Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

moniss

(8,550 posts)
4. Right around the time of the overturn of Roe I suggested
Mon Dec 8, 2025, 04:46 PM
Monday

that because pregnancy can permanently damage the health of or kill a woman that sperm should be looked at as a potential hazard and much greater responsibility/liability be placed on the source of that sperm. Yes in a consensual situation it takes two to tango but the results of a pregnancy, good or bad, have never been shared 50/50 and that has needed to change for a very long, long time. As part of that change one thought I felt needed to be implemented is that if a woman was misled into a sexual relationship by a man and subsequently became pregnant that a penalty be imposed for using fraud and placing her in a hazardous position that she would have avoided had the man been truthful.

In other words men would have to be responsible for their sperm in more ways than just paternity/child support. The current system, as a result of years of women having no rights, has given us the current situation where the hazardous effects of pregnancy are largely and completely on the shoulders of the woman despite that pregnancy requiring an equal interaction. Allowing men off the hook for the full measure of their responsibility/liability has more or less been codified in the society and we all know that society at large and legally still says the woman "got pregnant" and places the Scarlet P so to speak while making no requirement of the man the sperm came from except child support.

One thing I suggested is that when the woman has to go for doctor visits that the man the sperm came from must go as well. Equal responsibility. I went even further and suggested that if the woman suffers morning sickness then the man the sperm came from should be made to have induced nausea. I know that sounds extreme to some but why is it only the woman who should experience all of these things when it was supposedly "two to tango"? In other words just because the "dance" ended doesn't mean the woman should pay nearly all of the bill for the band.

Perhaps if we did these things men would look at the release of their sperm as having consequences beyond writing a check. Certainly women can and do face consequences way beyond potentially giving birth and raising the child.

Recommendations

6 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So here we are after less...»Reply #4