Squeers
I agree partly with your analogy but not wholly and I know you are playing devil's advocate. The use of the phrase 'women have it their way' assumes that it is all tiptoeing through the tulips for women and downhill for men. Is this really the case?

It is really 'nobody's way' if the child is unwanted. Different if of course both participants in the sexual act agree to raise the child even if living apart.

Both partners don't get it 'their way' as both have financial and practial responsibilities for the raising of the child.

I don't know what the answer is for men, in terms of decisions about pregnancy because yes, I agree that women have more say over the future of the baby they are carrying. It is sad sometimes that men who might want to raise a baby might not get the chance if the decision to terminate is taken. Men have little say in that regard. Anything different to that would mean forcing women to have children they don't want and losing control over the rights to their own bodies. This is not a feminist viewpoint, if men were to become pregnant I am sure they would not want to give up rights over their bodies either.

Now that child custody arrangements are changing to include fathers more, the act of raising a child is seen today as not only the domain of the mother but a joint enterprise.

In saying all that there is nothing that is completely equal in this world or even always fair. We can all think of areas where men and women lose out either in policy or in social stigmas and expectations etc. All we can do is muddle along the best we can striving always to be as fair as is possible.

PeterH
You must be a technical person - you are highly analytical in regard to sex and any resultant progeny (babies). Reading your posts are exhausting because you make me really think.

"Women biologically cause sexual desire in men: so does that automatically and necessarily give rise to a moral and legal obligation on women to provide even involuntary services in satisfaction of that interest?"

Women also feel sexual desire even if perhaps men are more driven. Women don't force men to have sex with them, they are not responsible for the decisions of others.

Having a baby is not an 'involuntary service' which is essentially your analogy. It is always a possible outcome of a sexual encounter.
The 'biological imperative' and responsibility falls to both participants.

What happens if that outcome eventuates has to do with the best interests for the child. Who should take responsibility if not those involved in the sex act?

As for women who falsely claim they are on birth control - if one is into casual sex this is always a possibility. Should men take no responsibility for ensuring they possess a condom just in case. It is a bummer for men should this happen or if they feel they have been duped, but the fact is a baby is on the way and will need to be cared for.

People are not forced into sexual liaisons. Some women might find out their 'new; partner is married, these risks are always present in an imperfect world. At best we learn from our mistakes.

Birth control is not fullproof (nor foolproof for that matter). There are many reasons why the pill does not work including antibiotics, gastro, missing a day and general bad luck. It happens.

I know it is not always easy to simplify, people and situations can be quite complex and emotional but I would like to know how it could work better any other way.

Pelican you are a voice of reason in this debate!

Peter H (sigh) <" These women want the privilege, backed by brute force, to treat men as machines for paying women for the babies they have. Otherwise they’d have no objection to repealing the laws forcing men to pay for women’s babies, wouldn’t they?"

Paying women for the babies they have? What about both paying for the babies that BOTH parents have. There is no (and has never been) immaculate conception involved in these pregnancies.
.
Two consenting adults have unprotected sex (I call unprotected sex that which couples have without using condoms and spermicide), and a baby results.
BOTH are equally liable to support this baby after birth.

The laws 'forcing men to pay for women's babies' were enacted in a predominantly male parliament weren't they? They were brought about because the Government did not want to pay for the upbringing of many babies abandoned by their fathers financially in the past.

Where do the nasty feminists come into the picture here, other than supporting the fact that men who play around with energetic sperm-loaded fertility equipment without protection need to pay for the maintenance of the resulting babies, along with the women who agree to play?

Hey, if any man definitely doesn't want a baby to pay for, then keep away from sex altogether.

If they would rather not be celibate, then use condoms, or deal with a pregnancy. It is as simple as that.

Dear Pelly,

Well said.

Dear Suze,

Spot on.

Foxy
No-one’s talking about forcing anyone into sex they don’t consent to.

Suzie and Pelican
You are just circularly insisting on your premise as your conclusion.

Yabby and Squeers
I don’t know whether morality amounts to no more than subjective opinion, but I like the way religious people make up whatever they like, and lay it all to God. Mohammed of Islam was especially good at this. While he decreed a limit of four wives for his followers, he had a special revelation from God allowing him fifteen. “God is great!” he ejaculated.

So why is it morally noble of me to have sex with many, various and beautiful young women? Let me count the ways.

1. I endow the woman with the boon of my seed: may all the little critters thrive. May the earth be covered with our progeny, as different and distant from us as we are from our primitive fishy ancestors. Did they have any contribution from the sire other than his seed? No, and yet they peopled us.
2. I reject the bigotry of dead monks and patriarchs enjoining mouldy tomes of moral nonsense, and the selfish hostility of matrons and feminists motivated by hypocritical greed, and by sexual jealousy of younger women’s charms.
3. I affirm the value of life, and the delights of the bedroom; they gladden the heart and put a smile on the dial; sexually satisfied people are healthier and happier, and this redounds to the benefit of the general population, discouraging crabby war – what price can you put on that?
4. a young woman is far better off being deflowered by a man such as me, who knows what he’s doing, than by some young and clueless jack who has no appreciation but that of a brute for the treasures he destroys;

5. the woman has the choice whether or not to consent, and whether or not to abort, which I cannot veto, and that is as it should be; so it is only right that the pleasure and benefit of rearing the child should be entirely her own, while selflessly and altruistically I claim none myself
6. there are loads of people who want to look after a baby – far more than there are babies to go around. This has the benefit of providing to people who most desperately want children the wonderful experience of looking after them; and a fuller contribution to the child than it could enjoy from me, given my noble priorities.
7. I leave wrinkled older women, in their flats, to look after cats, which is a boon to the population of cats.
8. feminists have just spent the last 40 years telling us how dreadful and terribly unfair patriarchy and marriage are to women. The woman can always obtain contributions the way women did in the absence of the dreaded patriarchy. This will promote female independence, and strike a blow against paternalism.
9. if more men were to follow suit, it would most likely have the effect of increasing the supply of sexual services for still other, more sexually disadvantaged men. Thus it will promote the social justice of assuring to the disadvantaged a more equitable distribution of resources that “we as a society” should guarantee as a basic right;
10. by deconstructing the stereotype of female “need” for male subjugation I promote the cause of *real* gender equity;
11. I provide a good example for the liberation of men from the obligations of the patriarchy which women have hitherto demanded unequally and unfairly for themselves;
12. God, in a personal communication to me, has revealed the urgency, and the importance, of my divine mission, and specifically commanded me to bring sexual pleasure, or ecstasy, to the fragrant, silken, tight young blossoms of the flowery battlefield, and to drink in the music of their sweet sighs and panting.

What could be more noble-minded than that?