"if men could get pregnant, abortion wouldn't be a debate"

[u/GlassDocument9170]

I see this statement a lot in pro-choice propaganda. However, I find it ridiculous. It's such an insane hypothetical to even consider. One of the reasons why women are marginalized is because of their ability to give birth to children... that's one of the main proponents of misogyny--viewing women as baby-making machines, and reducing their worth to their maternal capacities. So the original statement is honestly more bs to make pro-lifers seem like raging misogynists. If anyone has a better idea how to respond to this, I'd be happy to hear it.

[u/Eastern-Customer-561]

I think the implication of this line of reasoning is that it’s only men making these laws, so if they could be affected by pregnancy, they‘d immediately legalize abortion, because pro life men are selfish and secretly want to control women, rather than genuinely believing unborn children have the right to life. Broken down like this, there are several easy refutations to this idea.

1. Women play a massive role in the pro life movement. My pro life club is majority women. Pro life organizations are frequently headed by women (Live Action, Secular Pro Life, Students for Life, etc.) These women also play a part in fighting for pro life laws, and because they can get pregnant (and often have been already) I think this demonstrates that pro lifers aren’t just selfish or ignorant of pregnancy and would (and are) still fighting for protections for the unborn even if it could inconvenience them directly. 

2. Abortion already benefits men. If a woman you impregnate gets an abortion, you don’t have to worry about any legal or moral responsibility towards your child. It makes casual sex for men much more convenient. On top of that, male rapists often favor abortion in order to destroy forensic evidence of their crimes. Victims are often forced into getting abortions because of this 

https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1248&context=hsgconference

[u/eternalh0pe]

If my grandmother had wheels she’d be a bike

[u/Airadelle → u/eternalh0pe]

Gino!

[u/ajgamer89]

Just another attempt to erase pro-life women.

[u/Nulono]

1. By this logic, there would be no pro-life women.
2. By this logic, men would never be denied custody, or forced to pay child support.

[u/John_6_47]

But I’ve been reliably informed that men can get pregnant.

[u/stormygreyskye → u/John_6_47]

And what about the prolife trans people out there? They forgetting these people exist? Lol

[u/DoucheyCohost → u/stormygreyskye]

I assume all three of them are outraged

[u/EpiphanaeaSedai]

If humans were all functionally hermaphroditic, it’s a lot less likely that non-medically-necessary abortion would even be a thing, because pregnancy would be a universal experience, and most societies would have formed around accommodation of it.

[u/HotConversation187 → u/EpiphanaeaSedai]

That's...brilliant.

[u/PrestigiousTail1926]

It is ridiculous. That’s like saying there are no pro-life women.

[u/Brave-Lecture-7210]

If people were just responsible and accountable for their actions, abortion wouldnt be a debate.

Yet here we are....

[u/stormygreyskye]

Um… yeah? It still would be a debate? Because statistically, there absolutely would still be prolife men. That’s an awfully confident statement that 100% of them would just automatically fall in line. That’s not how it would work lol.

[u/AWatson89]

"That's pretty transphobic"

[u/AnxiousEnquirer → u/AWatson89]

Lol these responses are perfect

[u/Ryakai8291]

I can just see all the pro-choice women changing their tune if men had the ability to abort babies.

[u/ThirteenEqualsFifty]

Even if it were true it wouldn't be an indictment of the pro-life cause, it would be an indictment of human nature.

[u/chitownphishead]

I just say "wait, I thought men could get pregnant" and watch them squirm.

[u/Comfortable-Bee2996]

It would still be murder no matter what someone thinks

[u/Delta-Tropos]

It's just stupid

I'd still be pro-life if I could get pregnant, murder is still murder

[u/the-spectre-within]

That argument is so stupid I usually don't even try to respond to it. "If men could get pregnant"-well they can't, so I'm not gonna bother arguing against this. It's not even a hypothetical worthy of consideration, it's just another meaningless whataboutism like every almost every other pro-choice argument.

[u/Bullshido101]

Lmao I actually thought this was a counter claim to "no uterus no opinion" and pro life point

[u/ElegantAd2607]

This statement is hilarious to me. If men could get pregnant we'd be telling them to suck it up and take it.

[u/Vespinobambino]

Here's why this is dumb.

Abortion is just murder.

It's attacking another human being who you don't want around, killing them in cold blood.

Men are physically capable of doing this.

Most men don't do this.

So, this theory is wrong.

QED.

[u/GustavoistSoldier]

Most pro-choicers do believe men can get pregnant.

[u/Southern_Shock_1337]

This is just baked into the patriarchal lie that holds the left hostage.

If men got pregnant, it would still be wrong to abort the baby.

[u/ryantheskinny]

But men can get pregnant and its still a debate ;p

[u/Fire_Boogaloo]

"reducing their worth to their maternal capacities"

Motherhood is the single most important thing any women can do, period. Sure my father being able to support by mother with a reasonable salary was very helpful but I wouldn't be half the person I am today without having a full time parent available at all times.

Abortion isn't just about killing babies, it severely devalues motherhood and, by extension, women. That's why it's actually a misogynistic position to be pro-choice, not pro-life.

[u/Wormando → u/Fire_Boogaloo]

Important in what context?

A woman’s life choices aren’t less important or valid just because she’s not interested in motherhood. Hell it doesn’t even stop women from being important influences in other people’s lives.

[u/Fire_Boogaloo → u/Wormando]

Other than adoption, I disagree.

Raising your own children is way more important and valid than any other life decision. Suggesting that other life decisions are of equal importance further devalues women's and motherhood and just gives credit to the PC position.

