34 USA states Force joint custody on rape victims. Maryland Republicans just shut down the bill to terminate rapists' parental rights. Do you want to know who rapes children? Men who raped their mothers for faulk's sake! Can't afford to raise a child on your own? Don't worry...your state will mandate DNA testing to keep that ass in your life forever. Jobless loser? Don't worry, you'll share custody and pay him child support! We won't have enough adoptive homes for all the kids these people want to create. We're not talking about someone having their first child. Some of these people are single mothers of 3 or 4 when they get pregnant. Yes, they have problems. So why on earth do you want to answer this by flooding the world with countless unwanted kids?!?

We do see eye to eye on these points. I realise you weren’t trying to devalue our friendship but rather trying to make time for it while being committed to your family and I think that is a good thing! I think you are a kind and nice man and I respect you though I don’t always agree with you. Somehow I suspect if you had been friends with me before all the bad stuff at the hands of Christianity and Christians happened in my life, I would be more likely to be a Christian today.

Initially I felt sad and a little hurt about the first few sentences but I must agree with you 100%, for the sake of the long-term you are right and we must try to remember that from now on.
Remember that link I told you about:
http://ifightbullies.blogspot.ru/2015/12/banned-from-rok.html
Or better yet I can take you to the think-tank my friends introduced me to and I can finish answering any off-topic comments and we can say anything light and lenifying we like there too:
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/friendlyatheist1/nine_dead_in_charleston_church_shooting/#comment-2399203382
I know that link leads to one of my comments but you can type anything you like up under that.
You said, earlier on in the conversations, that two responses a day would be sufficient. One to two responses a day I think we can manage. However my circumstances are making it harder for me to write in (and I think yours are too) so please don’t expect a response from me nearly as often as there used to
be. Also if we have any problems with anything each other is doing, it would mean so much to me if we could speak gently to each other over the fault; especially as you value gentle speech when it is addressed to you. Last but not least I will try to fit in with you too, so please forgive me if I don't catch on immediately.

Oh, thank you for writing back and letting me know everything is all right; I was so hurt (because I knew my faults and thought I had driven you away because of them) and bewildered (because I couldn't figure out what I'd done wrong and want to make it up to you whatever it is) and angry (because in some ways I thought I had been more than fair to you and spent a lot of time including hours I should have been working to write, and decided it wasn't my fault, and your words shocked me) and I honestly thought you'd never write back again but now that you're back I very much want to hear where I went wrong so I can communicate better next time. I wrote up all those responses because I'd said I would and I was trying to think of things to say hence the flood of tiring questions (I try to keep my word when I can but in a way I needed a break too) but I see I haven't been totally sensitive to you either and I asked you how I could improve in the other comments; you'll find that I can be incredibly obliging when asked to do or not to do something. Yes I would love for us to come up with a better vehicle of communication, especially as RL (real life) is just as important as cyber-life if not more so and we've both got a lot of things to do besides sitting there chatting to each other. Besides I have no problem waiting; we both need as much time as we need. Also we must keep them fun and not feel obligated to answer each other all the time, but that doesn't mean we don't want to write back to each other from time to time. Again, thanks and I hope your day goes well :)

One more thing - I am willing to try again if you are, and I promise to remember not to expect you to explain your every thought or idea, and not to be one-sided. I apologise for so many comments (I think part of the reason is that I blame myself and want to express how sorry I am and how willing I am to be corrected for my behaviour if you are willing to offer such correction), feel free not to answer all or any if you'd rather not. Thank you for the time you did spend with me answering my comments; it was rude of me to take you so much for granted, and I would like to know how to make it up to you so that you don't feel exhausted if we chat to each other again. I am indebted to you for the time you did spend with me, caring about me as a person, and I will try not to burden you again - that is, if you want to give me another chance.

Another thing - I know I don't deserve this but please let me know you forgive me at least even if you never want to write to me again. Also I wish I knew where I had gone wrong so that I could rectify it especially as I am very unsure what I have or haven't done (except in regards to asking too many questions; also I suspect that the conversations have been too much about my interests in some respects and I apologise for that). I am asking for honest and severe correction of my behaviour so that I don't repeat whatever it is I have done (I know about asking you questions about every little thing so I will try to stop it from now on), that is if you are willing to offer it. If you are not, I respect that too, and won't press the issue; and if you do not want to write to me again, I will thank you for the time you spent with me and move on. I am truly sorry for being such a bother especially as I never meant to be a pest, for asking too many questions about your every thought, and for any self-centeredness I have shown. Please forgive me but if I only knew what else I had done so that I didn't do it again I would feel better.

“Crystal I don't mean to be condescending but it feels to
me like your ideas of love are purely of logic, I don't see you as having anymore than an idea of what you think love should be.”
You’re right I don’t; I’ve never been in love.
“I think you are at a strong disadvantage and I think is a
subject we should probably just let be, as I don't see us getting anymore since we areally coming from two very different perspectives.”
Okay.
“I think I am needing to take a break also as I am spending
too much of my time trying to nurture a friendship that seems very one sided. I feel you expect me to explain my every thought or idea and frankly it's exhausting. I pray you find some answers but more importantly some peace.”
Uh oh.
I can see I haven’t been very fair to you and I apologise for that. I know how I meant what I was writing – that I was taking an interest in your perspective – but I am sorry, very sorry; as I never meant to exhaust you by anything I wrote and no you don’t have to explain your every thought or idea. Please forgive me for asking how I can make these
commenting sessions far less one-sided than they were, because I’m a little scared that question will annoy you. I feel absolutely awful and it is only fair that you should take a break; I need one too. Also if you don’t want to write to me again please just tell me and I’ll respond to your remaining comments (if you want me to) and leave you alone. Bye for now and I feel terrible; this was my fault and if I only knew a way to make things right I would.

"without first having that love based on closeness and intamacy"
Could you please explain what you are referring to by that statement and also in what ways people can build love for each other so they can grow closer together? Sorry for the barrage of questions BTW, I know you are busy.

BTW I explained how I meant my questions and I was thinking specifically along the lines of times when the woman needs the man most, childbirth being one of those times.

I understand what you are saying, and will answer this comment properly later. However my real questions were more along the lines of, how do you think a man feels when he receives affection from someone he has cared about and invested time in, what do you think are the best ways a guy can treat a woman so that he makes her feel this way, and what kinds of emotions he can show to encourage such a response from her emotionally? If I think of anything else along these lines I'll ask it too if that's okay.

“I guess I need to do more studies as I am not aware of Peter Singer and his beliefs.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer
Do you think it is wrong for a PL person like myself to agree with Peter Singer’s beliefs on animals only*? Also to make it clear I disagree with Peter Singer on life issues as regarding humans. He is a vegetarian, animal-rights activist, pro-abortion,
pro-euthanasia individual. To me, belief in culling out humans and respecting animal rights conflict, despite the whole sentience and sapience thing.
“That said I will agree, and there is amazingly a turning of the Tide that is taking place in regards to abortion.”
That is very heartening to hear; can you show me examples of this?
“It seems even without legislation there have been far fewer abortions, I think information is changing peoples hearts and minds.”
Josh Brahm’s site, Equal Rights Institute, which we are on now, helps to answer people with – generally though not always – sound prolife arguments, to challenge people’s preset assumptions and asking them to really think for five minutes at least. I appreciate that he takes the time to try to get people to think through the implications of their positions rather than just call or imply that people are nazi-baby-killers, and I am trying to do the same when I speak to legal abortion advocates on this
very controversial topic – to treat them with sensitivity and respect as people as I discuss these things, to take breaks and to find areas of common agreement. I think this is very important; I know in the beginning I tried but I do not believe I was quite as good as I could have been (someone correct me if I’m wrong on that). All I can say is that I hope I improve.
Speaking of which, I want your expert opinion, because this sounds like BS to me:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/02/25/bryan-fischer-says-abortions-are-like-food-for-demons/
“When you see what is being done to these poor lives without an intervention on their behalf”
What is being done to them breaks my heart too, but it is important to understand *why so we can better answer it and encourage more people to care.
One of the closest beliefs that could relate to the lack of intervention (in my opinion) is the belief that the ZEF is not a person despite its humanity. I think another one is the bodily
autonomy argument – Thompson’s violinist. It’s one of the most popular arguments legal abortion advocates appeal to, so they can bolster their point about bodily autonomy:
http://www.l4l.org/library/thomviol.html
http://www.str.org/articles/unstringing-the-violinist#.VtDZn1LLe68
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion
Another argument is sentience and sapience, and the potential human life. If it doesn’t have the properties of a human being – sentience (ability to feel pain) and sapience (ability to show
wisdom) then it doesn’t have a right to live although it is a potential human being. There is one problem in this argument though – we are all at a developmentally different stage from each other. Science has proved this and whether we were to accept that life begins at conception or implantation (although in this case it would be harder because to implant it had to have
been conceived) this particular argument would fall flat on its face. Also is it not possible for sentience and sapience to develop? We all had to have a beginning. There is such a thing as acorns growing into oak trees and apple seeds growing into apple trees. Why would the original product need sentience
and sapience anyway; wouldn’t it need the capability for it at least? Just out of curiosity, can you define a human being and list the qualities it currently possesses – not the ones it will possess in the future – as a person while it is a zygote in a petri dish; I am curious as to your answer on that one. Sometimes its looks are brought up to argue that it is not a person. Also how
would you answer the question: why is there no battle raging to save the lives of cancer cells, e. coli, and cheek cells as well; for by PL logic cancer cells and e. coli are nonsentient, nonsapient cells that ought to have a right to live, and cheek cells could easily be converted into cells that will develop into a baby, with scientific manipulation. I’d like to discuss this aspect a little more in the future but I believe at present I should cut the paragraph
short at this point as I wish to give more thought to my next points before putting them up.
“it becomes painful for even the most ardent of supporters to continue support (anyone outside of that bubble is in my opinion in severe denial of the truth).”
I’ve seen legal abortion advocates express their moral qualms to each other about the morality of third-trimester abortions. I can read the anguish and the doubt in their words as they express
regret for those lives lost, although they still say they accept the “choice” of the mother. On the other hand, I’ve also seen people answer without too much thought that they have no problem with third-trimester abortions, or that their beliefs in abortion have been strengthened through research. I guess we as PL individuals are not doing our job when people do this, although some people will disagree because they disagree. Even some abortion practitioners occasionally express doubts and hesitation over what they do. Personally (this is not a criticism of any person I know but rather of a belief system) I do agree with your assessment that belief in second-and-third-trimester abortions without regret is a severe denial of the truth, because it is a sick and heartbreaking practice and fortunately most people can see that at those trimesters at least, it should be illegal to do such a thing.
“It is hopeful that through educating the educated we can make some headway in this area,”
That really needs to be our goal here. If you become a regular reader and commenter at ERI website you will learn how to rationally debate and relate to legal abortion advocates. It is
incredibly helpful, for one of the best ways to wipe out abortion is to wipe it out in the consciences and hearts of the people. Generally speaking our laws reflect our morals.
“what are your thoughts about the video's that have been posted by the agency Center for Medical Progress? If you haven't seen them, prepare to have a Kleenex or Handkerchief nearby, if you have do you feel they are helpful to the cause or just unnecessary abrasiveness?”
Personally I would rather not see such awful movies. I know that abortion is morally reprehensible and that is all I need to know. As for their being helpful, it depends – if the people are telling the truth then they are absolutely helpful and there is nothing wrong with what they did. If the people are lying then they are wrong and it is bad enough what PP is doing without making up lies about them. We need to be honourable in all our dealings regardless, for we have the truth on our side so we have nothing to fear and we don’t need to sneak around telling lies to prove
our points. I have wondered a lot about defunding PP but I am considering the viewpoint that financial punishment for abortion rather than total defunding of PP is the way to go, due to PP offering contraceptives, sex education, and a few other services (although CPCs also offer quite a few beneficial tools as
well).
It would mean a lot to me if I could receive replies to these two particular comments:
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/will-there-be-a-needed-spike-in-adoption-rates-if-abortion-becomes-illegal/#comment-2520613161
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/will-there-be-a-needed-spike-in-adoption-rates-if-abortion-becomes-illegal/#comment-2520803076

