Man FORCED to marry a woman to ensure she terminates pregnancy

SO screech the headlines of The Telegraph.com.

“A MAN whose girlfriend refused to terminate her pregnancy unless they got married has been granted a divorce – because he was “under duress” when he agreed to wed”

I thought these days you could get a divorce when you didn’t want to live with someone anymore. Surely anyone can get a divorce? Especially the very people who invented marriage,  to benefit themselves, i.e men.

I realise that some countries do not permit women to divorce (knowing that most women are miserable in marriage, and that men wouldn’t be able to persuade them to stay if a real choice was available). Other countries, such as the U.K  make it difficult for women to leave their spouses by removing funding from battered women shelters and forcing them to go through mediation.. but again, this has nothing to do with men and divorce. (70% of divorces are initiated by women)

 But according to this rag, we are supposed to believe that men are trapped in marriage and can only get out in exceptional circumstances and with a valid excuse at that. LUckily for this guy, he had one. Phew.

The Family Court heard the man had told his girlfriend last year he wanted to break up because “he did not want a serious relationship” – only to discover she was pregnant.

He said his girlfriend had terminated pregnancies before as neither wanted to have a baby. But this time she told him: “I’m possibly not going to terminate the pregnancy unless you marry me.”

Somebody tell these men to stop sticking their dicks into women if they don’t want to make babies. Fecking idiots. What kind of man relies on abortion for contraception?
And can someone please tell the rest of them to stop sticking their dicks into women who don’t want to bear their child.

What the newspaper is trying to do, of course, is to “prove” how powerful women are.. “Why do you need political and economic parity with men, when you get to decide whether a child lives or not?!?!???!” Women are so selfish.

Perhaps what really happened was that this guy refused to marry the woman unless she had an abortion?

Stranger things have happened. It’s not as though men aren’t  obsessed with controlling women’s fertility is it. Whilst refusing to take any responsiblity for their own.

So yes, men, here’s a guide to the Rules of Life:

Don’t make babies you don’t want (it’s fairly simple)

Don’t impregnate women who don’t want to bear your child.

Stick to these simple rules and I guarantee you will never have to suffer TEH PAIN of a woman not obeying your wishes when it comes to termination.

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Man FORCED to marry a woman to ensure she terminates pregnancy

  1. Shotgun wedding with a twist?

    Vasectomy. 20 minutes in doctor’s office, snip snip, no more danger of “poor manz forced to get married”. Diddums to the moron.

    It concerns me that she had multiple abortions over the years. She is definitely better off without him.

  2. I am sick to death of this whole women trapping men with babies. They’ve been using it as ammunition in all sorts of horrific ways to attempt to control women’s rights in everything from abortion rights, to divorces, to custody, to a justification to be angry at women. Men had a choice all along, they could choose NOT to release sperm into women in the first place. If women trapping men with babies is such a horrible tragedy, why haven’t men been fighting tooth and nail for better male contraceptives?

    • Exactly elkballet! THEY choose to impregnate us then lay on the guilt if we a) want to keep the baby or b) don’t wish to keep the baby
      Or worse, they use all kind of evil underhand patriarchal tactics, legitimated by law, in order to control women’s fertility.

      Men are idiots. IDIOTS I tell you.

  3. (Men forced to wait a couple weeks before raping postpartum wife.)

    nytimes.com/2011/07/12/health/research/12childbirth.html

    Vital Signs
    Childbirth: Wait to Restart the Pill, C.D.C. Says
    By RONI CARYN RABIN
    Published: July 11, 2011

    Women who have just given birth should wait at least three weeks before they start using birth control pills because of the risk of serious, potentially fatal blood clots, public health officials announced last week. Women who deliver by Caesarean section or have other risk factors for blood clots — like obesity or a history of previous blood clots — should wait at least six weeks before using these medications, they said.
    Related

    The new recommendations, by the **Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, are more restrictive than guidelines issued last year and are similar to recommendations made in 2010 by the World Health Organization.

    Women are far more likely to develop a blood clot in the weeks after delivery than nonpregnant women of reproductive age who have not just had a baby, several studies have shown. The risk declines rapidly after 21 days but does not return to normal until 42 days after delivery.

    Birth control pills that include both estrogen and progestin also increase the risk of blood clots in the deep veins (venous thromboembolism). Women who are breast-feeding may want to avoid hormonal contraceptives because they can interfere with lactation, the C.D.C. said.

    The guidelines were published in the C.D.C.’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report on Friday.

    **Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
    cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6026a3.htm?s_cid=mm6026a3_w

    • Even factoring out the OCP risks post-partum, intercourse and cunnilingus is also dangerous and can lead to air embolisms.

      Basically, dudes have to stop sticking their entitled dicks into post-partum women for at least six weeks.

    • THat’s disgusting. To be fair, I do think it is a Western cultural obsession.. this idea of a man needing to leave his mark on a woman after childbirth, like a dog pissing against a lampost. From what I’ve seen in Asia, women go to their mothers for the birth and for a loooong time afterwards, and the fathers visit them if they can get time off work. This is fairly standard here.
      Before you think I’m defending Asian cultures, there’s plenty of other sick shit here to make up for it… but it’s interesting how different patriarchies obsess about different things.
      ..proving that *none* of it is natural

      • but it’s interesting how different patriarchies obsess about different things.
        ..proving that *none* of it is natural

        That is exactly it. Same too with the supposedly “innate gender” bullshit too. It’s all made up fairy tale stuff.

  4. Actually men do not create babies and neither do women ‘have men’s children or child.’ Both are male supremacist lies which have been uttered by men for centuries. Women are in fact the ones who carry a foetus and therefore men can only father a child not make the ludicrous claim ‘she is having my baby!’

    But as we know men believe women exist to just serve men whereas men exist to control and dominate women including telling women ‘you’re/you’re not having my baby!’

    Next time a man claims ‘she’s having my child’ – ask the man did you create the child yourself because if you did you are the first male living or deceased who managed to do the impossible.

    Given malestream media does not know the truth even when it ‘hits them in the face’ I’ve no doubt Daily Telegraph is putting a spin on this story because malestream media has one agenda only and that is to perpetuate misogyny and men’s hatred/contempt for women.

    Given it continues to be men who believe they alone have the right to divorce/cast aside women I don’t think this male was coerced into marriage. After all too many men continue to view women as their personal sexual property and when a woman dares to end a relationship with a male he commonly throws a tantrum and all too often commits lethal femicide.

    Then there’s the issue of fathers refusing to pay maintenance for the child/children they have fathered and how government makes it almost impossible for the woman to receive money from the father in order that her child can eat. Many men who become fathers refuse to pay child maintenance upon birth of child because these men claim ‘the child was not theirs or why should they pay maintenance when the woman didn’t take contraception.’ See once again men want it all their way – to make the ludicrous claim they supposedly have innumerable foetuses floating around their sperm and then deny the woman right of child maintenance.

    I always wonder if men are the ones who ‘have children’ why oh why are not men the ones who are responsible for raising the child/children they have? Why is it always women who are expected to take responsibility ‘for the man’s child/children (sic)?’ After all the child is the man’s property is it not?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s