Hey Rachael,
In case you aren't aware the NRL is about football.
Not players relationships, not abortions, not politically correct ideology, not pushing leftist causes.

If women say 'My Body, My Choice'
Then men should be able to say 'My money, My choice'
These girls are just lamenting the financial windfall that would've come their way had they not had an abortion.
It takes 2 people to get a woman pregnant, so she's not innocent either.

Instead of the emotional women's whining you should be advising rich and famous men to use condoms when sleeping with little tramps that care not about the father (or child in question) but what they can get from sleeping with rich and famous men.

What about the poor blokes that don't have 50K upfront?
They pay for the next 18 years.

Stupid entitlement expecting women.
You think you have a right to seduce a man, extract his semen and make the man pay for your kid and your lifestyle for the next 2 decades.
Wake up to yourself.

After discussion with others on this topic, I want to amend my comment.
I want to acknowledge that footballers also act with a sense of entitlement and lack of respect and tend to treat women probably not as well as some other men.
Some of my male friends who are more knowledgeable on matters of NRL news argue the Cartright incident wasn't necessarily the woman's fault.
I still stand by my original basic criticism of the women, though I wish to back off a little based on a sense of entitlement and lack of respect shown by some football players.

I'm with AC: what the hell has the NRL to do with the personal lives of its players' girlfriends? Sporting fans would be interested in the game, not whether or not a player's girlfriend, who is unknown to them, is up to behind the scenes.

“... the NRL still has a long way to go in its treatment of women.” I'm sorry; we don't have rugby in South Australia, but I understand that women play something called 'nines'? Is abortion education and care part of that game? I thought it was about moving a ball about – in ways totally incomprehensible to a South Australian. But, who knows what they do in the change room?

This piece really highlights feminine hypocrisy: women should be the ones to make decisions about their own bodies, blah, blah, blah, but when they get it wrong, it's everyone’s' fault. Rather than alleviate genuine mistreatment of women, the people presuming to speak for all women are in grave danger of bringing down even more contempt on their sisters, including those completely innocent of all this 'feminist' crap.

Women can't have it both ways. Either they have complete control over their body or they don't.
If they wish to have that control, then that includes controlling whether or not they get pregnant.

What we need to do is get right out of the private lives of citizens with trauma issues to deal with!

If folk have unwise unprotected sex, then as sure as day follows night very virile couples will produce children!

And for many women the end of college or a budding career!? And hardly the NRL's responsibility!

As usual when virile young people have lots of money, they can become a virtual honeypot for the opposite sex, with less than perfect personal morals, and a young player putty in an ambitious partner's hands?

If there's any substance to any of these alleged claims by miss X or Y, then they need to come forward with proof that proves they were coerced. Always providing counter claims of coercion to become sperm donors can't be proven?

After all it takes two to tango or make a responsible marriage/relationship, where children would be welcomed? And a decision, in the age of easy as contraception, for the two people making babies!

Male bashing activists, with an agenda, need to just but out!
Alan B.

We should make coercing someone into having an abortion a criminal offence with mandatory imprisonment.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Armchair, you seem to have trouble comprehending that some things are more important than money.

And if the NRL is only about "football" then why (as the article points out) did they fine Mitchell Pearce a quarter of a million dollars for something unrelated to any sport?

I've not followed the stories closely enough to get a good feel for what coercion means in this context.

Coercion, can mean threats of harm or some sort of unreasonable pressure on a person to comply. The bits I've heard about were offers of short term financial gain and it being made clear that the men involved were not choosing to take on an active role of father.

I'm not personally a liker of abortion, at the same time I've come to the conclusion that choice is the lesser of evils when weighed against the alternatives and what flows from trying to remove that choice. It does seem though that many who favour female choice strenuously oppose male choice.

Not quite the same set of choices, the male should not have any right to demand a termination not to demand that a pregnancy is carried to term. However he should have the same rights to choose his own future role at the same points a woman is free to choose her future role as far as viable given the biological necessities.

If she chooses to continue with a pregnancy knowing that the male involved in the conception has opted out then she should not be able to bring the power of the state to bear to coerce him to pay the bills for her choice.

If choice ends at the time of the sex act then it should end for both genders.

R0bert

the blood of the butchered child cries out for justice while the fornicators argue about money.

“coerced their girlfriends into undergoing abortions.”

How do you ‘coerce’ someone into having an abortion? You cannot make them go to the clinic unless you physically force them to and as soon as you manhandle them through the door the staff would call the police because of your violence.

“abort their child”

Who says it is a child? Can you prove with utter uncertainty that at the time of the abortion it is a child?

“still receiving grief counselling.”

Why do they need grief counselling? Millions of women have abortions and feel no grief or need for counselling. What is wrong with these particular women? Maybe grief counselling helps convince the counsellors that abortion is the death of ‘someone’.

“a public figure with an imbalance of power should be able privately to bully a woman into having an abortion that she doesn't want.”

There is no imbalance of power. Both parties in the couple have the same power when it comes to the matter of choice. Fame or money are totally irrelevant. The woman has all the power because she is the one who makes the ultimate choice. If the man wants to keep the child and she wants to abort it what power does he have?

“Mitchell Pearce whom they fined $125,000 for his lewd act with a dog last year.”

Is the author suggesting that a lewd act with a dog shows the same lack of respect to sex with a woman? If you do not let the woman keep her baby it’s the same as treating her like a dog? Where is the analogy here?

