Isn't this hypocrisy?

Question

Anti-feminists cite statistics that indicate single parent households are responsible for some 70% of violent crime.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ao6OMHi1kfaPjVL50ParlHbsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071024044539AAWM244&show=7#profile-info-JptJiYvUaa

Male anti-feminists seek to absolve themselves from parental responsibility when they accidentally impregnate a woman.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AuG9ri4nDxlL8W3jBs2GyULty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071023121955AAHdLuI&show=7#profile-info-H5rWIMfQaa

If you believe that children raised by single parents are so bad for society, how do you jusitfy fighting for the right to abandon a child you have helped to create?

Some of you have strayed very far from the question. My point is that in your quest for equal reproductive rights, you effectively CREATE MORE single parent homes, something you deem as undesirable for society. Is this hypocrisy or just a paradox of politics?

Answer 1

Yeah, seriously. So here's the thing: they don't actually *care* about "society" or kids or crime rates. They care about *themselves*. Me me me.

Answer 2

In the first place, the statistics are verifiable and correct. Not surprised that feminists have a bit of trouble with the truth, however, especially when it shows that single-mother headed households are the worst situation in which to raise a child. (Also note that the sources are neither pro nor anti-feminist)

Second, you cannot have it both ways. Only women can become pregnant, only women can choose for or against abortion, only women control the very existence of children, yet when it comes time to pay the bill, men are no longer expendable. This is hypocrisy to the extreme and one of the reasons so many disdain feminists and feminism. Either men are involved or they are not and it is from conception onward.

If women want the unilateral right to decide whether a child will be allowed to be born or to kill it before birth, women must also accept total responsibility that should accompany their sole choice. Either men are involved or they are not. This ‘cafeteria’ style of allowing only women to decide men’s involvement, or denying any association with their own child is feminism in action.

Feminists demand choice and convenience for women only while holding men to a much higher standard with no choices, which is very telling about the “equality” that feminism is striving to mandate.

It is time feminists stopped acting like children and accept the responsibility for their sole choice. Stop blaming men for women's choices.

Feminists will never allow the obvious solution, stop basing custody on the sex of the parent, end "no-fault divorce" and outlaw abortion-as-birth-control. If men and women were treated the same, there would be no problem, would there?

Answer 3

When a woman claims, at a critical point in the process, that she has the ABSOLUTE right to control the outcome of a pregnancy, then she assumes absolute responsibility for that outcome.
___Social policy is a blunt instrument, adnd doesn't deal well with this sort of thing. Of course, many women will take the desires of their partners into account, and many men will honor their responsibilities in participating in the impregnation. The question has to do with devising a fair default to deal with the disputed cases, a default that doesn't cast too much of a biasing shadow over the decisions to be made by people.
Some men should be nailed for child support, but when a woman abuses the powers that current laws give her, the child should be taken from her and given to someone else looking to adopt. If the child's welfare is really at stake, it the child shouldn't be left with a parent who lacks integrity, especially when that lack of integrity infects the child's coming into being.
___If society is going to make the life of a fetus an optional thing at all, then both sexes should have equal options regarding their responsibilities. If a woman insists on having an accidental child that the father doesn't want, she should either choose to raise it on her own, or to give it up for adoption. Why on earth should she have the absolute freedom to terminate the fetus or not, based on her slightest whim (the "right" doesn't distinguish the cases of the most werious consideration from the cases of the slightest whimsy), while denying it to the man, and then nail him with responsibility over which he has nothing like her degree of choice?

Answer 4

Actually, there's evidence both for and against the idea that violent crime is more likely to occur because of single-parent families. There's no real link between single-parent children commiting more violent crimes than two-parent children, BUT there's statisitcs that say single parents are more likely to abuse their children, which can obviously result in lasting mental issues and may turn a child violent. In both cases, it's said that poverty plays a bigger role than the number of parents, though.

As for parental responsibility, yes, it IS possible to accidently get a woman pregnant. If a condom breaks, if she's not using her contraceptive correctly, if she lies about being fertile or taking contraceptives or is misdiagnosed as fertile, a woman could get pregnant without the man intending for it to happen. And it DOES happen.

Not all anti-feminists believe those statistics. Not all anti-feminists believe in absolving parental rights on the basis of it being an accident. A person can believe in one or the other or neither... and sometimes both, though I agree, that does seem hypocritical. Although really, not having parental rights doesn't mean you can't be in the child's life... For example: I have no rights to Child A, though I live with Child A's mother and try to be a part of Child A's life. I want to be part of the child's life, I just don't want physical or legal responsibility, since it wasn't my fault the child was born. This could apply to the father of the child, or just a lover in the mom's life.