"My belief is if you aren’t honest with the person you love,
then how can you claim to love them?"
It's true what you say, especially in marriages and with children. My parents always tried to tell me the truth, to the point of not discussing Santa with me until I was old enough to understand he was a fantasy character! I appreciate them for that.
Sometimes though you have to lie to stay out of their hair or protect yourself emotionally (I speak of difficult relationships here and I am glad you don't find yourself there with Carolyn!).
"I understand you feeling unsafe when people are unsympathetic"
That is why I lie sometimes, because I don't feel safe telling people things I know they won't like, or because I don't trust them. Let's just say that honesty is an area I struggle in.
"I would pray that when you find someone that they will be sympathetic to your needs and cares and desires."
That's a nice idea, I've fantasised about it sometimes myself; yet I don't feel comfortable getting married.
"I know it is hard to trust someone that deeply but once you can do it; it can be one of the most amazing earthly relationships you can experience. When you love and are loved truthfully there is nothing like it, and it’s nothing you can Explain… you just feel it."
That's awesome; as I said I wish I could find someone I could trust that deeply. Yet I doubt at times that I have the character for such a relationship, although it is easier to tell the truth when I can communicate properly with them, I feel they understand me, and we share a common bond and lots of interests.
"Thank you for your love and encouragement Crystal, you are helping me to be a better man and husband :)"
That's great and I hope to help you more as the days go on.

Well, that is her decision, and I am glad she has decided for what is most comfortable for her. If she ever changes her mind she will be made to feel most welcome but I respect her decision.

Again, please take your response to the Astute Observation that I Am a Man page until I find a better one; I hope Josh will forgive us for being so off-topic at times!
“I see femininity and masculinity as being both biology and psychology.”
Actually, I grok the biology. But why do you say, psychology? I thought good Christians depended only on the Bible – or am I misunderstanding what you are saying?
“I see men and women and being dynamically different in both regards. So yes there is the biological pieces and the the cycles, but there is also a different emotional reaction.”
Is this not all the MORE reason to employ women in those places they were previously forbidden from, so that they might contribute their differences to new jobs and situations?
“Men tend to be (even without environmental adaptation) to be more logical thinkers and less emotional.”
Perhaps there is a certain truth to men being more logical and women being more emotional; I am very unsure as to this subject.
Did you know that Emanuel Swedenborg taught the men = logical, women = emotional belief? Not to vilify metaphysical spirituality (I tend to adhere to it) but he was involved in mysticism, which the Bible condemns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Swedenborg
Here’s the quote from page 249, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Penguin Classics, under the section “Notes”:
“Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772), Swedish scientist and mystic, believed that men and women were constituted by similar substances in a different organization. In women, reason is subordinated to feeling; in men, feeling is subordinated to reason. In their union a spiritual marriage between love and truth is effected. The first English congregation was founded in the 1780s.”
“Not that men are not capable of emotion we just aren't naturally as emotional and I think that is even besides hormones.”
What led you to that belief and what else besides hormones makes men less emotional, in your opinion? In short, what led you to believe that men are more logical
and women more emotional, in general? I believe you mentioned observations as a reason; would there be other factors that would lead to such a view?
“I think this is actually a good thing as men are able to live in a fire fight when people are dying all around them and not be emotionally crushed. (let me say I don't like war, but I do see it as a necessary evil in some ways)”
Well, guys do get PTSD from wars. Perhaps not as much, but it does happen.
“Where as women are great in hospital situation because of their more natural empathy and sensitivity can be strong but also emotional and great care takers. Men as Doctors and Nurses (I have noticed) tend to be more withdrawn from the person and drawn to the symptoms, where females in the same role seem more capable of treating the person.”
Do you mind if I ask for real-life examples? I’m not totally against this viewpoint if it isn’t used to suppress people so I’m curious to see this in action.
“I am not saying one cannot learn to be like the other, but that there is a difference in who is good at what.”
Okay, I can understand this viewpoint to a certain extent in the abstract. I am curious to know; why do you believe that? Is it because of God’s design?
“Yes I have heard the jokes and language men use to and about women I have never agreed with it and I do my best to tell people who tell me those things that it is not respectful.”
Oh, good!
“About allowing boys to cry, I believe that men need not some much get in touch with their "feminine side" as much as getting in touch with their emotions (which are not necessarily masculine or feminine maybe a combination of both).”
Now that is a new perspective on the issue of boys crying and I like it :)
“Yes I do agree it is out of balance we definitely need to encourage men to explore their feeling and women to explore the emotion, feeling, bodies etc. These are definitely things we can agree on.”
In what ways do you think men and women can be encouraged to explore these areas of themselves? Also, you are correct, we do agree on this, last couple of sentences.
“As far as men being the champion and the protector, I think I made it pretty clear in my last section what that looks like, but to emphasize more clearly I think as a woman is oftentimes (not always) in need of a physically
strong counterpart it is the role of a man to treasure and protect and keep women safe from harm and abuse (especially from himself).”
Why do you believe women are in need of a more physically strong counterpart?
“I think in a lot of ways though the confusion of roles is what has caused a lot of this. Men aren’t being taught to be protectors, as women are not being taught that they need protectors.”
Firstly, why do you believe that? Secondly, I disagree, I think it is the roles themselves (not so much the protector but more the men are in charge of the delicate illogical flowers known as women cr*p) that caused the problems. Just because people had roles in the old days doesn’t mean women weren’t abused because of those roles, or the misuse of them if you will.

“I am not certain how best to describe it other than to say that I think the value of life goes well beyond any theological discussion.”
I do agree with that position. Respecting life is a human rights issue and if we respect the right of someone to live then all our other rights follow from that. But what determines the extent of the worth of human life, and the
inherent right to live, without a God?
“Obviously there are pro life individuals who are not any religion and celebrate life based on the ideology that all life is important Woman, Children, Man and Animal.”
I happen to be one of these, and tend to be very strict on it too.
“That said it does still surprise me that people who are not Christian can be pro-life it's refreshing to say the least.”
Why does it surprise you? However, I’m glad you find happiness in it. We exist, in many different groups. Prolife atheists, vegans, pagans, animal-rights activists, humanists, feminists, gays – there are a lot of us around if you want to keep looking.
“Not to say that I believe people who are not Christians don't believe in the sanctity of life, but that my experience has brought me to see that few I have met have been pro-life”
Now that accounts for your surprise my friend. Being PL is not exactly a popular view, you know. It has the Christian image painted on it and is portrayed as wacky and extreme (granted, some Christian PL people do stand for and do wacky and extreme things). I think secularism, evolution, and a highly sex-oriented society have a lot to do with why people tend not to accept PL thought and practice; would you agree with that and can you list additional causes for this phenomenon?
“that said I haven't met a lot of Christians even who were fully decided on their choice between pro-life and pro-choice.”
Some of these people are genuinely struggling but others are waffling on the Bible’s clear commands. For the latter group, I have no sympathy for them. Some people are PL because God said to be rather than that they came to that position because they could see it was obviously rational.
“So abortion being simply a conversion issue ie needing to convert someone to convince them of the value of life? No not at all.”
Since you seemed to mean conversion to Christianity in this scenario, I agree with your conclusion here.
“I would most definitely consider myself pro-life on a personal level.”
Now that is where it always starts. However, from my experience, it should never end there.
“As far as my political desires? The truth is I feel the Pandora's box has already been opened, I am under no illusion that the political landscape will be able to change the way we view abortion or change it's legality.”
I realise that we risk this possibility. Yet I also remember a great man called Wilberforce that held a contrary opinion to most in his day on slavery, and bravely changed the world he lived in for the better.
“To me it's more of an intellectual and emotion driven conversation (science definitely helps in this pursuit)”
I agree that science helps in the pursuit of persuading people to reconsider their beliefs on abortion which is what we need to try to do more often. From a different perspective though, if this were, say, animal abuse, would this be more of an intellectual and emotion driven conversation in your eyes than abortion is? Also, I believe that the climate is so ripe that it could lead to euthanasia as well.
“So I guess from a political standpoint I am neutral on the issue of abortion as I feel it is overly politicized already.”
You are right, it has been overly politicised. There has been no swift solution to this moral crisis in our society. I’m not against working actively for legal reforms for years if that’s what it takes but I am against it being used as a political bat over people.
Try reading this comment and you will see the level of disrespect I feel for politicians:
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/secularprolifeblog/secular_pro_life_perspectives_the_colorado_springs_shooting_what_we_know/#comment-2395091869
“Also because from someone who started as a right wing conservative republican I can transferred my views to a more libertarian stand point.”
I’m not American but I’m not crazy on either party. There is no politician good, no, not one.
Why did you choose a more libertarian road?
“I want less government and more personal accountability.”
Generally, I would agree with you. Also, I share your views in this sense – simply laying down laws without supplying people with the tools to keep the laws will not work. That being said making laws means we must properly determine whether our actions cause harm/death to people or not. Does abortion do this? Yes it does. Laws are made to protect the innocent among us who otherwise might have no voice.
Let’s take wife-beating, for instance – do you think it should be illegal? Do you think it is your business if someone beats their wife? Yes, we can provide all the tools in the world – counselling classes etc – but still it should be
illegal otherwise more men will find it legally acceptable to beat their wives and the women will be less likely to have legal recourse to protect themselves.
“I know that we have what we have, but I think we could all stand to have more of an ability to make our own choices, not that, that relieves us from having laws and controls, but that we have more freedom on certain issues.”
Could you please expound on what you mean here, and how a society free to make its own choices even on issues like abortion would look to you? Also, when it comes
to euthanasia, how would such a society handle that?
“So I hope that long rabbit trail wasn't too confusing... to sum up I am personally not for abortion but neither am I for government having full control of the decision process either way.”
You said that you are not for government having full control of the decision process either way – in other words, would you believe that legalising and illegalising abortion are both sides of the same coin to you?

“I believe it's only responsible for the Church to step up and provide love and caring support to these mother's and help them through the various stages of the pregnacy and either adopton process or raising and supporting.”
I know of some churches that do this and when they do, they do it well. However this doesn’t seem to be one of the church’s strengths; do you know of any churches that do this? What is one of the church’s “strengths”, if you will,
is preaching abstinence, pushing abstinence-only sex education, and shaming people, especially women and LGBTQ+ that are not virgins or properly married. Generally speaking the church doesn’t provide workable solutions or aid to solo and teen mothers at all; but rather, they shame them. This is one reason I am morally opposed to church involvement unless it is genuinely non-judgmental, helpful, and constructive.
“I believe in the idea that it takes a village to raise a child”
I do too.
“and if the Church were to adopt that ideology I think we could definitely make some headway in making ourselves more than just speakers of pro-life but supporters of it.”
In what ways do you think the church should adopt this ideology? Also, by adopting this belief, how would the church make headway in making themselves supporters of prolife thought and practice and not just speakers of it? Just curious, could you be referring to more church families adopting and setting up missions to help pregnant women by any chance, or does it encompass that and
more?
IMO you want to know how the church can make headway? Stop shaming women for having sex whilst in possession of a uterus. Also stop telling women they are sinners for not abstaining. Help them. Offer them aid, and provide ways to
prevent abortion from occurring in the first place. Try to help people understand why abortion is so morally unacceptable rather than just preaching at them that it is, because telling them alone might sow a seed but it doesn't
really convert too many people. Abstinence is only one of many options. It works great when it’s properly followed, but regardless of what the church says, people will have sex and it’s time they realised that.

