I couldn't make out all the audio (my work computer, I often have sound come in too damned low) but that said yes and no on what I did hear.

Bottom line is we are the ones who get pregnant. I will always hold with a woman should be able to take care of herself and anyone else who comes along and her body, her choice.

Should a guy be on the hook after a one-night stand? Well, it may seem harsh but yes. Unless it can be shown the woman knocked up set him up to get pregnant without his knowledge. If there's some evidence of that, not only let him off the hook but take the baby away from that sick s.o.b. She's not fit to be a mother and shouldn't be raising a child. If he doesn't want baby, there's long lists of couples lining up to adopt.

However, what the hell is wrong with these guys who hit and run and are then astounded that they got burned playing with fire? Either have a vascetomy or don't do the one-night stand thing. If you do do the one night stand thing, go in keeping in mind that you're basically playing Russian roullette with your life, your finances and your freedom. It sucks but it's the very real risk of casual sex. Pregnancy is a risk for the female; parenthood is the risk for either gender. (And disease is for both parties.) If you aren't willing to risk it, do indeed keep it in your pants. Or get the surgery to safeguard yourself.

Bottom line, man or woman, opposite sex or same, you sleep with a stranger, you're doing just that. You don't know if they're as sane as they seem or psychotic. It's a dangerous game to play. Be an adult and accept that you ran the risk and live with the consequences of your actions.

That said, any woman who steals sperm without a guy's knowledge should be locked up and the key thrown away (she's a danger to herself and others; most particularly anyone she made with said stolen sperm) and all her assets, every last dime, should go to the guy she victimized.

Don't ever let it be said I'm unemotional. :)

Oh, and, Amy, good interview even with the parts I missed. It'll get people talking which is the mark of a good interview. You do that (get people talking) very well. And it's a good thing.

Amy- I just wanted to say you looked great! I love seeing a fellow pale redhead wear a skin toned top well.

Dr. Helen was awkward at first but she warmed up at the end, she didn't exactly make it easy for you. Was she afraid to take a stronger stance? She seemed hesitant to let more of her opinions show. Why?

"Should a guy be on the hook after a one-night stand? Well, it may seem harsh but yes. "

Gander meet goose. She should be on the hook too exactly the same way - he should be entitled to drag her off to Planned Parenthood to get scraped.

Well, let's back off of that one, maybe. It's his kid? it is indeed. Then he should get custody at birth. She can get visitation. If she doesn't piss him off too bad.

I can't view the video here, but about whether men should be off the hook for one-night stands....I say yes. If women were forced to be more responsible with their bodies, then there would be less illegitimacy, unwanted pregnancies, STD's, and ruined lives. Too many women (girls) look at their lovely bundles of joy and see PAYCHECK written all over their pretty little faces.

"If he doesn't want baby, there's long lists of couples lining up to adopt."

This type of thinking is a falacy. There may be long lines for couples seeking WHITE children, but not for non-white American children. Most couples seeking private adoptions are white, and these white people want white babies. If they are not able to find a white baby, they are nine times more likely to seek and international adoption than to adopt a non-white American baby. 70% of black women have children outside of marriage. It's safe to say that adoption is not a realistic option for everyone and that the family laws often encourage unbridled, self-righteous irresponsibility.

I tried to load the vid, but for some reason, I couldn't get visual and the audio was muffled. I'll try again later. I am very interested in the subject. I have a near and dear male friend who is going through this now. The C*nt got preggers. He always used a condom and after she got pregnant, he checked his supply. There where pin holes in them.
He's going through hell right now because of this crazy broad.

Amy:

You on the right track about the idea of fairness instead of equality. I like to ask, rhetorically, if an apple can ever be equal to an orange.

Reproductive rights are fundamentally asymmetrical, so there must be some kind of sensible principle of fairness applied. A woman should not have many more options than a man, but at present we have a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too situation.

Either women should have the right to abortion but no right to child support, or the right to child support but no right to abortion. One or the other, but not both.

Uh, Jim, point out exactly where I said otherwise. Goose and gander made baby; both goose and gander responsible for baby being here; both on hook for it. Equally, ideally. Should be and it's definitely not my fault it isn't currently. I raised my daughter sans child support.

She should utterly be on the hook. However, forced abortion? You are fucking kidding me with that. That would be just as bad as forcing her to endure childbirth and pregnancy. Until you can have baby for her, get pregnant instead of her, shut up. I couldn't object to the example above where she pricked holes in condoms and any like situation -- I said lock her up and throw away the key on that. You and I both know that's the whackjob minority of women knocked up in one-night stands. And whackjobs shouldn't be allowed to become mothers.

