Having listened to SCOTUS oral arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization earlier this week and having digested perhaps too much commentary about the future of Roe v. Wade, I’ve come to the conclusion that the pro-choice movement has been going at this all wrong.
We can all see where these “viability” arguments will lead. And, once the last gasp remedy to end an unwanted, unplanned, and unaffordable pregnancy is off the legal table, what’s next? Will women’s access to birth control become the next battle line? It seems that the moment of conception is the contentious issue. So, why are women having to deal with pregnancy in the first place? They can’t get pregnant without the ultimate thrust of the male.
We think nothing of neutering dogs, gelding stallions, castrating bulls and rams; why in the name of reason are we not talking about neutering men? I mean it! Women already carry the burden of nine months’ worth of gestation. Let’s face it, women also predominantly carry the burden of feeding and caring for infants and, in this country, women all too often find themselves raising their offspring completely alone. It strikes me that the male half of this equation gets off Scat-free. Pardon the pun.
I think the entire fetus discussion needs to start before the sperm can makes its way to the egg. How about a national program of male sterilization? Okay, maybe we leave ‘em intact until they’ve procreated successfully one time (replacement theory and all). In the event they stay with the same woman, maybe two times. Beyond that, off with their nuts!
Rangewriter 
We’ll said. And ironically it is the male species predominantly in our legal system making the decision for the woman’s body. Let’s at least insist only adult women can make the decision affecting a woman’s body.
Get Outlook for Android ________________________________
LikeLiked by 1 person
Which was pretty much my point. 😎
LikeLike
Well, I never! 🤣 Oh, yes I did, and I have children and grandchildren to prove it. However, we’re as Rockwellian as we can possibly be No dead beat dad here.
Great piece! To misunderstand this, one would have to do so with great intent.
LikeLike
I’m glad you’re too sharp to be offended. 🤩
LikeLike
Linda, very interesting supposition. So, is Karen’s suggestion. For a gender who is less than literate about the female body, men seem to be authorities on what women can and cannot do with their bodies. Maybe Margaret Atwood’s dystopian future is not so out there anymore. Keith
LikeLike
Atwood’s future wasn’t that far off when she wrote the book back in the 80s, I believe? It is even less far off now. Her warning fell upon deaf ears…or perhaps it didn’t. Perhaps her warning resonated all too loudly with men who consider themselves the center of all magnificence and power. (Note: That is a special segment of men, present company excluded.)
LikeLike
Ouch!
LikeLike
Fourteen-year-old child birthing her father’s spawn. Ouch!
LikeLike
Yeah, it definitely takes two to tango. I am of the frame of mind that we should not need abortion, but that it should be available in certain circumstances. Some definitions would be nice, but I’m not in the mood for a discussion. As far as contraception is concerned, my opinion is that religious reasoning should take a hike on the subject. Yes, the Bible does say “be fruitful and multiply”. It does not say “overrun the entire freaking planet”. Finally, I have never understood why lawmakers and/or religious officiators should think it’s OK for a woman to have to die because ending an ectopic pregnancy that has zero chance of being born alive would be “abortion”. Unconscionable. From ABC news: “Twenty-one states already have laws on the books that would immediately ban abortion if Roe were overturned. This comes in the form of laws that predate Roe but were never removed from the books, so-called “trigger” laws that would go into effect in the event of the precedent being overturned, state constitutional amendments, and six- or eight-week bans that are not currently in effect but would ban nearly all abortions”. Ugh…
PS: If we neutered men, is their a faint chance we might not have so many wars? Or so much societal violence? Hmmm…(please note, tiny dose of hopeless sarcasm here before you pounce). We could probably get a similar effect with some kind of shot lowering testosterone, but then the men would claim we were trying to tell them what to do with their bodies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh boy. This post has rattled some cages. As I suspected, I’m getting some fabulous feedback.
Yes, I live in one of thw 21 states. I’m so glad my mother fought for women’s rights over their bodies. She brought “family planning” to our town. I had access to birth control so that I would not need an abortion…though, if some weird thing happened, at least there was that option during my fecund years. I feel badly that on my watch, we have and are losing many of the choices she worked so hard for.
Indeed, what would a world of neutered men look like? I’m not pouncing. My post was filled with hopeless sarcasm and I appreciate the in-kind responses that are rolling in.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We could always freeze the semen before neutering so we wouldn’t die out as a species altogether…🙄
LikeLike
Haha. Freeze the juice, then off with the nuts. Oh dear. I better muzzle myself. I’ll be sent to the back of the room.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Having fought the original fight, it is depressing to think this has even happened. Men have skated for way too long. Vasectomy is easy, cheap, and reversible. If the big babies can’t handle it, no sex for them. Rosy palm becomes the option.
It is so damned offensive to have old men making decisions for all women, including young girls who are victims of rape or incest, a good old southern tradition.
No uterus? You don’t get a vote.
Off with their jewels, indeed…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Support/agree with you 100% on this!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here, here. A toast to rosy palms around the world. We need fewer humans!
LikeLike
My husband was just talking about how if the issue moves to more consequences for men, there won’t be as many restrictions. Unfortunately, I believe this is true. Both of us could really get behind your plan. We’re in Texas, and it’s just pure crazy right now
LikeLike
Thanks for stopping by and for sharing your thoughts. Yes, Idaho, where I live, would like to make itself in the mold of Texas and is almost there. I love Alli’s reflections in the comments.
LikeLike
Thank goodness (I say once again) that I live in California. Although I am too old to be personally impacted, I can’t imagine that we may well be going back to the days of back alley abortions. Like so many have said before, if men got pregnant, this wouldn’t even be up for discussion, let alone in front of the Supreme Court.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So true, Janis.
LikeLike
Works for me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Diane would agree with that. No need to remove the testicles, unless one plans to use them for meat production (one scifi author explored that idea). Vasectomy avoids a few health issues.
LikeLike
And is reversible. Yes, I was being flagrantly tongue-in-cheek with this post. I needed to vent and sometimes, that’s the purpose WordPress serves. I’m lucky that most of my readers seem to understand my flights of fancy.
Food source, oh, that’s rich! We couldn’t call them Rocky Mountain Oysters, I wonder what moniker would dress them up presentably. 🤣
LikeLike
I am almost afraid to comment on this one. I do agree if it affected men more, things would be different and I do have a sense of “what could be next?” I remember when women and girls had to get illegal abortions and it was horrible, as were some of the extreme reactions of the “pro-life” movement. Don’t want to go backwards.
LikeLike
Neither do I. But, I’m afraid that’s where we headed. 😦
LikeLike
Absolutely and how about if women are the one’s to choose who will get neutered. It’s always angered me that those who condemn abortion the loudest are men. Their sperm isn’t as precious as they think! 😀
LikeLike
No argument from me!
LikeLike