beat" and women who look down at this are the same ones that are allowed and are killing their children in the womb when they just feel that they want to.  I think both of these happenings are terrible, but the killing of an innocent is much worse.  Morality is not something you can invent on your own, but it can be found when you seek it with the help of Jesus Christ.

[Michael Hardner]

6 hours ago, Ell said:

Morality is not something you can invent on your own, but it can be found when you seek it with the help of Jesus Christ.

There are other ways to be moral.  Community morals don't need to be Christian anymore.