“financial or emotional pressure to abort”

Every woman has to make her choice a financial one.

“absolves men of responsibility for an unplanned pregnancy.”

So men are responsible for having sex and so is the woman. Women have a choice whether to become pregnant or not. They are the only ones who have that choice. How can you have responsibility when you have no choice?

My mother gave me this advice when I was still a boy and mad keen on football and cricket, both of which I played.

If you what to sleep with a woman, ask yourself this question. Do I want this woman to be the mother of my kids and my wife? And do I love her and want to grow old disgracefully with her?

And something to think about before drunken debauchery, the one night stand, the exchange of body fluids replete with the very real possibility of STD's!

Lady Palmer and her five daughters far less risky biological relief!

As a Dad myself, I gave my own kids this advice and with all the aforementioned in mind, if it's not on, it's not on!

Better to carry a couple of condoms in the purse or wallet, when desire and reduced inhibition allows you to take leave of your senses!

And we are all capable of that! Why Charlie Chaplin became a doting daddy in his seventies! And there are reports of women in their sixties and over, becoming pregnant, and not by immaculate conception!

Simple advice for the boys and girls involved in these traumatic events? Wait until there's a ring on the finger, before putting one in the nose of your (keeper) favorite stud!

Even there, confront the very real possibility of one day, waking up beside a complete stranger you don't like very much!

Infatuation and falling in lust has a lot to answer for!
Alan B.

Rachael

Your hypocrisy is nauseating.

Oh, gimme a break! As a feminist myself, I can smell a faux-feminism argument a mile away.

Any man has the right to say: No, I don't want this child. While it may be devastating for the would-be mother, it's still his right. That does not constitute coercion.

The NRL has many issues regarding the treatment of women. This is not one of them.

I think this is an interesting case and there's more than meets the eye.
Everyone made good contributions to the discussion.

In respect of Abortion:
Should the woman have the right to teminate a pregnancy even if the man wants to keep it?
(Woman say's 'I opt to terminate my egg donation')
Should the man also have the right to terminate a pregnancy even if the woman wants to keep it?
Man says 'I opt to terminate my sperm donation'
(Giving 'equality' and 'equal choice')
Should both parties be required to give consent for an abortion to occur?
'We opt to terminate our....'
Or should we respect the right of the unborn and neither party has the right to terminate it?
Which we do, but we argue over when the right time is.

Then there's the payment thing.
This is new and where does that lead?
Now we'll see women using it for extortion "20 grand or you're on the hook pal"
And was 'taking money' (instead of responsibility) as a payment to destroy an unborn child not also somthing that might be considered immoral, and should it be unlawful?
- Wrong to coerce? What about wrong to accept payment?

Hey Aiden,
I wasn't really arguing so much in regards to money as much as I was arguing for 'equal choice' as the other commenters already mentioned, however in the above example I specifically am.
I should've worded what I wrote in the previous comment better.

Of course you did also make a valid point in regards to the 'role model' factor of sports stars.
Personally I'd question why we uphold footy players and other ssports stars as role models so much in the first place. Not everyone can realistically become a sports star.
Though they're in the public eye, why should their lives be any more scrutinised than CEO's for example?
Or alternatively why should their private lives be scrutinised any more than any other regular person?

To suggest she "accidentally" got pregnant nowadays is laughable. She got a big pay cheque and by acting all distressed and "hard dun by" was hoping to extract another.

McCackie, I doubt any of us know enough detail to suggest that the accidental part is not real. I don't mind some scepticism but I'm also aware human make mistakes. Contraception is not foolproof. Both of them had options to either engage in safe sex or not engage in sex. It's possible that both thought contraception was at play and it wasn't or maybe caught up in the moment. The men involved had options and ones that for those who engage in casual sex make a lot of sense regardless of the fertility issue.

It's the double standards that follow that should bother us, not assumptions about motive unless there is a reasonable evidence to the contrary.

R0bert

Get real R0bert, she ain't from a Nunnery, sportsmen are hunted down by "Ladies" just for this purpose.

Remember, it was not rape, it's her body under her total control. I don't see he has ANY responsibility to give her anything but the time of day.

McCackie, neither are the men involved from a monastery.

I've no doubt that some do as you suggest. I'm not comfortable though with any position that assumes guilt in a specific situation without a lot more evidence than I've seen in this. The women had control over the choice to keep the child or not. Both men and women have as far as I'm aware in these cases control over the circumstances that lead to the pregnancies (within the limits of protection afforded by contraception and or self control).

As I understand it no one was forced to participate in the sex act.
I've heard nothing to suggest that anyone was forced to participate in unprotected sex (not foolproof but fairly effective).

If the males involved have not been advised to the risks associated with what appears to be easy access to casual sex that seems to be one of the "perks" of their job I'd be really really surprised.

R0bert

Like most things I read here on abortion, this article makes no sense. It's only value is in showing how depraved our society has become.

If our abortion laws can be so vicious and callous towards women and the unborn, then there is no moral position left to take. As abortion is free and available for any and every reason, then these men are doing nothing wrong. They are simply falling into line with the values established by the law makers of our society.

Hi Armchair Critic,you said it takes two person to get a woman pregnant. can you please elaborate more on this? do you mean it takes two men to get a woman pregnant or what?