Remix.run Logo
▲ lotsofpulp a day ago

That is where the debate ends. Either a woman has the autonomy to make decisions about what happens to her body, or she does not.

As for georgeburdell thinking women are more advantaged against men, he should do some experiments applying to jobs with equivalent credentials as a man vs a woman, both in child bearing years. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the average man in that age range will need or ask for fewer days off than the average woman.

▲tarpitt a day ago | parent | next [-]

My personal experience is that all of my female colleagues have found jobs quite easily (even some pretty unimpressive friends of mine), while all of my male colleagues are struggling to find work. There is a massive hiring bias in favor of women as I understand it.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/09/04/jobs-report-women-payrolls.h... is a report I've read recently (it's partially due to the growth in the healthcare industry due to aging population). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFCljh6dBIg&t=144s is a discussion that captures the modern perspective for young men.

The idea that maternity leave plays into this in any signifigant way is totally old-fashioned (in my opinion).

Women essentially have a higher effective charisma thanks to their greater sexual market value. There were some studies that showed women have an in-group bias to support women, but also men have a cross-group bias to support women. People naturally pefer women.

▲ponector a day ago | parent [-]

I think the answer is in salary expectations: men have higher average salary. It's easier to find a job if you ask less.

▲nonethewiser a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But your test doesnt work if the baby/fetus etc. is a person, which is what abortion opponents think. If its a person then your test (does the woman have autonomy to make decisions about her body) has a contradiction. In that case, one expression (abortion) of one person's autonomy would transgress the other. You are not actually addressing the crux of the issue so your argument only works for people who already agree the fetus isn’t a person, which is the very thing being disputed. You have to address if the thing inside the tummy is a person or not, and when.

▲lotsofpulp a day ago | parent [-]

I didn't posit a test. The previous posts discuss [women's] bodily autonomy, so either one can assume women should always have bodily autonomy, or the other option which is women sometimes do not have bodily autonomy.

>You have to address if the thing inside the tummy is a person or not, and when.

As an aside, the data overwhelmingly shows neither women nor doctors are choosing to abort viable fetuses willy nilly. The real world effect is, as the data shows, to cause doctors to think about their financial and criminal liabilities before their patients' well being.

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/04/raw-data-abor...

▲nonethewiser a day ago | parent [-]

>so either one can assume women should always have bodily autonomy, or the other option which is women sometimes do not have bodily autonomy

Framing it as a question of women's bodily autonomy assumes there is only one person involved, which is exactly what abortion opponents dispute. So your framing doesn't settle the issue.

The crux of the issue is if and when the thing in the tummy is a person.

▲EPWN3D a day ago | parent | next [-]

That's not completely true; even if the tiny blob of cells is a person, bodily autonomy matters because there is no other situation where we force one person to use their body to keep another person alive.

Like the state cannot hook you up to a blood transfusion machine (or whatever), plug you into some guy who needs your blood, and then keep you there. And you cannot be prosecuted for murder for denying a life-saving blood transfusion to some guy who needs your blood. That's somewhat analogous to pregnancy.

▲chmod775 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> bodily autonomy matters because there is no other situation where we force one person to use their body to keep another person alive

The state will however happily violate bodily autonomy to achieve much lesser goals, like putting needles in you for blood tests or to literally kill you.

Keeping another person alive is arguably one of the more worthy goals.

> That's somewhat analogous to pregnancy.

The comparison goes in the right direction, but it's not quite there. Your examples are all about inaction, while terminating pregnancy generally requires action.

▲EPWN3D 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> The state will however happily violate bodily autonomy to achieve much lesser goals, like putting needles in you for blood tests or to literally kill you.

Be that as it may, it does not and cannot force you to donate your organs or blood, even as a condition of incarceration.

> The comparison goes in the right direction, but it's not quite there. Your examples are all about inaction, while terminating pregnancy generally requires action.

Not quite true. If you were hooked up to a blood transfusion machine, you'd have to unhook yourself. Maybe a better scenario would be a dialysis machine that connected one human to another human's kidney.

▲chmod775 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> Not quite true. If you were hooked up to a blood transfusion machine, you'd have to unhook yourself.

Umm...

▲nonethewiser 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>That's not completely true; even if the tiny blob of cells is a person, bodily autonomy matters because there is no other situation where we force one person to use their body to keep another person alive.

Yeah but if it's a person then it's not about bodily autonomy because the abortion denies the baby bodily autonomy.

At that point it's about what we owe other people.

▲EPWN3D 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The dependent being cannot have autonomy by definition. The woman in the case of an abortion is denying the embryo autonomy, she's refusing to support the dependency.

▲lotsofpulp 19 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>At that point it's about what we owe other people.

Who is “we” in this statement? The “owed” amount seems to be entirely paid by considerably less than half the population.

▲Forgeties79 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

A Kantian framework does not graft onto “women must bring pregnancies to term because they owe it to them,” doubly so when it’s not conclusively a person. You keep asking people to respect that opinion yet leave zero room anywhere for people who think it isn’t a person.

I also don’t appreciate that you are arguing on behalf of a group you are clearly in agreement with yet your phrasing avoids committing to the stance. You present yourself like you’re just giving them due consideration and respect but you only give that side these graces.

▲MrDrMcCoy 6 hours ago | parent [-]

By what framework does one grant or deny personhood to any genetically distinct, living human? Should age and location even apply?

▲Forgeties79 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Dude I am not debating “is it a person?” with you. It’s clearly not currently settled that it’s a life, it’s literally why there’s a debate at all, and we are not going to solve it or change our stances on it. You believe it is, I do not, and that’s the gulf that makes this whole thing such a 3rd rail issue. Ultimately it’s also not something I have to ever face with my body so I look to those who have to carry it to term for guidance on what is or isn’t violating.

▲roodypoo2 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Vast majority of abortions are for convenience because women have been brainwashed into self-destructive tendencies, not life-saving.

▲ a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
▲ a day ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
▲atmavatar a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Surely a solution to that problem would be to institute equal maternity and paternity leave while making it socially acceptable and even encouraged for men to take advantage of said leave.

The men would get the benefit of spending time with their newborn children in a way they cannot do today, while their significant others get the benefit of another person available to help them out full-time through the child's early months. The cherry on top is that businesses would be far less able to view women as men who take more time off.

▲icantevenhold a day ago | parent | next [-]

This is the case in Germany but the problem is still not fully solved. But it’s a lot better!

▲lotsofpulp a day ago | parent | prev [-]

It does not matter if men are mandated to take the leave, biological differences such as the effects of menstrual cycles will make it so, on average, women will request and/or need more days off. Also, the effects of pregnancy beyond the minimum parental leave duration will pretty much only affect women's ability to work, not men's.

▲akoboldfrying a day ago | parent | prev [-]

In some sectors, notably academic STEM faculty positions, women are drastically preferred over equivalently qualified men. From "National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track" (Williams and Ceci, PNAS 2015 [1]):

> Contrary to prevailing assumptions, men and women faculty members from all four fields preferred female applicants 2:1 over identically qualified males with matching lifestyles (single, married, divorced), with the exception of male economists, who showed no gender preference.

In a meta-analysis of 57 such studies, Galos and Coppock (Science Advances 2023 [2]) found a small 1.2% bias favouring women overall, with gender-coded fields generally have a preference for applicants of that gender (5.1% towards women in nursing, admin, early childhood education; 3.0% towards men in trades, engineering, executive roles).

[1]: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1418878112

[2]: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ade7979?hl=en-GB