“Yes I think in general we should do what we can to make labor not sound quite so awful”
I do agree, if our language were more positive then I think we would have a better chance of more pleasant birthing sessions. How do you recommend making labour sound better?
“but I think we also need to be realistic, because it's not going to ever be completely a pleasant experience”
Change “ever” to “always” and you’ve got it right.
“but between changing the words we use and changing how we go about making it come about I think we can change the fears that come from it”
What do you mean, change the fears? I don’t see it as changing the fears so much as changing the perceptions of it. Also how do you go about between changing the words we use and how we go about making it come about?
“and it can be a beautiful wonderful experience”
I totally agree, but it can also be torture.
“but it will take people coming to grips what it is and what it isn't to get to that point.”
Honesty is key!
How can we encourage people to come to grips with a
balanced view on childbirth?
“Yes if there is pain like you describe”
Trust me, pal, it really is THAT BAD. Once I was very sick and took medication incorrectly and when that time of the month came around I thought I was dying, the fiery pain was that bad and something I never want to feel again! I’m betting unmedicated, un-spiritually guided childbirth would be far WORSE than that. If you doubt me try out a labour simulation machine and see how that goes.
“it makes sense that there might be something going on that is out of the normal”
You’re absolutely right, smart man! The pain is a common phenomenon but it is not the way things should be.
Is not pain generally seen as a sign that something is wrong? Of course the rules change when women are involved; in that case it’s God-ordained! I assure you, when it comes to agony I am no masochist. Fear is one of the biggest factors of childbirth pain out there. People talk about childbearing pain and its accompanying friend menstrual pain as if it is on a different level from all other pains. Childbearing pain is seen as “good” pain because
the contractions serve a useful purpose to birth the child into the world. I understand it would be uncomfortable and challenging but it doesn’t have to be agony if we can help it. Furthermore, as women have taken charge of their fears
they have experienced better births, which is why I think that the idea of “good pain” is such utter confounded bullsht. There is no such thing as “good pain”; trust me my man there really is not. Have you ever had your legs or any other muscles on your body pull so tight that it hurt like fire and felt taut and pained you as it throbbed and yanked whenever you tried to move your leg? That is called *cramping and please just imagine that sensation pulsating through your abdomen every few minutes, amplified ten times over. Also if your leg was broken you wouldn’t think the pain was good (although it is warning you that something is wrong and that warning is necessary for survival), you’d have tears streaming down your face and be totally at the mercy of the pain as you feebly rasped out a heartbroken plea to the doctor for a painkiller. When it came to my femininity I suffered those days once, and my resolution is, never again!
“and if possible alleviating that through C-section sounds perfectly reasonable to me.”
Yeah me too. Can you describe any situation that you know of where such a thing would be impossible?
“How can something that ultimately protects life and health be considered narcissistic?”
Well, for one thing, C-sections are apparently a financially
booming business as quite a few of them are done for convenience rather than for necessary medical intervention (this is an interesting claim, and worth investigating although I believe sometimes they are absolutely necessary). Also, C-sections and epidurals prevent the wonderful aspect of the pain, which brings bonding between you and your baby in such a way that the medical interventions of man don’t quite compete with that blissful torment and the bonding endorphins that rush forth from those anguished sensations (I’m being snarky, and some adherents of Lamarze technique teach this). I suspect that, more often than not, people really enjoy watching women physically respond to natural childbirth and that feeling increases when the women are suffering because their movements are so damn sexy (again I'm frustrated). In other words, women exist to benefit others and if they ask too many questions, seek to empower themselves in a way that men will reject, or reject pain, they are being narcissistic.
“I don't get that I see that idea coming from sadists.”
Out of curiosity, why do you believe the idea comes from sadists? I see it coming from pregnancy fetish people, promoters of certain birthing techniques, traditionalists, followers of cults and spiritually abusive religions etc. And
yes, we could say that at least some of these people are sadistically inclined while others are sincerely deluded; I bet the pain will wake up the female adherents real fast although I wish neither harm nor anguish on anyone of them.

I stated I don't want Carolyn to feel pushed into anything. I don't want her to ever feel excluded either, it is a nasty feeling I know. I want her to feel part of everything whether she writes in or not.

Thank you for offering to do that (asking her and letting me know), but I don't want Carolyn to feel pushed into anything. Whatever decision she wishes to make she should be comfortable with it. You mentioned that your life is like an open book to Carolyn. I thought that was nice and I wish I could have someone I could trust like that but I find it difficult and terrifying to communicate with people if I find them to be unsympathetic. Also you stated that you believe that people can't be loved or love if there is no trust; I do agree, and I think that lying and deceit indicates a lack of trust not just in a marriage but in any other relationship. Good man for being so communicative with your wife :)

“I can completely respect that, I have seen many church and Christian abused people in my own walk, I have even experienced it some myself first hand so I do understand.”
I am sorry you were abused but I’m glad you understand where I am coming from. At present I don’t feel comfortable sharing my experiences but in the future, when I know the time is right, I will consider it.
Would you consider Christian-abused people to be a
common phenomenon in the church?
I don’t understand how you could embrace a faith that was used by your family to batter and crush you. If it had been me I would have refused to convert out of pure rebellion and possibly spite.
“we all have made bad choices in life and the amazing thing is it's never too late for a new start.”
That is very true.
“We can all be new creations and leave the past behind.”
I’m not sure whether you’re talking about justification or sanctification? I did learn about Christian theology in my
past, you know. But how can people be new creations and leave the past behind when they’ve done so many bad things? I know it’s the sacrifice on the cross for sins but I don’t have much to say at present over this section.
“Yes I most certainly would rather be an ambassador of love than of judgment these days.”
That is a worthy goal. In what ways do you believe Christians can be ambassadors of love rather than of judgment? Also, if you believe you are meant to be an ambassador of love, I’m curious as to what you believe about hell?
This is one reason I so deeply enjoy Beth Caplin’s blog sometimes, and I recommend you read there too:
http://sbethcaplin.com
“Here is one of my favorite chapter in the Bible 1st Corinthians 13”
Just curious, but what version of the Bible is it? Is it not a chapter in the Bible urging humans to have empathy to improve the social structure? I’m not sure what it means at all.
“That last verse is so clear, that love is the greatest and the other that without love nothing really else matters. I feel unfortunately the modern "Church" has forgotten their true commission, which is not to convert but to show people the love of Christ.”
What’s the difference between conversion and love? From what I know of Christianity, if you love people you will try to convert them to save their precious souls from the burning fires of an eternal hell, as preached by Jonathan Edwards, slaveowner*, in his sermon Sinners in the Hands
of an Angry God. Jude says “And save some with fear, snatching them out of the fire, hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.” Therefore conversion and love are the same thing in the Christian’s mind and if you really love people you will warn them about hell and the judgment to come.
Also do you believe in relational evangelicalism?
*This earns him a mark in my black book of bad deeds; I can prove it to you. Learning this simple fact about that guy, that he bought and owned people (or at least one person) is helping in my healing in regards to that sermon:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2016/01/26/slaves-in-the-hands-of-an-angry-white-god/

"See, these people know the truth, they don’t want to admit it because it doesn’t serve their purposes."
I mean by this primarily people like Peter Singer, and abortion practitioners. I believe most people know that the unborn is a person on an instinctual level, and can see the baby with their eyes but I am not referring to them so much (although I do think that people have been seriously conned on this issue, and once they understand the truth they will more likely than not turn away from belief in abortion) as educated people - doctors, scientists, philosophers, etc - who understand it is human life and seek to eliminate it anyway.

“I wonder on the grounds of bringing a child to viability you could make the point that instead of early abortions it could be advocated for late tern c sections?”
I’m not sure what you’re referring to here; could you please expound on this point in your reply? If you mean that transferral of the baby from the mother to an artificial womb should be managed via C-sections then I realise that could happen in some cases (I think on reading below that
is what you mean but if I am wrong or you mean something else feel free to correct me); however I would like to see medicine and technology developed to the point where C-sections will not be necessary in the vast majority of scenarios.
“I understand there are issues with cost and then the inherent risk of surgery. If we would claim then to be comparable to the inherent risks of a botched abortion though perhaps this could be a road taken?”
It is a way and we could do that as one road out of many, yes, but the vast majority of abortions are done in the first trimester, as Planned Parenthood admits in this PDF, and I quote the following:
“In 2011, an estimated 1.1 million abortions were performed, a 13 percent decline from 2008. The abortion rate in 2011 was the lowest rate since 1973 (Jones and Jerman, 2014). The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) estimates that 66 percent of legal abortions occur within the first eight weeks of gestation, and 92 percent are performed within the first 13 weeks. Only 1.2 percent occur at or after 21 weeks (CDC, 2013).”
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/5113/9611/5527/Abortion_After_first_trimester.pdf
They go on to say that legalised abortion was the reason for the decrease of first trimester abortions; what’s your opinion on that one? For my part I think it is an absolute lie because common sense dictates that when the government makes something legal and freely accessible
people will be more likely to participate in it than if the government legally censored the activity.
BTW here’s an interesting article put out by the Guttmacher Institute about why women have abortions, etc:
https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
The first trimester abortions are why we have to find another way that doesn’t involve C-section style surgery for all trimesters especially the first one. Women generally recover from abortions in about two weeks from what I have found:
http://www.afterabortion.com/physical.html
https://www.mariestopes.org.uk/women/abortion/surgical-abortion-explained/how-long-will-it-take-me-recover-surgical-abortion
http://www.boulderwomenshealth.org/our-services/abortion/abortion-faqs/
We have to do better than that, and our operations need to be conducted in such a way that a woman doesn’t suffer pain to the same extent as she would if she had an abortion, preferably not at all.
I have a theory but I am not sure how it will work gestationally-wise? It’s this – once you get the embryo out you immediately attach something to it that would bond to the embryo and enable it to continue to receive the same nutrients it was getting from its mother even after separation from its mother’s womb before transplanting it into the artificial one. I have read that an embryo will die on separation from its mother’s womb and that is an obstacle that would have to be overcome if this was to ever work out.
On this one, it’s confession time as I have been very naughty in this way – I have put off studying gestation for a while due to time constraints. I would like to be sure my theories are workable at least as I would like to talk out
of education rather than ignorance. Also I don’t mind putting out ideas; even if others pick up on them and do them I would have done my job by sowing the seeds for reproductive reformation in our society.
“I was actually shocked to hear that rapists can have visitation rights, that is definitely something that needs to be lobbied against.”
Totes agree! It’s outrageous. Rapists lost their rights the moment they forced intimacy on a woman:
https://www.salon.com/2015/10/04/parental_rights_for_rapists_youd_be_surprised_how_cruel_the_law_can_be/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/10/the-daily-show-parental-rights-rapists_n_7041588.html
https://www.upworthy.com/the-daily-shows-samantha-bee-did-an-eye-opening-report-about-rapists-and-parental-rights
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/01/us/rapist-child-custody/
I think there are efforts underway to strip rapists of their parental rights:
https://news.vice.com/article/new-federal-law-gives-states-incentive-to-strip-rapists-of-parental-rights
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/family_law/20141.authcheckdam.pdf
https://familycourtinjustice.wordpress.com/2015/06/03/rape-survivor-child-custody-act/
http://www.lifenews.com/2015/12/17/law-would-stop-rapists-form-getting-custody-of-their-child-when-a-raped-woman-rejects-abortion/
I confess I have concerns over falsely accused fathers and what should be done with them if indeed it was discovered that they had been falsely accused; however, I also realise that false accusations of rape are rare and that such laws are important for the mother’s well-being.
“My fear in the case of a mother who abandones the baby due to rape, what if she never tells anyone and the father (rapist) finds out and then tries to take custudy, or if he someone claims she is lying and that it was consensual,
definitely would have some check and balances in place to keep these things in check.”
Indeed. Never considered that before but that would
absolutely have to be dealt with. Whatever happens the rapist can’t be allowed parental rights. For this to truly work, we’re going to have to reform adoption, and stand against rape culture. I will be happy to dive into the
benefits and downsides of such technology with you another time.
“Interesting point on science, I think true science what we can see and observe needs to be part of our argument against abortion for science actually tells us that life beginning at conception will continue to the point of birth
if the process remains uninterrupted. Anything that happens in between is either as a result of things not lining up correctly or some external force terminating that life.”
That paragraph is very well put actually, although it must be pointed out that pregnancy can go wrong at any time, and some pregnancies develop wrong either from the start or very early on – molar pregnancies for instance. I believe I shared with you the Peter Singer quote about life beginning at conception, plus the quote from an abortion practitioner. Please tell me if I didn’t and I’ll be happy to post them up. See, these people know the truth, they don’t want to admit it because it doesn’t serve their purposes.
What I mean specifically by science is this – prolifers
need to get into the scientific fields and use their minds to benefit women and children. They need to not just invent superior technology that is female-friendly and preserve the life of the unborn person and the bodily autonomy of the pregnant person; but also to invent new medical procedures to save lives of mothers and unborn children during life-of-the-mother scenarios; invent new drugs for women suffering mental illness, morning sickness, and any
other malady that can be taken during pregnancy; invent new contraceptives and improve old ones (in all areas including implantation prevention, if indeed that does occur); and create other ways to generally improve the lives of pregnant and unborn persons via technology and resourcefulness. In short they need to be encouraged to be the new minds of the future, and to win the respect
of the scientific and medical establishments through their groundbreaking research. Unfortunately I haven’t seen too many prolifers doing at least some of this stuff; perhaps my circle is too small and I hope I am wrong on that. However
seeing the opposition towards using contraception to win the battle on abortion (although it must be stated that many PL people are for contraception not against it), I fear that this might not become reality unless PL people get
their act together and start really thinking about things:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/12/19/southern-baptist-leader-birth-control-is-the-sexual-misbehavior-that-led-to-same-sex-marriage/
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2015/09/when-pro-life-means-anti-birth-control.html
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/march-life-organizers-think-birth-control-same-abortion
I wish I could get my hands on that article about the Utah seminar where the Mormons boo-hooed about how contraception was ruining everything.
Here’s one brave soul that stepped out and is trying to make a difference:
http://www.xojane.com/issues/unpopular-opinion-i-am-both-pro-life-and-a-scientist
“Also from the standpoint of trying to save the lives of unborn babies I think out approach should be two fold offer
solutions through medical progress (maintaining the life of the baby outside of the mother)”
Totally agree, here’s to hoping it works out!
“and offering love and support to the mother and not condeming them by calling them names or making rash character judgements.”
I think so too; that’s why we need to stop calling solo motherhood a mistake and a responsibility for idiocy.

