BangkokReady

Are you saying there are no health issues, no strain, no stress, no damage to the body, from a man working for 18 years to financially support a child to adulthood?

Interesting, but how do things change after the meal has been consumed? After the baby is born, things are very different. I'm not sure your analogy works once you consider that carrying and birthing the baby is not the only part of child birth or rearing. It is very much a two course meal.

I think you should be polite and considerate, but if you spill over it isn't your fault. You didn't make the seat or decide how much space each passenger gets.

I wonder if the reason that some people might be annoyed by a tip is that they don't associate the tip with the service provided but rather think that it means the guy will want something in return later on. There seem to be a few examples in the news where men use women owing them money as leverage to demand sex. In my experience, even being being friendly and passing the time of day with a woman seems to be an indicator of sexual or romantic interest. It wouldn't surprise me if giving money was seen as something similar.

If you pay for a seat, you're entitled to that seat. If the seats are too small, that's on the airline.

So why does that man not have a say, given the fact that his body, his health, his time at work, his emotional state is affected?

It has nothing to do with pity. If a woman has the right to choose whether a baby is born due to the effect the baby has on her body, why is the man not allowed any say based on the effect it has on his body?

That may be why he was filming me in the first place. ????‍♂️

I wouldn't say that she necessarily does. She of course consents to the risk of pregnancy, but, since abortion was invented, she does not need to consent to the risk of carrying a baby to term as she knows that she can stop the pregnancy. The person I was responding to, suggested that the reason that a woman has the right to abortion is that she has to use her body to carry the baby to term. It is therefore a question of autonomy over a person's body. I wanted to know the views on this of the person I was replying to, as this would then lead to my next question. People suggest that the man has no right to say whether a woman that he has had sex with and impregnates keeps or aborts the baby, but he is generally held responsible for paying for the raising of that baby until it is 18 years old. Now, if we consider that a man must work to provide money to support this baby, and that a man uses his body to earn that money, it means that his bodily autonomy is not considered in this. What I mean is, a woman has the right to choose to carry or abort a baby, due (according to the person I was replying to) to the fact that it is her body that is used to carry that baby, but a man has no choice in the matter, even though it is his body that is used to earn the money that he must pay to support the baby. Any strain that the man's body, sanity, health, etc., might go through to support the baby, is completely ignored in favour of the strain on the woman's body, simply because she is the one who carries the baby.

How what?

You've already made it clear that we've reached an "intellectual impasse" where you are not wiling to answer a simple question. ????‍♂️

Of course. Logically if you are concerned that answering a question will expose you in some way, you avoid the question. I understand that fully.

That's quite the escape plan I've handed you, huh? It's fine. We'll just pretend you didn't want to answer because of how right you are. ????

I know this is very childish, but I think it's actually quite a good response if you don't like being filmed. Sure, they might have the right to film you in public, but you have the right to stair into the camera and wave, totally ruining that "take".

You lose your right to privacy if you're doing something immoral? Or the fact that you don't want to be filmed should make you question the morality of your actions?

Yeah, you cannot film private property without permission, even if you are standing on public property. Also, it's kind of rude to film people anyway. I always find it annoying when I see someone with a mike and a smartphone. I know we don't have a right to really have an expectation of privacy when we are out in public, but I don't really want to end up in the background of a YouTube video. It gets to the point where, if someone is making money from filming members of the public, where is the cut for the community they are using?

Why don't you want to answer the question? What weakness in your argument are you protecting?

That's how I describe comments that deliberately ignore or misrepresent what I have said because the author doesn't want to debate or discuss, they only want to score a point for their side. You weren't trying to. That was my point. As I said, I already have done.

I'm not discussing the laws of Texas, Louisiana, and maybe Alabama.

Simple question, does she or not?

Doesn't the woman in some way consent to this responsibility when she chooses to have sex?

It's a human life from conception.

I think the act of rape would make it a different scenario.

Ah, well I can't really speak for Pattaya, I haven't really visited there.

And women having rights magically nullifies men's feelings?