Look I'm tired of the guys trying to argue against their responsibility in baby-making by saying they should have a say. You play, you're taking your chances unless you are doing the responsibile thing to avoid and having the operation.

Grownups want sex. Adults realize there's risks involved. They balance how much they want to play against those risks and their ability to protect against them and -- psst, here's the real grown up part -- deal with the consequences if the protection didn't work.

I have only one child because I decided not to have any more. I came of age in a time when everyone thought I was crazy insisting any man that wanted to sleep with me had to use a condom that I was all too willing to buy (because if I bought them I knew where they had come from and that they weren't tampered with, think it's only women can play those games) because no matter what else I also used, condoms are the only thing that also protects against disease. Everyone used to think I was kind of nuts (though, at 51, I've yet to have a guy refuse to sleep with me because I insisted on protection though if I ever run across one I'll be fine taking a pass even though I'm post menopausal now) then the AIDS scare hit and they all stopped laughing.

Two (or more) people play, two (or more) people accept responsibility for the risks involved. Don't want to be a daddy, don't risk making a baby. We can debate whether or not a guy should be able to force an abortion or be absolved of his parental responsibility until hell freezes over (and since I don't believe in hell, that's a mighty long time) but it's not the reality of the situation and never will be no matter how many laws are enacted because laws won't change the fact that support the kid or not, they're your offspring. Even if you never have anything to do with them.

It ain't as cut and dried as we all wished it were. Women run the higher risk because they get pregnant but that doesn't give men a pass at thinking about what they're risking. If they're really adults, they will.

The laws are set up the way they are to accommodate our post-feminist views of men and women: women are semi-divine semi-adults who must be protected at all costs, and who therefore cannot be expected to shoulder true, equal responsibility for their actions. Men, although demonized and despised, are the only real adults, and thus must be held responsible for not only themselves, but also for women.

True equality? Responsibilities commensurate with rights? Apparently it has been found (by the unholy alliance of gender feminists and chivalrists which controls policy) that women just can't handle it. So, men are forever charged with fixing it so women can have that cake and eat it, too! (It's ok, so long as men don't mind never getting any cake.) Example? No one can tell a woman not to destroy the simple "lump of tissue" with which she is afflicted after careless sex, but at the same time, she can demand that the careless (foolish?) man step up for a lifetime of work (his body, her choice!) to take financial responsibility for HIS "baby."

Who woulda' figured that all that female "empowerment" would lead to the perception that women are "special" -- like the kids on the short bus?

BTW,

More "empowerment" > more power > inevitable and increasing self-interested corruption.

Anyone else getting offended by that increasingly noxious stench emanating from no-limits, "you should have it all" femville?

I know two men that this happened to. In both cases, it wasn't a one-night stand, it was a girlfriend, and it was done in an attempt to keep the man around. One man was under the impression that GF was infertile, the other man had been assured that GF was on birth control. It's completely fucked up. Guy #1 stayed with Babymomma for a few years, until he finally accepted the fact that she'd always be a psycho. Guy #2 is still with Babymomma two years later, but they still don't have any marriage plans and don't live together.

Healthy. Real healthy.

"Until you can have baby for her, get pregnant instead of her, shut up. I"

It is so not about her. It is about the baby. We are talking about reproductive rights and responsiblities. Reproduction = babies. Period.

She chose to have sex just as much as he did.

And spare me the whining about pregnancy - I know how ill-designed human females are for reproduction, that's not my fault and that's not the point. She should be on the hook the same way he is. He can't terminate the pregancy, she can't. That's equity. Everything else is special pleading.

No, of course I am not going to carry it all that far. She can abort if she wants, he can opt out of fatherhood as much as she can opt out of motherhood. She can't or won't support the child on her own? Why should the child suffer for her failure or decision? The father she has identified should have the right to put his child up for adoption.

"Don't want to be a daddy, don't risk making a baby."

Don't weant to be a mommy, don't risk making a baby.

There; fixed that for you.

"He can't terminate the pregancy, she can't. "

Ooo, can I drag you down to the clinic to get snipped? Equal is equal, after all. I can control your body to say you don't have a kid, by force.