Heya, I apologise for the flood of comments, but I did say I would reply and I try to keep my word in these areas. I have to get back to my job soon!
When you can write back please do so; I don't mind waiting and I hope all is going well with your friends and you and your wife.
Just curious - what have you been praying for me? Oh, and thanks for offering to pray for mental issues; I feel like I really need it at times. Despite our disagreements (BTW disagreement is fine) you have been a good and kind friend. Please know I love you and your wife too.

My question did not just concern rich, poor, middle-class women doing this, but also lesbians, transmen, prostitutes, sexually active women, virgins, defacto partners, solo mothers, widows, divorcees, common-law married women, fiancees - basically anyone other than a properly, legally married-in-the-sight-of-God-and-humanity woman; also a married woman taking in another person's rejected zygotes to save life. However after speaking to you I assume that you would be okay with all of these scenarios; if I am wrong on this assumption, by all means correct me.

“Yes agreed, there are still situations where I think it would be better to have a C-section for the life of the mother and the child.”
Agreed 100%
I’m sure you probably know all this, but to refresh the memory and educate the readers, here’s at least some of the reasons that people have C-sections:
http://www.marchofdimes.org/pregnancy/c-section-medical-reasons.aspx#
http://americanpregnancy.org/labor-and-birth/reasons-for-a-cesarean/
http://www.webmd.com/baby/tc/cesarean-section-why-it-is-done
BTW in case I didn’t mention this before I was born via C-section and this makes the accusations of selfishness etc, very personal to me.
“Sure traditionalist will say that vaginal birth is the only natural birth”
I know :(
I wonder what kind of traditionalists you are referring to.
“but do we say to a diabetic that needs insulin "that's not
natural!". Do we say to a person who has lost their legs that has prosthetics to walk that they aren't "natural"”
Brilliantly put argument, well done mate. Do you mind if I use it?
"since when do we judge people for taking advantage of medicine for the betterment of man kind"
Multiple choice:
a) When they can’t afford it and need free healthcare
b) When they’re women
c) When they’re minorities
d) All of the above
I look forward to your response to that question.
“as I said in another response I think anyone who sees C-sections as narcissistic is in danger of being called a sadist in my book.”
I do agree with you, especially considering that C-sections are necessary to save LIFE.
Please, read through my conversations at these places when you get time and tell me what you think:
http://blog.secularprolife.org/2015/06/insight-into-american-moral-compass.html
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/05/25/ray-comfort-josh-duggar-wasnt-really-a-christian-when-he-molested-those-girls/
On looking back I am ashamed of some of the things I wrote. I realise my motive was trying to get him to understand a different perspective but still it would mean a lot to have correctional feedback if I need it.
People still have this attitude that pain is good for women, it makes me mad with rage:
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/column-10-pain-is-womanly-and-other-bullshit-myths-of-childbirth
As for abortion doulas, I share your sentiments completely because people are supporting someone taking someone else’s life; supporting such a decision is extremely depraved. That story about that young woman killing herself was just horrible and I think it’s such a tragic ending to such potential! Letting a loved one die without recommending counselling is incredibly heartless, bordering on abusive. Possibly the family thought they
were respecting her decisions, but then again possibly the family wanted her dead and couldn’t care less about her welfare. It is hard to tell in these cases, and you’re right about life being more than that. This sort of death is what voluntary euthanasia will lead to and that is why I am so deeply opposed to it. With voluntary euthanasia, you might as well kiss proper therapy good-bye because there will be no need for it; suicidal people will just kill themselves with no hope just like that young woman did. No you should not
support people wanting euthanasia in that decision but rather encourage them and point them to a better way. It gets harder to know the right thing to do when someone is suffering from an agonising medical condition or is in incredible pain from a ravenous potentially lethal disease out in the wild with no doctor to treat the person (I'm thinking of The Maze Runner type situations here far more than normal life), though (although generally I strongly recommend keeping the person as comfortable as possible, etc); however I can confidently assert that such individuals commonly targeted for euthanasia as the elderly, people with depression and other mental illnesses, suicidal people, and medical illnesses right up the scale to brain-death should not be encouraged to be euthanised, nor should they be. BTW I think you’ve hit the nail on the head in your reply; I think people should be counselled and helped from under the cloud rather than dying under it and being supported in that decision, because one day they will be thankful they weren’t euthanised and may very well go on to do great things.
Here’s an article dealing with euthanasia, and reading the comments is revealing. It showed that some of the biggest
motivators for euthanasia were concern for the suffering of an elderly or sick relative and a desire to grant autonomy to elderly and sick people ending their lives on their terms. I started a discussion with some of my fellow commenters on this page; they were very respectful despite their disagreements with me (as they usually are!). Unfortunately I never finished it; perhaps I should go back and try again:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/01/18/scientists-pat-and-peter-shaw-rejecting-religious-do-gooders-ended-their-lives-on-their-own-terms/
One of my fellow commenters asked me this:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/01/18/scientists-pat-and-peter-shaw-rejecting-religious-do-gooders-ended-their-lives-on-their-own-terms/#comment-2466074649
If that question was posed to you, how would you answer?
Have you ever heard of the book My Sister’s Keeper:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sister%27s_Keeper_%28novel%29
This book deals with euthanasia being performed on someone who was born “for that purpose”. The ending is horrific and the author seems to be pro the idea of someone being created just for the purpose of donating their organs, never mind what the donor has to say about their own lives. Legal abortion advocates are often very fond of pointing out the hypocrisy of not permitting abortion for a woman yet allowing people to opt out of organ donation. On the bodily autonomy level, it is inconsistent because the only way the child will survive is being carried to term. However, on the life level, it is perfectly inconsistent because human life should be respected and organ donation does have the ability to kill someone if done incorrectly or unethically.

Take the response to this page for now unless I find a better one:
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/responding-to-the-astute-observation-that-i-am-a-man/
"Again I guess my point is balance, but seeing as your comments reflects this I guess my argument has been deflated lol. Next :)"
I acknowledge this. I do believe in balance on these issues. The only reason I am responding to this comment is that I hadn't responded to it before. Also - and this applies only if you no longer hold the beliefs you espoused in this comment - please know this reply does not apply to you although I would be interested in hearing that you did change your ideas, and why.
"I guess part of my concern comes from what seems like a desire to change men into women, such as having men wear skinny jeans, have feminine hair styles, make up lines just for males"
Why do you think it's about changing men into women? Also have you considered that it could be about allowing guys that didn't fit in 100% to explore another side of themselves so that the sexes had greater common ground?
"What I think bothers me is what seems like a desire (from perhaps a radical feminist standpoint) to cause males to lose their masculine identity so that they can more closely identify with females."
Okay, please define masculine identity, particularly in this context. Do you believe that masculine identity encompasses the way men dress, and if so how would men lose their maleness and be more feminised by embracing more feminine styles? Also do you think it is wrong for people of both sexes to share common ground on clothing styles? I'm sorry, I'm a little confused as to what you mean here.
"I do agree that men need to understand feminism and females better, if they did I think they would be respectful to women and understand their needs better."
What do you think are the best ways for men to do this without losing their masculine identity in the process? I mean as well, if more feminised styles of clothing are a problem then over what kinds of things should men and women bond over?
Just a thought - if masculine identity encompasses the way men are biologically and neurologically wired far more than the way men look, then how can they lose it by the way they dress and by their mannerisms? I mean, they can't change their biology (there are operations to make you trans but that's not for this discussion) or neurological wiring, can they?

First off, before you read on, if you find any or all of these questions too personal or painful, please don't respond to them.
"I guess to start with I was raised in a very "traditional" Christian home"
Can you explain what you mean, because you put "traditional" in quotes?
"You have the right to be racists against those who have intimidated you or made you feel unsafe"
This idea makes me curious; what do you mean? As for the other ideas, I understand them intellectually enough to know they are non-sense.
"Long story short I was the poster child of not how to raise a child."
I can see that, I am so sorry my friend. However you are trying to make something of yourself and I commend you for that.
"I have struggled my whole life for identity as this is not who I wanted
to be, and I have found some success but also a lot of failure along the
way."
Don't worry, just keep trying and hang in there because if you keep going you will be more likely to find your identity than if you don't.
"As I mentioned in another post it is quite possible the Lord is still
working on these heart issues within me, I must admit these are hard
things to talk about, but as much as I say..."
Thanks for being brave enough to admit you haven't lived up to your words at times. The intentions are good, and the words come from your heart, so that is a start. Putting them into action is harder than we realise though.
I feel like this question is a little rude but if you're comfortable with this can you tell me some of the ways you objectified and did not respect and love women, and also some of how you failed to meet people where they are? If you don't feel right about this query please don't answer.
"My only saving grace truly is that God Jesus has not allowed me to stay
as I once was, and continues to change me from the inside out on a daily
basis."
Well, I'm glad it's working out for you then. As I've stated so many times, you're a very open-minded person (some would say you have a repentant heart), which is part of the reason the operations on your soul are so successful. You will keep changing, learning, and growing and you will be far better ten years ahead than you are now; and you are far better now than you were ten years ago so hang in there, buddy.