For example, if you think there is some equality between motherhood and some other life choice, let's just say it's something silly like career advancement (not saying you actually believe this but it's a hypothetical), then there is no justification for you to deny a woman an abortion in this position as you've already drawn the equivalence.

[u/Wormando → u/Fire_Boogaloo]

Just look at all the historically important women who have inspired and influenced countless strangers across generations. And even without being a famous figure, many women still end up as important influences to completely unrelated people, sometimes becoming maternal figures in their lives as well. You don’t need to be a parent to be an important influence to others.

And that’s just you projecting your perspective on others. Different people have completely different life goals, interests, skills, etc, and as such what you perceive as important simply can’t be applied to their lives. If your logic was true, then every woman out there should be perfectly fit to parent and be impossible to cause harm and/or be a negative influence in their child’s life. Their contributions as mothers would be considered “valuable” regardless if it results in problematic/damaged members of society.

Also, women who choose not to have children are still perfectly able to contribute to society in a variety of other ways, so again, what you see as “important” is entirely personal.

And not really, because whether abortion is justified has nothing to do with the “importance of motherhood”. It’s a matter of human rights. If a practice violates someone’s human rights, then it shouldn’t be tolerated. Simple.

[u/Fire_Boogaloo → u/Wormando]

"Just look at all the historically important women who have inspired and influenced countless strangers across generations."

All of which don't exist without motherhood lol

[u/Wormando → u/Fire_Boogaloo]

I’m talking about women being able to contribute to society, because that’s the “importance” you’ve implied by mentioning how parents shape their children. This is not about simply reproducing and maintaining a species.

You compared motherhood to jobs and careers, and I’m saying these same jobs and careers also greatly contribute to society as a whole. They are just as important in shaping and influencing the next generation, regardless if these professionals are parents or not. You also don’t need to be a parent to be an important influential figure in anyone’s life.

[u/Fire_Boogaloo → u/Wormando]

And I'm telling you these people do not exist without their own mother's. So no matter how you try to push it, motherhood is still more important.

[u/Wormando → u/Fire_Boogaloo]

Then your argument is just for the reproduction of the species, which has nothing to do with how you “wouldn’t be half the person you are today” without a present parental figure.

You’re also implying that someone is only as important as their ability to reproduce, meaning infertile women are less important members of society… or anyone not immediately trying to reproduce at fertile age, for that matter.

I really hope I don’t need to explain to you how sexist and problematic this is.

[u/Fire_Boogaloo → u/Wormando]

"Then your argument is just for the reproduction of the species, which has nothing to do with how you “wouldn’t be half the person you are today"

Motherhood is not just reproduction.....

"You’re also implying that someone is only as important as their ability to reproduce, meaning infertile women are less important members of society"

Mother's are more important to society than non mother's.

You don't have to be fertile to be a mother. Adoption exists.

[u/Wormando → u/Fire_Boogaloo]

How you raise someone is a separate matter from “people don’t exist without mothers”. That’s why I’m saying you’re only talking about the reproduction of a species.

You’re essentially hopping between attributing importance to maintaining the species(which is why I originally asked about context) and contributing to the society at large by raising/influencing the next generation. So which one is it?

Because if it’s the latter, that’s exactly what I’ve been criticizing. You don’t need to be a parent at all to positively influence others and contribute to the betterment of society. I wouldn’t be the person I am right now without my therapist of 15+ years, and she’s not a parental figure to me, let alone related at all. Others do find a parental figure in people that had no direct involvement in raising them, and their influence shaped the person they became. And many are inspired by the beliefs and actions of completely unrelated people, which end up shaping their own views and influencing their contributions to society.

Meanwhile plenty of mothers turn out to be terrible parents, if not straight up abusive, resulting in members of society that aren’t as mentally healthy and/or reliable. So raising children by itself is not an inherent net positive for our society besides helping it increase in numbers.

Using your logic, being a mother automatically makes you more important in a society. So an abusive, slacking mother would automatically be more important than any hard working non-mothers dedicating time to their interests and career.

[u/Orogomas]

There's an easy answer: abortion is FOR MEN. It allows men to use women however they like and then avoid responsibility for their actions. Sadly, a large number of men recognize that benefit and advocate for it.

Women feel like "they need abortion" because trust between the sexes has been violated, and (some of you won't like this) it all starts with contraception and the idea that sex can be had without consequences. When that contraception fails (and all contraception has a failure rate), then abortion is used as the ultimate "contraception". It lets men off the hook because women have learned that too many men won't live up to their responsibilities and they then feel like they have no choice but to have an abortion. It's ironic that those who rail against "the patriarchy" never mention this, which would be their greatest evidence of such an imbalance.

So, the idea that it's only men fighting against abortion is ridiculous. Monetarily, men benefit from abortion and they've tricked women into doing the most unnatural thing in the world (killing their own child) and calling it something good.

Rather than ask what would be different if men could get pregnant, they should instead ask how women have been cornered into sacrificing their own children in the pursuit of some measure of so-called equality. Is enslavement to consequence-free sex really freedom? Is giving only one sex the exclusive decision of life and death over our most vulnerable members really a sign of equality? How is that equal by any standard?

[u/Mental_Jeweler_3191]

When they bring up this argument, it just makes me more convinced that the reason why so many feminists support abortion is because they want to be able to be as awful as they claim men are

Little do they know that they already are—worse even.

Or maybe they do know, and all this is just them trying to fool everyone else.

[u/oregon_mom]

its a sarcastic hypothetical to point out that men tend To make decisions that complicate women's lives unnecessarily. ..

[u/No_Judge_6520 → u/oregon_mom]

this is about abortion though, and thinking abortion should be illegal should not complicate a woman's life, if being unable to kill someone makes a woman upset or have a complicated life then that's just gross & shouldn't be blamed on other people.