All that nonsense aside, sex leads to babies. This isn't rocket science, even little kids understand it. You don't want kids? YOU need to be in charge of BC, period, or don't have sex. If the condoms are with you, she can't wreck them. If you don't know her but are fucking her, I'd say don't leave anything to a stranger that affects your life permanently.

AHW, your friend was "under the impression" she was infertile? That's a thin thread to have unprotected sex on. There are very few ways to be completely infertile. I can't, in my wildest dreams, imagine a woman trusting a guy who says "come on baby, I can't make babies, don't worry". Yet guys trust women that way all the time. I have difficulty believing they are really that dumb. Which leaves us with them deciding the fun is worth the gamble. We aren't expected to cry for losers in Vegas, are we? What's different here?

I don't understand why any single person not in a relationship isn't on BC(if female) or carries a condom at all times. There seems to be a large number of folks out there engaging in casual sex or thinking about it. I never did, but then I'm one of those weird ones who believes in only having sex when you're in a relationship. There's a great deal of security in that. But if somebody engages in casual sex on a regular basis, why the fuck aren't they protecting themselves at all times?

Anyway, on to a possible solution to this dilemma...I think that maybe child support laws should be changed. That if a man has to put in X amount of dollars a month, a woman should have to put X amount of dollars as well. That way, if there is a mistake, both are lawfully financially responsible for raising the child. I believe it's a fair and equal way of going about this.

There's an easy fix for the problem, if only the law would do it. Any woman who is pregnant with a child, cannot show she will be able to support it, and cannot produce an actual DNA-tested father who is capable of support, loses parental rights if and when the child is born, and the baby is placed for expedited adoption with a reputable agency. End of story.

But I'm just dreaming, I know. Apparently the practice of extorting child support from either male suckers or third-party taxpayers is too big a cottage industry to shut down. But it's doing irreparable damage to our social stability, the horrible societal end game of which will eventually be visited upon all of us. Sad.

Great stuff, Amy!

Listening to BBC Radio as much as I do, I've become aware that the general perception over in the UK is that the state has made it soooooooooooo easy for young women to get pregnant and then be setup for life with generous gov't welfare incl. a home, food, and sometimes even a car. Now they're beginning to wonder why they, Great Britain, are flat broke!

>>Now they're beginning to wonder why they, Great Britain, are flat broke!

Not a global economist I take it, Robert W.?

Jay R, I don't disagree with anything you say -- except for the part where you want it to be switched to men having their cake and eating it too. Neither party should be left off the hook. And, frankly, your claim that men are shouldering all the responsibility kind of conflicts of all these guys whining about being on the hook for a lifetime (of baby they made) after a one-night stand. You act as if you didn't know you were taking that risk. Snip snip, masterbate, if you can't be a responsible adult enough to admit you're taking a rather obvious risk.

ahw, and T's around (against all odds since mommy did insist on not only condoms but the brand I recommended) after his daddy insisted he was sterile. Your point? As I said, both genders are guilty of assholeness.

Jim, I think that was kind of the point I was making. Don't want to be a daddy, don't risk making a baby; don't want to be a mommy, don't risk making a baby. Um, I did, in fact, start off by post that I'm only the mother of one by choice just as Amy's only the mother of none by choice.

I'm promoting equal liability. Tough noogies if that doesn't translate to males being able to dictate what females do their bodies. You have that choice only at the point where you do or do not engage in sexual intercourse with her. If a woman rapes a man -- or pricks holes in the condom -- that's a whole other story and not typical consensual sex, whether we're talking one-night stand or gf. In those cases, I wouldn't be against forced abortions. But if it's a matter of whoopsie whatever protection, if any, we used failed. Tough noogie. You both have to shoulder the consequences.

That said joint custody should be automatic if both parents are fit and each pay half the health care (and other similar) costs. I think one suggestion someone put forth in here would be appropriate, each support the kid when it's in their home, feed, clothe, etc. Maureen's suggestion above is an excellent one, both put equal amounts into an account for kid that covers things like health care and education. Oh, and, frankly, I think paternity tests should be done on every child born to a claimed father, even if mommy is married to daddy. To protect father and child. It protects mommy only if daddy is trying to weasel out of his responsibilities.

But, for Chrissake's, stop playing with matches then whining you're getting burned when common sense ought to tell you you risk that. I knew that I risked getting pregnant even with protection I used after having my daughter. I would have had the abortion if I had and paid for it myself (well, the part my insurance didn't cover). I'm glad I never had the misfortune but, if I had, I wouldn't be wringing my hands and crying it was all the guy's fault when I consented to sex with him. No, I'd have bucked up and dealt with the consequences of having run the risk.