BTW here's a couple petitions to help stop this stuff:
https://www.change.org/p/university-of-wisconsin-cancel-the-unethical-torture-and-killing-of-baby-monkeys
https://www.change.org/p/stop-forced-organ-harvesting-in-china-2

Your comment was so well-stated, well-done :)
"People should always respect life in all it's forms as well as animal lives."
Yeah, and some PL people give other PLers a hard time for including animals :(
"I do agree medical science shouldn't be using living people or animals for experiments that is just wrong."
Again, agreed 100% but what alternatives can we recommend to scientists other than living people and animals? Besides, I am tired of scientists experimenting on animals, it's just plain cruel and half the time they do it to "improve their genes" or fiddle with something in the cat breed including the shapes of ears. I despise rats but am deeply saddened for any rat that is unlucky enough to end up in a laboratory or a science class, as sometimes rats are cut open (after being given anesthetic) and experimented on. Animals don't deserve to be treated like this.
As for human beings, using them against their will is just plain unethical and wrong. We know of the cases of euthanasia involving brain death, etc - which I personally consider unethical. Yet have you ever heard of horror stories like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China
I am against cloning of animals and humans because it was not consented to and it violates their free will. Would you consider the cloning of human beings to be a violation of God's image on people and why? Also, do you think the attitudes of scientists and philosophers toward human life influence the way the media and eventually entertainment portray this very crucial topic?

First off, please wish Kim well for me and let her know she is not alone in her views.
"Apparently one of her classmates in a class she was taking made the
comment "well if women wouldn't dress so provocatively" needless to say
she was not impressed with that comment."
Yes, because it is false. The majority of rapes/sexual assaults happen at the hands of someone you know. Also did not Jesus say that if the man lusted after the woman he had committed adultery with her already in his heart?
"I think its that overall viewpoint that continues the culture and makes
it easier for Men to continue to justify their evil behavior."
It certainly is. Many people admit that even if a woman dressed in concrete blocks that men would still lust after them, yet they insist on holding on to this harmful myth. Sorry but life just doesn't work that way, which is why it makes me really wild, now, when people insist that my clothes had something to do with that old bastard ogling me. You'd be shocked at how many rapists went after women dressing modestly! Also, if a man needs to see only a certain kind of clothing style on the opposite sex to keep himself from raping, he needs to re-evaluate the way he views women! Just curious but do you see any conflict between the Christian teachings on modesty (especially for women) and the feminist understanding of rape and rape culture?
"No I had not heard about Roosh V and the pro-rape conferences and
frankly I am shocked and appalled. This is something that should not be
allowed and yes for certain any participants and organizers should be
locked up!"
Yes, ITA. Here's some articles about it:
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/6/10926872/roosh-pro-rape-rallies (this one I find well-balanced although it disagrees that the rallies were pro-rape)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/legal-rape-advocates-cancel-pro-men-meet-ups-for-fear-of-their-safety_us_56b3698fe4b01d80b2454002 (although I must add that I doubt he really cancelled them, due to a notice on RoK that seemed to imply or state otherwise)
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/02/misogynist-blogger-make-rape-on-private-property-legal-so-women-can-have-learning-experiences/ (ugh, this guy is gross)

Wow, that sounds cool. Can you expound?
Also, only if you get time, please send me a couple
articles about this research my way so that I can look at them.

"What a beautiful story about the love shared between a man and women in a birthing experience"
The look on that particular woman's face, I would describe as radiant and I believe it would have made the birthing process go much smoother.
Such affection is definitely a way to win a woman's heart, I can tell you that now. Knowing that our partners care in such a way is like flowers and a diamond ring to us, and being held by our guys is worth a thousand words. To us, being loved like this is romantic. In short, when a man nurtures his partner, she blooms; she is radiant because she is loved, confident in his affection, and more desirous to please him than ever before (at least that's how I would feel if I were treated so compassionately).

"I think I gave my opinion about abortion doulas, but to make it clear nope can't stand behind that."
I do agree, what alternatives would you suggest to such a thing though? Abortion has become so mainstreamed, just as you said.
In regards to the way people choose to have children I agree with you; no one knows better what the best thing to do is than they themselves and no one
should be judged for their choices. Yet I do think that the person delivering the baby should know what they're doing because home births can be risky in
that way.
I have a friend that calls childbirth torture, and I can't blame her for that opinion (in fact I agree, and think of it as a rack - if it is painful).
"What a beautiful story about the love shared between a man and women in a birthing experience, I will be sure to share these ideas with any guy friends I have who are facing a soon birth."
It's good that your guy friends listen to what you have to say. You're right, it is beautiful and if you ever want to watch it just go to YouTube and type in the words "Hypnobirthing Dad's Role".
Some guys are absolutely useless at caring for their partner during childbirth. They look at their I-phones or they faint at the sight of blood, or they don't attend at all, or they tell the woman "it was horrible too - for me to watch it" or best-case scenario they just fluff around anxiously not knowing what to do. How to overcome these stumbling blocks I don't know; do you have any suggestions?
On a more negative note, I feel very nervous telling you this as I'm not sure how you will take it (please know I'm not accusing you of anything!): as a tokophobic individual I struggle with the idea that someone could claim to love me yet inflict such horrible pain, sickness, torture, and possible death onto me (people generally don't care about such things I've found); what is your answer to that? I know it would be highly likely that I would tend to feel very scared and angry if he tried to make me pregnant, too; or even suggested it. I tend to think of it in terms of “He wants to hurt me” and I tend to think of it as such a mean thing to do to a woman, because of the potential downsides of pregnancy (I hope I’m making it very clear that I’m not accusing you of being mean or anything, but rather just telling you I find my
future partner making me pregnant scary). I know people with this fear so strong in them they would rather kill themselves than carry to term; how do you
answer them? As a mentally ill individual I fear trying alternative methods of overcoming pain for fear mental problems get worse. These are very real struggles for me. Honestly I hope I haven't put you off talking to me about these types of subjects :(
Yes I try to have a positive idea of birth but sometimes I will think about these physical activities very negatively. Then I think about it like a marathon, a race that has to be run - endurance, that kind of thing and on that
mental level it's not so bad.
"I like to feel I provided that sort of support to Susan during the birth of our children, certainly not every memory of my life with Susan is bad it's difficult though looking through the lens of the pain I feel to remember those better memories."
That must be hard, I am so sorry. I'm curious to know how you can remember the better memories at all while struggling through such a haze of pain, if you wouldn't mind sharing. Also, I hope you don't mind my asking this but from your ex's POV, did she feel supported by you during that time?
I am still working on the resources to help you understand the fair sex better, will get those to you as soon as I can. Take care, mate.

BTW, I know I've said this before but if your wife ever wants to be part of our conversations that will make me very happy :)

There was a time when women DIED if they didn't push the baby out. Also women still die in childbirth, even in the US!
Also, just wanted to make it clear - it's not the support for a woman having an abortion that horrifies me; on that level I can understand people having abortion doulas. What I find horrifying is the normalising of taking another person's life and treating it the same way as other types of surgery that really help people live, on that level it's sad and I'm shocked and grieved by it. Do you think I am wrong?

Thank you for sharing that, very much. I honestly hope Susan didn't suffer very much if at all; pain in childbirth is horrible but I do appreciate that she had support during this very difficult time. Yes, I do know about doulas :)
Have you ever heard of abortion doulas? As I see it, this is yet another way of legitimising morally unacceptable behaviour. Can I understand that women might desire support through an abortion? Yes, on that level I grok it, yet at the same time I am deeply appalled by this:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-abortion-doula-turner-met-20150824-column.html
http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/09/my-year-as-an-abortion-doula.html#
I'd like to know what you think.
Thanks for letting me know that you don't approve of this attitude against pain relief. I agree, anyone who wants to punish women for Eve's sin can go fornicate themselves with a rusty pipe. Also I don't see how C-sections can do anything but benefit those who need them! Nothing narcissistic about that, in fact it's life saving and as I mentioned, LIFE comes before other considerations as much as possible. However what kinds of situations would pain relief bring danger to mother or child, do you know of any?
In regards to our discussion on celebration of femininity, I wrote and said, "I'd give you some articles about what influenced my thinking on this issue but you'd have to be okay with that first." I very much want to share at least some of what led me to this place but is this offer acceptable to you? Also would your wife mind if I did, because she can read them too and be encouraged if she wants :)
Last but not least, I saw this interesting video recently on YouTube called "Hypnobirthing Dad's Role" and I was struck strongly by the way the man treated his wife. I sensed by the way he touched, supported, served, spent time with, and looked at her, that he deeply cherished her and he treated her with nothing but the utmost tenderness and service, and when she smiled at him I saw how much she blossomed under his affection and she was happy to bear him their child; it was a truly beautiful birth and I know if I ever had a partner I would want to be treated the exact same way. I'm telling you this because, again, I'm wanting to help you be a better man and if you have any guy friends that will soon hold their children then please let them know, this is the way they should treat their wives/partners during that time.

I think you are right. Also I believe we need to start changing our language toward childbirth - like encouraging people to think of it as challenging rather than painful and pressure waves rather than labour pains - hypnobirth therapists frequently emphasise positive language to describe the experience. You'd be surprised how many people had less to no pain when they employed such methods as hypnobirth and took such speech to heart. Although I will say, it doesn't always work out and some people suffer horribly, but I think that pain is a sign something is wrong rather than a sign that everything is normal; why do people only say there is good pain when it applies to women I will never understand.
My mother had me via C-section so natural birth was impossible in her case (yes, sometimes we need the hospitals!). The disgusting thing is that some people (as I mentioned before) really believe C-sections are a sign of narcissism in our society and that it is less selfish to birth naturally, ugh! Although I will admit sometimes C-sections are unnecessary that doesn't mean we can't have the practice itself because sometimes it just might save a life!

I hope my mentioning the potential downsides of the childbearing process is okay with you. I totally agree with your statement and I tell every mother out there with a baby that she is brave. I don't know why they don't get awarded medals for courage, Anne Frank noted. Yet I will say that not all women suffer; painfree childbearing is a thing :)

It's a rhetorical statement. Of course it wouldn't be any different for in vitro; that's not my point. My point is this - despite all the advances in medical science and all the alternative ways of eliminating pain and nausea out there, there are people in this world who STILL believe the nonsensical idea that women deserve to suffer pain in childbearing and would rather shun anesthetics and epidurals for childbirth or hypnobirthing/yoga/other, nonspiritual ways (at least I think they are) than open themselves to Satan (in the case of some alternative methods), impede the birthing process (in the case of medical methods). In short, they believe women should feel the raw pain. I am not joking. I could back up my claims.
For instance I spoke to one person once who believed that women should not have C-sections because they were selfish (no kidding) and when I tried to reason him out of his ideas by explaining to him I did not appreciate pain in the area of femininity most common to my single life and was trying to get rid of it (and I used examples to prove this) - and at least that was my motive in my comment although I'm not sure how clear I made myself, his response was that it was beautiful that I could feel the many aspects of pain. Also I tried to explain to him my fears (I got pretty graphic, to my shame) and his response was positive enough but I couldn't help but notice that this guy got excited whenever I described anything painful :(
He's not the only one. There are more people with this mindset that childbearing requires neither medical nor alternative methods. Then they tell women their only purpose is to bear children. People like that make me really, really angry. Some of these people have a sadistic pregnancy fetish that makes them enjoy the suffering of others, while others are religiously minded and believe that the pain is punishment for being a woman and the sins you committed and you shouldn't do anything to decrease/eliminate it or you can't do anything about it. If you'd like I'll be happy to try to back up my statements because I wouldn't say these things if I didn't know some people's minds.

