Post Punk Kitchen Forum

The thought experiment misconstrues what is meant by "reproductive rights". Eve's bodily autonomy trumps Adam's reproductive desires, for approximately the same reason that someone can change his mind during sex and this trumps his partner's desire to continue. I mean, we don't have a positive right to have children. What would that even look like? The state contracting with surrogates on behalf of would-be fathers?

Anyway, who cares about this shiitake. I'd be more interested in thought experiments about convincing ex-girlfriends to have abortions.

Although I do find it a little racist that feminism isn't called egalitarianism.

Here's my thought experiment:

Tommy Sadballs has just been diagnosed with acute congenital exploding balls syndrome. His doctor tells him he only have three hours left until his balls explode, taking out most of the crucial structural parts of his cork and badly scorching his taint. "My goodness!" says Tommy, "I only have three hours left to have sex FOREVER?!?"

He goes to a bar and meets a woman named Vagina Fancy. They get along swimmingly. After talking about their mutual interest in Irish agricultural surveys of the 18th century, they agree to certain copulations. But! Just before Tommy busts a nut, she's like, "Whoa, wait, you have to stop." So Tommy stops, and then he busts a nut. LITERALLY.

Later, he is fitted for a prosthetic cork and balls, but it's just not the same. For the rest of his life, he has feelings of sadness. So, what was more important? Vagina's right not to be sexually assaulted, or Tommy's right to get his rocks off before his cork's off? Bear in mind that Tommy is a man, so his feelings are pretty special.

The term "bust a nut" is offensive to male genitals. Nothing is busted.

I was in a similar situation, Linanil, but it was a different country from now. That's not what I'm talking about. A father shouldn't have the right to decide to have a "sociological abortion" when a child is already born if he previously knew about the pregnancy. Maybe give him 10 weeks after finding out about the pregnancy to decide.

It's the same here. A child (probably the mother in her child's name) can sue a man to undergo a paternity test, the biological father has to pay child support according to his income. The circumstances under which the pregnancy started don't matter. Many biological fathers play the system, though.

If the child lives with the father, the mother has to pay child support. The mother usually gets the custody, unless the father already has another female partner to take care of his child. Patriarchy harms both men and women.

viewtopic.php?p=462751#p462751
This is a good thread where we've discussed that issue at length.

I think we've just redefined "thought experiment."

I know I'll never look at 18th century, Irish agricultural surveys in the same way again.

I've also written a lot of Tommy Sadballs erotic fan thought experiments, if you guys are interested.

Only if there's a Buster Gonad crossover.

I haven't read most of this thread Gulliver because I think it might make my head implode but really the pay gap is pretty forking low down the list of important feminist issues & I would strongly suggest that you read some Bell Hooks before suggesting we don't need feminism.

Gulliver wasn't saying we don't need feminism. He was asking why we don't use a broader term than 'feminism' in order to address issues of inequality for everyone. I think there have been some good answers to this question in this thread.

I feel that by even suggesting that the term feminism is unnecessary now, that it is only being kept around for legacy and that male & female struggles are the same is massively insulting. Male & female struggles aren't the same at all & the reason that we need feminism is because the patriarchy still exists not because the pay gap's apparently closing for one small section of society!

Egalitarianism is not a broader term, it's a synonym for feminism.

If "egalitarianism" is a synonym, why would anyone think it's important to use it rather than continue to use the word "feminism"?

Because they are aware many people have wrong notion about what feminism is.

Didn't you know?

I love how it's always white heterosexual men who say things like "I don't see race because I'm colorblind," or "why do we even need feminism, women have more rights than men do these days!"

Kind of for the same reason we call vegans "vegans" and not "vegetarians."

Yup. I also love how they're the ones who always want to "play devil's advocate," because thought experiments involving forcing women to give birth will never have an impact on their lives.

"I've notice this movement has begun to nibble away at my inherent and enormous privilege. Surely it's time to call it quits by now. Ladies?"

Guys, I'm not sure if you're talking about Gulliver or the trend in general, but if it's the former, I'm fairly certain Gulliver's not a white heterosexual man. He's stated very clearly that he's gay. That doesn't take away from the problematic nature of what he's argued in this thread, and it doesn't negate what you're saying about how that argument tends to come mostly from within that demographic. But if you're painting him with that brush, it's not a completely accurate brush.

Feminism is not called egalitarianism for the same reason cars and trees are not called "things". Feminism is a particular type of egalitarianism.

Otherwise my post would have read,
"Egalitarianism is not called egalitarianism for the same reason cars and trees are not called "things". Egalitarianism is a particular type of egalitarianism.

...and that doesn't make sense. And your original post would have read "...oh well you get the idea. Pretty simple...It's a good thing for an idea to have a word of its own.

You're right. Sorry about that. I was referring to the trend in general, like you said, but I should have been more specific in my post.

or racism for that matter.