Or you men -- or mice?

" In those cases, I wouldn't be against forced abortions."

Oh, by all means, lets kill kids because their adult parents are asshats. I can think of quite a few that would be going, if we start that. Smart idea, that.

Let's take it further: if an adult robs a bank, let's imprison the kid! Punishing the kid because of the parents actions is a GREAT idea!

"Jay R, I don't disagree with anything you say -- except for the part where you want it to be switched to men having their cake and eating it too."

T's Grammy, thank you for the accord, but please quote anything I posted which implied, much less stated, that I want it to be switched, as you say.

"Neither party should be left off the hook." I wholeheartedly agree. So, if men are responsible for their as yet-unborn baby (which of course they SHOULD be), then, in your view, women should be also be treated as "responsible adults" and NOT be allowed to kill that unborn baby after "taking a rather obvious risk," right?

The simple point is that men have no ability to "get off the hook." Only women are allowed that privilege -- by killing their unborn baby, or by later abandoning their little "abortion survivor." But hey, that's cool. We can't demand that they act like responsible adults -- they are just women, after all. What more could possibly be expected of them?

Wow, don't you just love all of the wankery and asshattery that rears its precious little head when this subject gets dragged up again?

I think the amount of vitriol being spewed by twerps like Jay and Tyler is totally hilarious (did some woman insult your winky?). Fortunately, it's pretty likely they're not getting laid with any regularity.

If as one half of a pair of consenting adults you can't deal with the consequences (and let me remind you that even contraceptives are not foolproof!) that come along with sex, you shouldn't be having it.

As for demanding that men should be allowed to control the fate of their pregnant partners, sorry. Don't do the babymaking tango with someone who doesn't want a baby if you do, and vice versa. If you can't be bothered to gauge someone's sanity level before you leap into the sack with them, or you're too trusting or stupid to handle the contraceptives on your own, then you really shouldn't be fucking them.

The real losers in all of the scenarios are the poor children who get born to overgrown, entitled brats masquerading as adults who can't handle dealing with the outcome of their actions in a mature and responsible way.

Hamsa,

Name calling. Check
Shaming language. Check
Sexual smear. Check.
Lack of any substance or logic. Check.

Congratulations! You (once again) score 100%!

...and then there was the case where she stood up in court and stated that "she wanted to have a baby and not get married"....to the stunned and shocked jury.

...after already turning over her journal detailing the tracking of her cycle.

But that is legal.

Silly men, beware. Women are predators in every sense of the word.

I think T's Grammy has really nailed it. Any party who engages in fraud - poking holes in a condom, stealing sperm, etc. - should get the book thrown at her. But the idea that casual sex can somehow be COMPLETELY divorced from the risk of pregnancy is delusional. Take responsibility for your choice of sexual partners and the manner in which you have sex! I really don't understand how a forum full of people clamoring for freedom and personal responsibility can suddenly turn into a bunch of whiners trying to get out of the biological consequences of their own actions.

"Oh, by all means, lets kill kids because their adult parents are asshats."

A fetus is not a kid.

In some instances a kid is a goat, but that's a horse of a different color.

Gog,

Ok, you be the one to tell a woman grieving after a miscarriage that she is wrong to feel that she has lost her child. "Silly thing, stop crying! It was just tissue, after all."

When did the phrase "Just a little pregnant" stop being an absurd joke, and instead a license to kill?

"Neither party should be left off the hook." I wholeheartedly agree. So, if men are responsible for their as yet-unborn baby (which of course they SHOULD be), then, in your view, women should be also be treated as "responsible adults" and NOT be allowed to kill that unborn baby after "taking a rather obvious risk," right?"

I love it! I never can understand how women who profess to be so intelligent can just say "Ooops, it happened. Better get scraped". Don't want a kid THAT bad? Use 2 forms of BD. Sterilize yourself. THINK and be proactive, in other words. Use those brains you brag about.

I have a relatively simple solution for this:

Women get to choose if they are going to carry a child to term or get an abortion.

If the woman chooses to carry the child, the man gets to decide if the child will be kept or put up for adoption.

If the woman refuses to put the child up for adoption at the man's request, the man's paternity rights will be forever taken away and the women will be completely 'on the hook'.

Both parties share the responsibility and cost of DNA testing, which would be required before any man could be accused of being a father.

What do y'all think of this idea?