Thank you :)

Oh, I nearly forgot - will such people offer pain relief or encourage alternative methods to overcome and reduce pain and nausea? This answer doesn't apply in every case, but more often than not, NOPE.

Unfortunately as a male-bodied individual it would be presently impossible for you to do so, but I admire the offer :)
Do you know how science could make it possible for male-bodied people to be able to carry unborn embryos to term?
I'm happy to hear it doesn't matter the reasons that a woman would choose to do such a thing, nor her station in life; thanks for being a reasonable person and putting life first.
Also especially considering a few factors: 1) a woman has a right to control her fertility (within reason of course)
2) reproductive choices are empowering when chosen
3) that child could be raised in a loving home
4) anyone offering to do that would be pretty brave especially considering pregnancy and childbirth are potentially life-threatening, and unless someone is using medical or alternative (including spiritual) means to overcome pain they might very well suffer greatly
5) I thought life was the highest ideal here; again I am reminded that for some folks it's a smokescreen

"Anything that is done with an aborted baby I consider horrible because
as you mentioned it completely ignores that right of that creation to
make the choice."
Why is it we take such care to care for born people's right to refuse to be used as medical experiments, even to the point of allowing abortion and of allowing people to refuse to be organ donors, yet if someone is seriously ill (ie braindead, PVS, sometimes coma, or just suffering from some serious physical or mental disease), unborn, or an animal, that we don't care about their consent when it comes to medical science? That just doesn't make sense to me at all!

"Intereating ideas, well if abortion were to become illegal I would think
that anything that could be done to an embryo should be stopped short
of giving it life. I don't agree with stem cell research as I think it is often used as an excuse to keep doing more and more abortions."
Agreed. I do, however, have a question. I know of embryonic stem cell research procedures that do not take the life of the embryo; do you consider those unethical? Also, what is your opinion on mothers who donate their miscarried or stillborn babies' bodies to medical science so that they could help someone else? One reason people want abortion to continue is that women donate their aborted babies to PP so that the organs, etc, can be passed on to a child that needs to live; what is your opinion on that?
"As far as IVF is concerned I think you would definitely have to make
some changes in regads to procedures but I would hope that with reforns
it would continue, as a way for mothers who have a hard time getting
pregnant to become pregnant and also for woman who for whatever reason
can't carry a preganancy, to pass on their life through surragacy."
I totally agree. It shouldn't be banned entirely as that would force couples to be sterile unless someone decided to adopt a baby out to them. Yet I think that it can open the door to some very unethical practices if not properly regulated with respect for human life.
For curiosity's sake, do you think that secular humanism and the desire to utilise science in every area of life has such an intense grip on the West that abortion becoming illegal is next to impossible?
"I love the idea of women who are willing to.make that sacrafice for each
other I see it as a very beautiful practice. No One Should ever shame a
woman for wanting to help bring life into this world ."
I do agree with that answer and I appreciate the fact you would understand why some people would want to do that.
Would your answer be the same if Woman A had totally decided against carrying the embryos at all? Also, would it be the same if there had been no Woman A involved, and Woman B had simply decided to either adopt a snowflake baby or at least give it life and find it a good home?
Also, what would be your response to those who protested that such behaviour was out-of-order, and that it is shameful for a woman to seek to be pregnant outside of the bounds of marriage whatever her motives (which would be to save embryos from embryonic stem cell research, to find or offer a good home for a child, or simply to experience birth in a positive way while making sure the child's future home was well accounted for), protested that IVF should only be practiced by married couples (one reason out of many being that children are best raised by a mother and father), or gave any of the other objections I listed? I can understand the objection that people are carrying on an inhuman trade from the level of arguing that it should be illegal though I don't totally agree with such reasoning. But as for the other objections they would be rooted in very anti-women taking control of their fertility ideas, wouldn't they? I know your opinion but in this question I'm asking for your response to the nay-sayers who would make life difficult for someone like that.

Just interested in your opinion - if abortion ever became illegal what do you think would happen to such practices as IVF and embryonic stem cell research? Furthermore, if you could foresee that abortion could become illegal in the future, what do you think the church would need to do to prepare for an abortion-free* country, and would you think the church should even be involved in such preparations?
*By this the author means making abortion illegal, but we will always have abortion with us so abortion-free is inaccurate in this sense.

In regards to your beliefs on freezing embryos I can understand that although I think there is a time and a place for freezing them. Yeah, people create them then discard them, which is morally problematic unless you can find a willing surrogate to take them.
"To the article you posted, I can't morally stand behind genetic research even for noble causes."
Personally I never thought about it the way you said it. What worried me about the article was two things: life might be taken in the process, and human beings are being experimented on without their consent which is not ethical. Again, I'm reminded of the Maze Runner which deals with this very topic, only the subjects are teens.
Also I dislike genetic manipulation for animals as well as people; I think that animals should be left alone as they are. Personally there might be a time and a place for genetic experimentation but not at the expense of human or animal life or consent, nor of ethics.
"To your discussion of the use of embryo's to be given to surrogates to
pass on life and adoption to the life that exists, I stand behind that
fully, and no I don't think the woman should be viewed as a (insert
derogatory name here) I think she should be thought of as a hero, and I
would to shake her hand!"
I totally agree with you although I am curious as to why you hold the position you do on this issue :)
Is it legally possible to do that though?
Also I have heard people say that IVF should be illegal because it promotes the abuse of innocent unborn life. I would have thought the abuses should be strictly regulated by law rather than the practice itself being made illegal. I'm pretty sure there would be people in the PL community who would frown on that kind of action for whatever reason possible - for destroying morality and decency, for becoming sl*tty or at least giving the appearance of it, for becoming a parent in a non-traditional way - yes I can hear some of the criticism now. Yet I think you gave the right answer, because every good PL person knows that LIFE comes first, before anything else, and if some other moral position will demean life it is generally best to err on the side of life unless you are defending yourself or executing a genocidal individual.

I think your answer is very fair. Except I am curious to know, what is so problematic about freezing the embryos? I completely understand your concerns with the first one though.
What's your opinion on the following subject in the article:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/feb/01/human-embryo-genetic-modify-regulator-green-light-research
Also, what is your opinion of the following scenario:
Woman A got three ZEFs created for her through in-vitro fertilisation, and she decides she does not want them implanted in her, or she only wants one. The others will most likely be taken and used for embryonic stem cell research. Woman A tells her friend Woman B, who is pro-life, single, and abstinent (a virgin in fact), about her in-vitro fertilisation and her decision to only have one embryo. Woman B decides to have the other two embryos implanted in her and carry them to term, and Woman A and Woman A's doctor say yes, she can (I'm not sure if that is legally possible and I'd really like to know if it is; but for the sake of this scenario it is). Woman B carries them to term and finds a loving family to adopt them out to, which Woman A also likes. I have a question: do you think Woman B is sinning against God by being pregnant (partially because it could give the appearance that she was sexually active when she wasn't), and looks like a sl*t for offering to carry the ZEFs, or do you think Woman B is a hero for saving them from a lethal form of embryonic stem cell research (not all forms are lethal to the embryo but some are)? I'm curious to know what PL people's thoughts are on this kind of scenario because I've heard a lot of folks say in-vitro should only be used for married couples, etc; and also tend to disapprove of unwed pregnancies.
In regards to the masculine/feminine side of the argument could you please answer this on the link I gave you, when I respond to your comment in full, rather than on this page:
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/will-there-be-a-needed-spike-in-adoption-rates-if-abortion-becomes-illegal/#comment-2506699347

"As far as men changing the society, trust me some men are trying to change these things… We are facing flack though as we are seen as trying to control women in the process, again see how we can’t win?"
I can sympathise with the difficulty and I appreciate that some men are trying to change these things; it means a lot to me and I know a handful of good men I trust. It helps hearing a man's perspective on these things as well. How do you think women can make it easier for men to protect them? Also in what ways are guys accused of controlling women when they try to change these things, can you explain?
Although I will say that topics related to adoption spike rates and similar subjects are for this page, so on that note I have a question for you: What do you believe about in-vitro fertilisation?

Hey, thanks for your response :)
Two things in mind. First I don't consider you a coward at all! I think you're a very nice person and I appreciate the fact you would talk about these things so civilly with me.
"Being overprotective means smothering the woman emotionally and
spiritually but not being protective enough means being neglectful and
in some cases either apathetic or a despicable coward."
You said in response:
"Sorry it doesn’t work that way… we can’t read minds and if
you consider me apathetic or a despicable coward for now knowing the difference, then I guess I’ll accept that lol."
I said that statement because some men can't be bothered protecting women and do everything they can to get out of it, not in the sense that they're not built to be strong and protective or have had something happen in their lives so they can't protect (like being crippled, etc) so much, but because they consider women inferior and they as men matter more. It was not meant to be an indictment on your character and I apologise for implying this. Also you're not a coward for not knowing the difference, and I think you did the right thing for asking that woman what she wanted done. However if it were me I know I would want intervention on my behalf regardless of whether it was masculine or feminine and I tend to think the default position for a man should be to step in and intervene on the woman's behalf especially if she's having a difficult time dealing with it herself. Also I didn't mean to preach to you about those long paragraphs but was rather telling you how it feels from a female perspective.
Secondly, this is my fault in this way - the rules here say we have to stay on-topic, and I think that we need to keep the conversations about adoption rates spiking on this page, and move the conversations about masculinity and femininity onto the page provided below:
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/responding-to-the-astute-observation-that-i-am-a-man/
Which means I will respond to your comment in full, on that page and then send you the link so you can respond to me there.
Thank you, you are kind and you don't have to change for me or for anyone. In some ways we don't agree on this topic but we can still have good discussions about it.