And I wouldn't be too hard on us guys, you know. We can be single parents, too:

"2.5 million
Number of single fathers in 2006, up from 400,000 in 1970. Currently, among single parents living with their children, 19 percent are men.

Among these fathers —

* 8 percent are raising three or more children younger than 18.
* About 40 percent each are divorced or never married, 16 percent are separated and 4 percent are widowed."

Answer 5

Both parties know the risk involved. If a pregnancy occurs the male should be willing to step up and support the child. If he doesn't want to, maybe he shouldn't be taking any risks. Yes, the woman has a right to decide about abortion, she is carrying the the child. Gentlemen, at the very least you should find out what's going to be expected from you if a pregnancy occurs. If you don't want to support a child, don't get into a position where you might have to.

And while I think the best home environment is a loving, two-parent home, I'd rather raise my child as a single mom than in a place where it is unwanted and resented.
Yes, there are more criminals from a single family home. The fact remains that some people who grew up in loving two-parent homes are sharing jail cells with the fatherless ones.

I take every precaution to not get pregnant. If I were I man, I'd take every precaution to not get a woman pregnant. I would NEVER trust anyone else with that responsibility.

Not all women set out to trap a man by becoming pregnant, and if we do, then men should be on to us by now and not be sleeping with us because clearly we're all out to get them. They should know better shouldn't they? Devious women or stupid men?

Answer 6

Having a good male role model is obviously good for children. He can show a boy how to be a man and show a girl what qualities she should look for in a mate. Besides gender specific benefits, just having another parent (male or female) in the home can ease the burden of parenthood. The question leaves out two viable options--abortion and adoption. If a man doesn't want to raise a child then the mother can abort the pregnancy, put the child up for adoption, or find another man to raise the child.

Answer 7

Men that wish to be fathers & men that do not wish to be fathers aren't the same thing.

Both situations represent a loss of rights & equal protection.

Are you saying that because MRAs believe fathers should be active in their children's lives & this is good for society that this negates the need for men to have the same reproductive rights women possess?

MRAs must choose between fathers seeing their children and reproductive rights?

The men that want a "financial abortion" were already going to be non-existant in the child's life, so it didn't matter anyways.

...& that's an important distinction.

Men should have the same rights women do to either be a part or not be a part of fatherhood.

There's nothing hypocritical about that.

Answer 8

The right to absolve men from parental responsibility when they accidentally impregnate a woman will REDUCE unwanted pregnancies and single parent households.

This is how I as a non anti-feminist person jusitfy male anti-feminists fighting for the right to abandon a PRO-CHOICE WOMAN who on her whim and fancy and convenience choose to have a child and DENY it the right to have a responsible male parent.

They dont want to abandon a child. They just want a right, much lower in seriousness compared to right to abort a human life. The right to be free of financial burden for a choice that they are not allowed to make (abortion)

Answer 9

The root of the problem is the inherent selfishness in adults who have sex for pleasure without considering the responsibilities or repercussions of their actions.
Under the 10 Commandments, it was called adultery and was forbidden to try and prevent this very situation.
The problem with selfishness is that it involves more than one person, and unfortunately the children. Two people have sex, the woman gets pregnant, the guy disappears, the woman keeps the baby out of guilt and tries to raise it all on her own. Her parents may or may not help, but in our society we have no respect for motherhood, let alone single mothers, so most women are on their own.
But the woman was equally selfish in agreeing to sex for pleasure without precaution. It is both the man's and the woman's fault for seeking sex for pleasure without regarding the consequences of getting pregnant and/or an std. It is selfish of the man to walk away from the responsibility, it is selfish for a society to aprove of such behavior, it is wrong for society to punish the woman, and it is wrong for the child to be the end result of such selfishness.
Some people are able to rise above the situation. Too many do not.
By addressing the root of the problem, adultery, the problem of single-parent households would be cut by 75%.

Answer 10

Last time I checked It takes a man and a woman to make a baby. And both of the actual parents need to take responsibility for that child.

Unless there has been a DNA test done the only one of those two who might, depending on circumstances be confident who the father is is the woman.

Why should a man pay for a kid unless it is proved beyond doubt that it is his when any woman can just seemingly pick a name out of the sky of someone she was with around the time she thinks she conceived and lumber him with the child support?

I am not anti feminist I am just telling the truth!!

Answer 11

Well I suppose men as described in the second example do not look upon the child as a 'minature adult' which has to be nurtured and raised and educated but a burden which they did not want and will have to pay for for the rest of their lives. I suppose that is the difference between men and women...women wish to nurture children and see it as a priority that their children should achieve....men who feel they have been deceived, do not see the future outcome but only the immediate financial hardship. Which lets face it can be burdensome......but that's the difference. The male anti-feminist questioner does have a point. The woman does have the final say.....this of course most women know.