This will be long, so I will break this up into two parts. Some of these issues I've got strong feelings about so please don't be offended or worried if my tone comes across as passionate, as I am by no means intending to be hostile by my comments, just challenging you to think through a few things; but never be afraid to disagree ever. Thanks for talking about these things with me, some men I know wouldn't give me the time of day.
"I identify Masculine identity as being strong protectors, courageous in protecting the weaker but also being warriors."
I do agree with this sentence, although I have to state that not all men have the temperament or the ability to do this. Are those men any less male? I don't think so, because masculinity is determined by biology rather than role. Also women can protect men and other women and are very good at it; we should not pass those contributions over as such women are heroes!
Putting that aside, please let me explain how the butch cis male ideal of protector makes me think, if he lives up to it, and I hope it's okay what I'm going to say next. I think of men as these amazingly strong, brilliant, beautiful people with such physical power and strength, and such deep, powerful voices, yet with the ability to be so gentle and kind and respected by everyone because they are honest and compassionate, I find it nothing short of a miracle that such people should exist. Men are capable of marvelous feats but the greatest one of all is being good. In short I'm very pro the idea as long as he lives up to his side of the bargain and doesn't use it to hurt and betray.
I mean nothing inappropriate by the following scenario, but just so you understand a little better what women want in a man. Do you know how a woman feels when her partner, with hands so capable of gentleness and strength and voice so soothing, commands her lovingly to come to him, turns her towards him, draws her gently nearer in such a way she would not dream of resisting his voice nor his hands as she knows this man means her nothing but kindness, and holds her close to his heart, tightening his strong arms around her to help her feel more secure? She snuggles into his embrace, feeling safe, protected, and loved, as he kisses her tears away and lets her know that he loves her for now and for always, and she swears in her heart to be loyal to him, to always make him happy, to never leave his side, and to suffer and die for him if necessary. You earn our loyalty, respect and devotion if only you are kind. Sorry to ramble on like that as I mean nothing by it but to please remember to treat your bride like that on the hardest of days, and some women consider it sweet to be called "my bride" even when they've been married to the same man for years. Also I think they are words you need to hear, very much. If you want reverence you need to be willing to show respect back, because women don't want to be only loved, they want to be respected too.
Also another scenario - imagine your friend coming to you with a problem, and she's been condescendingly patted on the head by other men, told her problem is insignificant, and basically been mansplained to. But she looks to you because she knows you to be intelligent and she knows you will help her. To listen to her when she talks and then try to solve the problem, to let her know she is intelligent and smart when other men have told her only that she is beautiful, means a lot coming from a man, because it means you, as a male, value her with her contributions and her sharp mind. Being complimented for intelligence by a good, kind man speaks volumes to a woman's heart and secures respect for you. After all, if you want to be a leader, isn't this the way a good leader acts?
For a woman who doesn't want to be protected but can look after herself the offer can come across as condescending rather than helpful, as she has securely established her independence in herself. I believe that men need to be respectful of the fact that sometimes women don't want to be protected and take a hands-off approach yet be there for the woman if she asks for or needs help, giving her courage and support in enforcing her boundaries. There is a balance between being overprotective and not being protective enough. Being overprotective means smothering the woman emotionally and spiritually but not being protective enough means being neglectful and in some cases either apathetic or a despicable coward.
I want to see men raise their voices to defend us when other guys are rude and call out suggestive things to us on the street. I want to see them look tall and imposing as they step between a woman and her attacker and not back down. I want to see men listening to women they care about rather than saying "that sucks". I want to see men empower women by treating them as equals not using them as inferiors. That is what I think the best way to protect, provide, and lead is, if indeed that is what you think you must do.
"I determine that men in general should be considered the stronger vessel and Women the weaker vessel."
Do you mean physically? Or emotionally? Or neurologically? Also on what basis do you determine this?
Also, if women really are the weaker vessel how could your mother have borne you into the world? Are you aware of how much physical and emotional effort it takes to birth a child, and to be pregnant? It's hard, challenging work, and sometimes it can be painful and even life-threatening! What about a woman raising a child, especially by herself? What about the fact women visit the Red Tent (have their cycles) once a month and often feel pressured to pop a painkiller in their mouths and move on rather than respecting themselves, suffering in silence often without the hope of proper treatment? What about the woman who rises above the challenges of fighting for better treatment of women, and faces being ridiculed, mocked, spat on, scorned? What about the woman who faces torture and rape for refusing to reveal the names of people she is hiding or rescuing from an evil government? What about the woman who puts on a pair of boxing gloves because she knows she has to defend herself in this world? What about the woman who works hard, without a break, stinting herself of time and sometimes food so she can feed her children? What about the woman who faces shame for solo pregnancy, or speaks out about her past experiences with a rapist and faces ridicule on that level? What about the woman who has had to stare down her attacker because no man would defend her and say that is no way to speak to a lady? What about the fact that more often than not we bear in silence things men don't even have to think about? How is that weakness? Don't you think with the things we face we're a bunch of tough little b*****s? Please just think about it, very carefully.
"I think men should be in the role of protector and champion of the woman."
May I ask why you believe that, so I can understand your opinion better?
Here's my POV on that:
That's a nice sentiment on paper, but men so far have generally done a bloody poor job of it. More often than not, they've beaten and betrayed us, and they want the title without the responsibility. They frequently brag about being protectors and use protection as a way to control and exploit women, but when trouble comes they hide behind mummy's apron strings because all it is is really bluff and they didn't mean it at all. If men are to call themselves protectors they need to try changing a society that gives them the power to hurt women. Also women need to learn to protect themselves, because men cannot always be trusted. This is a comment from my friend, I found it insightful:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2016/02/nagmeh-abedini-franklin-graham-and-the-silencing-of-evangelical-abuse-victims.html#comment-2494843490
"Just to let you know you have very kind in your responses I really have enjoyed our conversations."
I will always be kind unless you do something to betray my trust. I know of some people who would have torn you apart and cursed you for some of the beliefs you espoused. But I care more about a proper dialogue with an open-minded person than turning them off by snarling at them, it's not helpful to be rude online unless you're defending yourself. Also you have been very gentlemanly, nary a peep of sexual advances or condescending talk towards me in your conversations, so thank you for being honest with your partner and respectful to me. Plus I want you to enjoy yourself! Online discussions should be polite and fun.

Oh, that's good. I'm glad you don't keep secrets from your wife and I don't tend to trust men that do.

That's great, please tell her hello from me. Also I hope she doesn't mind the things we talk about.

I do hope I am listening to and being respectful towards your concerns rather than being dismissive and brushing them under the carpet. I know what it is to have that happen to me so I am trying not to do the same to others.

"What I think bothers me is what seems like a desire (from perhaps a
radical feminist standpoint) to cause males to lose their masculine
identity so that they can more closely identify with females."
Please explain how you define masculine identity. Also in what other ways do radical feminists want men to lose their masculine identity that you have observed?
"I do agree that men need to understand feminism and females better, if they did I think they would be respectful to women and understand their needs better."
This is the way for men to truly more closely identify with women. If they have those fashion changes without a change of heart then they won't be any better off. It's attitude not performance that counts.
"I guess part of my concern comes from what seems like a desire to change men into women, such as having men wear skinny jeans, have feminine hair styles, make up lines just for males"
Just curious but have you ever thought that this might be a way for men to explore their femme side? Also how is this suppressing guys, please explain as I am trying to understand. As a choice we agree it's not suppressive but if men were being forced into this we would agree this is highly suppressive; do you see men being forced or pressured into such choices anywhere? Although I know of butch femininity, or masculine femininity, where women celebrate the maleness of their character.
"Again I guess my point is balance, but seeing as your comments reflects this I guess my argument has been deflated lol."
Well, I do try to be balanced. I believe in equality first and foremost, which means that women don't get to rule over men unfairly either, just as men don't get to rule unfairly over women. Ability, not gender role and biological sex, determines your aptitude.
Here is a definition I wrote up about what being manly means to me as a woman; please read it and tell me what you think of it:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2016/02/nagmeh-abedini-franklin-graham-and-the-silencing-of-evangelical-abuse-victims.html#comment-2494976076
The thing is, I don't mind men being manly as long as they are respectful to us the women. I want to feel safe and to implicitly trust and reverence my future hubby knowing he will be honourable with me, but I can't if guys handle me inappropriately and treat me like an object because I am a woman. To be honest I've lost a lot of respect for the sex due to their disgusting behaviour including wife battering (which conversation we had the other day).

Just curious - how do you define femininity? Because when I think of it I think of the biological feminine processes but do you have more in mind as well?
"Not at all, I think it's wonderful that you can celebrate your femininity."
Thank you, that is very nice because today is one of those days that hearing such a thing is very meaningful to me :)
"Not being female I guess I have a hard time identifying with the ideas, but I am happy that you are learning to embrace them."
In some ways, due to my ignorance on certain matters, it became a harder road than it needed to be; but I am getting on the right track again and am working to experience my femininity on my own terms, learn a lot about myself to improve all aspects of my life including this one, and take pride in it again rather than being subjected to what I believe and know to be negative experiences. I'd give you some articles about what influenced my thinking on this issue but you'd have to be okay with that first.
"I know that society definitely makes it a negative point of women and
their physical and emotional differences from and early age."
Yes, ever heard of those jokes about women's biological femininity, or men joking about raping or assaulting women, or other such things? Just the statement that women are inferior alone is enough. Also what do you mean by emotional differences (which in some ways are largely influenced by hormones)?
"It seems hey do the same thing to young boys in a different way, by telling us to be tough and not to cry."
Boys should be allowed to cry because they're people first and foremost and have emotions. Just curious though, how can you believe in roles yet think that boys should be allowed to shed tears? Because complementarianism tends to lead people away from allowing boys to show any emotions at all.
"So from that perspective I can identify with being discouraged to explore certain feelings and emotions."
Woman up and take painkillers, resting is wimpy and that time of the month isn't that special anyway. You're being way too sensitive about childbearing and you're afraid of nothing. If you didn't wear that provocative outfit those boys wouldn't have been tempted to whistle at you/you wouldn't have been raped. Women should be quiet in church, etc. Women can lead men into sin theologically and sexually. Women should have intimacy whenever the husband wants it, he is the head after all. This and a lot of other stuff makes it hard for us to explore who we are. Just like it must be for men, being told they can't cry etc.
"As I say I think we are all beautifully and wonderfully made and that
even the things that society wants us to view as grotesque are beautiful
in their own way."
They are, yes. But problems with them aren't beautiful - they need fixing.

I will be soon.

Don't know why you're not but will respond when I can.

Yes, it did post. Please don't bother writing it up again.

You mentioned the following as a concern of yours:
"Another issues of concern for me is the desire to emasculate males and
subjugate them to being feminized. I believe there is a reason for
masculinity and femininity and I believe by embracing both parts we get
what we strive for, which is equality. Short of this we have issues on
both sides of the coin and it becomes a matter of opposition versus
compatibility."
I can understand this worry, and I want to reassure you now, I believe in equality. I don't want to suppress men and I try to be very sensitive to that because I love feminism, not in spite of it. Because feminism means equality not suppression of anyone and I wouldn't want to see you or any other guy squashed because you're a man. I think men are highly intelligent and I have a deep respect for them if they behave with dignity especially towards women and nonwhites, and think that treating weaker members of society well is also important for men to do as well. I'd appreciate an explanation as to why you have those concerns, especially of being emasculated, as well. Because I think it's important for guys to celebrate their masculinity too. And non-cis people should celebrate their identities whatever they are (disagreement there but that's what I think).

I hope you don't mind if I touch on this first:
"As far as the spirituality of womanhood, I believe God has set into
place a very wonderful process inside the body of a woman, where life
has a chance to be formed and grow."
I do agree with that, but sometimes the process is very difficult for the woman :*(
"I think there is spirituality
involved as the whole process brings a soul into existence and not just a
body."
It is possible, but I never thought about it that way very much. I tended to think of the feminine processes as a way that a woman could experience herself on a level of ecstasy and appreciation for the unique feminine functions because they make her different from a man, become more aware of everything in every way (including learning about her body if she is struggling to have a better life in this area), and possibly be in touch with higher powers as well. Which is one reason why I stress to myself that my language used to describe these processes be as positive as possible, and train my mind to want positive outcomes; I'm getting better at it but sometimes it's very difficult. Such areas are very neglected, I'm afraid. Hence the pain and torment that many women suffer due to the great chasm set between them and their feminine functions from an early age onwards.
"Yes I think we can agree on that but possibly from different
perspective."
Agreed, and hoping conversations like this are in your comfort level range, because I don't mind dropping this topic if it isn't.

I think that adoption needs reform, because too many children get given away to bad families where they become more battered and more abused than before. However there are ways around this, as movies like Juno will attest.
As for solo motherhood, I don't consider it a tragedy. I deem it an opportunity for women to have children in a matriarchal-structured household, which I think is valuable for society. One reason we have abortion is that solo motherhood for young single women is still severely stigmatised in the sense that it's seen as not-cool to have a baby when you're young.
If PL wins the battle on abortion they have to embrace feminism. The church attitudes toward solo mothers have encouraged abortion for too long. We need a better way - a way that recognises the spirituality of such feminine functions as menstruation, pregnancy and childbirth, and menopause, while being truthful about anything that could go wrong and all that could go right (also do you personally believe there is anything spiritual about these functions, just curious and hope you don't mind my asking); the right of women to be solo mothers; and the celebration of new life and a woman's countercultural acts (those of having sex while being female and getting pregnant too) before all else. Although some folks say being forced to be pregnant just for having sex is a punishment, and I get where they're coming from. I simply don't think that there is any moral justification for abortion in non life-threatening circumstances and even in those life-threatening circumstances choosing to save one life when all else has failed is a difficult decision to make.
Here's some feminist perspectives on solo motherhood:
http://www.singlemothersbychoice.org/2015/06/27/in-praise-of-the-single-mother/
http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/08/single-parent-double-standard/
As for abortion being illegal I think we have an uphill battle, but I don't consider it impossible. If Wilberforce could get slavery illegal in England while so many people believed in slavery, then I think we can do it too, although in a way it would be tougher due to living in a global world.

I'm glad we agree that encouraging people to come over to the PL side is a good thing. It could be seen more as an issue of persuasion than conversion. PL is not a religion but rather a moral stance on a moral issue that affects all of us.
Do you personally think that adoption rates will spike if abortion becomes illegal, and also do you think abortion will ever become illegal?

On the first question you misunderstood, because my question was do you think it's a good thing to convert people to the PL position through reasoned arguments, honest morality, and scientific proof for the PL position?

Thanks! Just pick an SPL article (preferably recent), comment on it, and send me the link. I'll be down as soon as I can, but am rather busy today so might not get to you immediately. Also I hope you don't mind my pointing out that you missed these comments although I don't expect you to answer everything I write:
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/joshbrahm/will_adoption_rates_spike_if_abortion_becomes_illegal/#comment-2502079110
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/joshbrahm/will_adoption_rates_spike_if_abortion_becomes_illegal/#comment-2502116893

Same to you.

Seeing a different side of Christianity should be interesting. I'm happy you took my invitation to this site, and I hope you don't mind if I show you another one:
http://blog.secularprolife.org
Also I think you've been very nice. Some men are just plain rude.

Do you think abortion is a conversion issue? Also, would you consider yourself "personally pro-life but politically pro-choice"?

Thank you for being understanding :)
I have to say this as generally as possible - I've seen what fundamentalist Christianity can do to people, how it can break them down and make others into tyrants. It and my own bad choices nearly destroyed my life and that is why I don't want to be Christian today. I appreciate that you have chosen to forsake that road and follow the path of love.

Also when I correct or disagree with you I'll generally be as gentle as I can be (unless you defend nazis or some other such crazy thing - I know you wouldn't but I'm very harsh on that kind of thing). I'm letting you know up front that you've got nothing to be afraid of, because you seem to have had a pretty rough start in life and if anything I don't want you to be scared to speak your mind, and I want you to know someone cares about you the person despite not liking some of your ideas. I hope I've been gentle in our past interactions as well, because I think it can mean a lot to an emotionally battered individual when someone is kind to them and possibly help heal them further.

Oh, okay, that's a great answer! I can accept that.
I was a little worried you were going to try to convert me, because I would respectfully resist such behaviour and it wouldn't work out.

"But your perspective is definitely helping to change some of my misconceptions."
That's great! You're young, you'll learn and grow if you keep being open to it. Some of the ideas you've written up are very brilliant as well I must say :)
"I pray that I can be helpful in your life as well."
Just curiously puzzled - how can you be helpful in my life, and what do you mean by this?
You have a great goal, please continue keeping it as such.

Thanks for the admission. Just curious, how did you judge people in the past? Also if you want to be sensitive lurk for a while, get to know the territory, and if you have any controversial ideas phrasing them in a question rather than a dogmatic statement could ensure that you are less likely to be attacked.

Generally I am too polite and obedient to the meanies! Although I tend not to be when I see them attacking another person. I'm happy I could be so helpful in exhorting you to be a better person and man. You've got a rough journey ahead of you so it makes it harder but it shows character that you would try.

It's best that you do for LJF, it's unofficially a safe space for survivors of spiritual abuse, domestic violence, and that kind of thing. For some, they find the mention of the words and the ideas "pro-life" and "Christian" to be triggering.

BTW if anyone is rude to you online it's best to ignore them, I learned the hard way. I see you have the tendency to try to reconcile, like me. It doesn't work with some folks and sometimes I will be rude or ignore them to stand my ground and defend myself, then I leave them forever. That's just the way some relationships online are, especially as some people consider confrontational statements as speaking forth truth to be a virtue.

I don't mind hearing a different perspective myself, it's part of growth. Civility helps! I generally can't stand it when people are rude towards those trying to express a different opinion. I am rude to racists and name-callers if they're not willing to change their ways though but that's just me.
I appreciate that you want to do your job well as a man and I congratulate you for that.

I think there are a few comments of mine you haven't answered if you check in the Inbox. We could resume there if that's all right with you.

Another thing - these dear people think it's their fault because society made them believe raped and abused women were always at fault, and they've seen others that spoke out get blamed, ridiculed, and shunned while the perpetrators get a free pass. In the interests of true justice we have to fight this and rapists must be PUNISHED!

Oh and when you can, can we please pick up where we left off? Thanks.

Okay, sure bud. Please come back when you can, I'll try to answer more of your questions. As for me RL comes first and is calling me away too. Bye and bless ya mate.

That solution you have offered is simply perfect. I swear you must have a brilliant mind!
As for the "article" it's actually a website. Just type in "rape" and "rape culture" into the search engine and you'll come up with dozens of results.
Confronting rape culture is essential if we are to end the abortion battle. People need to see that prolifers CARE. I have read that some people consider rape culture to be more of this feminist stuff so they don't look at it, although it's actually very real and terrifying!
Also have you heard of Roosh V and the pro-rape conferences he was planning to hold? Guys like that ought to be locked up in prison, what a hateful bastard (sorry for swearing Josh but that guy disgusts me beyond measure).

How would you suggest addressing the issues of trauma behind rape in therapy?
Also, have you ever read at this website before:
http://samanthapfield.com
Cuz I have and she's confounded awesome :)
She's also the one who taught me about rape culture, although there were others that had a hand in that as well.

Hey, those are good questions, and I appreciate them. I'm just worried the idea is dead because of that factor I mentioned about the embryo dying due to disconnection from the uterus, although I have this feeling that if this particular brainwave doesn't work out that we'll find something better.
I can't give answers to all those questions, because I don't know. You're right; we'd have to have a plan and really make sure everything worked out on those levels too. Although I will unhesitatingly state that a rapist should automatically lose rights to his child, and not be allowed rights through genetic testing or in any other way. Were you aware in quite a few states in the US that a rapist has visitation rights??
Also, do you think PL people are seriously involved in science, or not involved enough?

I know. Though an abortion might bring relief for some, it would bring intense guilt over killing a person for others.
I think you have it. We need to address the issues of trauma behind rape through therapy, etc. Then we can talk about abortions, but not before then (unless the situation requires something different).
Also what do you think of rape culture? Do you think it's real or imagined by the evil liberals?

Although I will note, that even if a raped woman got an abortion she will still bear the consequences of the rapist's actions, she just won't be pregnant.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I think both lives and both people's rights are equally important. I should have stated that we need to show compassion not just to pregnant but to unborn persons in this terrible situation, because their lives could be snuffed out at such short notice. To be honest I find both the position that women can be forced (not required by laws that should be designed to protect both women and children but forced) to bear the consequences of the rapist's actions and the position that unborn children can be forced to bear the consequences abortion through death to be equally repugnant, and I think it's high time we found another way.
I also believe it's time that people started investing their time in technology that would allow unborn persons to live while allowing women their bodily autonomy; if created in such a way that it could sustain unborn life while women could repeatedly use it without surgical or societal problems, I think it would do a lot for the abortion debate and it would decide matters decisively on our side. However I have heard that once the unborn person is disconnected from the woman's womb it tends to shut off and die due to its disconnection; a very heavy dilemma indeed if this problem is to be solved:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_uterus

Josh Brahm has a very good answer for rape babies. He encourages people to empathise with the woman while asking a question like "Is it right to respond to violence by committing more violence?" Is that not a good inquiry to this question?
Yes, rape is troubling on both sides of the coin. I believe showing empathy to the mother AND to the baby is crucial. Because rape babies can grow up and when they hear that people think rape babies should die, then they think that they are inferior and unworthy. Also the child did not commit a crime by its presence and it is not fair to put it to death for the crime of the father. However I think that the conservative position that women must carry despite the intense trauma of rape and depression, as it currently stands, is a highly unjust one because it forces a woman to carry a pregnancy to term regardless of her feelings (which I find highly offensive). That doesn't mean I don't advocate against abortion in cases of rape; what it does mean is that I am deeply restless and troubled with a position that demands so little empathy for a victimised woman and I would like to see serious reform in this area so that the needs of both mother and child are respected.
Here's the story of one woman conceived by rape:
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/rebeccas-story/
And here's the story of one woman who was raped, whose blog I follow and I deeply respect her despite disagreement on the life issue:
http://www.xojane.com/issues/pro-life-activist-to-pro-choice-christian
I know of rape victims who are pro-legal abortion who would rather that people believed rape victims should keep their babies because it's sl*t-shaming consensual sexual relationships otherwise (the woman I referenced is one of them).
Here is a horrifying piece of satire about rape, supposedly written by a rapist to thank the GOP for being pro-life:
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/10/25/a-fan-letter-to-certain-conservative-politicians/
It really made me think in a lot of ways, I must say.
You state that you're troubled by the thought that you could be standing in judgement of a woman in such a terrible situation. On the one hand, you have every right to voice your opinion for the sake of human life, because every life is equally worthwhile. On the other hand, you are trying to be empathetic to a woman struggling with a rape pregnancy and I commend you for that. My advice is to LISTEN to women who have been raped and express support for both pregnant and unborn persons as empathetically as possible.
I struggle with this question myself. How can I respect a woman's trauma and empathise with her need for bodily autonomy in this case while exhorting her not to take innocent life? At present I do not know but I think compassion for rape victims is an area of needed reform for quite a few (not all, because some are good in this area) PL people.
As for life-of-the-mother I completely see the inconsistency in that position, because even in those cases the unborn person is as worthy of life as the mother. However, sometimes you can't save both and in those cases, the life that can be saved should be saved. I do hope for a day in the future where we can save both lives due to superior technology and abortion to save the mother's life will no longer be employed to save life.
This is my position on the PL movement as it stands, spoken in the words of another person who shares my feelings:
http://www.xojane.com/issues/confessions-of-a-former-pro-life-activist

I read this article recently:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/11/09/ohio-high-school-teaches-kids-that-adoption-is-only-option-for-babies-resulting-from-rape-or-incest/
My thoughts on it: I think the teacher should have given all the options but explained what was morally wrong with abortion. But I wish that we didn't have to keep choosing like this between women's right to abdicate pregnancy and unborn person's right to live. Sad. If only we had something to answer both dilemmas. How should the teacher have handled this? I think that doing it like, speaking about how serious rape and rape culture is and then saying "is the answer to violence more violence" is a good idea. If anyone else wants to tell me I am right or wrong they are welcome to.