If all things were the same, but it was men who fell pregnant and gave birth, abortion clinics would be so standard they’d be on every corner, like McDonald’s. In fact, it’d be a sign of status to go to one.
Male 1: “I’m just off to the abortion clinic real quick.”
Male 2: “Oh nice, King. You’ve been busy.”
Male 1 leaves.
Male 3: “He’s so cool.”
Working people of all genders are not getting paid enough.
This is 100% true and factual.
If males were going pregnant they’d be females
In year 2000 poll, percentage of pro-choice people was 49% among both men and women. In 2006 it was 51% for both. Since 1995 and until 2020, the difference never exceeded 8%, peaking at 20% in 2025 correlating with political polarisation, with year 2010 men responding more pro-choice than women respondents by 5% (47% vs. 42%)‡.
Partisan divide was always more influential than the gender one, with pro-choice stance being 47% less popular among republican women than among democratic women; 42% gap for R/D men in 2020–2021 poll‡. If cisgender men could give birth, it wouldn’t have more influence on their abortion stance than overall political beliefs.
‡ Gender Gaps on Abortion Reach Historic Highs | Gallup, June 2025
Did you know grey hyenas have a matriarchal society? Females are more aggressive, dominant and hold different social status to males. They aren’t less horrible than patriarchal hyenas.
The problem isn’t the males or the females. It’s that they’re hyenas.
And they give birth through a pseudo penis that is torn apart.
I don’t think it brings anything useful to the conversation, but it is an interesting fact.
This conversation is now about hyenas.
Are you a hyena?
Are you not?
You’re way behind. That’s why laws approved are no longer named after what they really do. Who decides that a specific law harms a specific population? The same people approving them… So… Yeah.
What? No. Laws are never named after what they do, they’re named HR#### or something. Acts are nicknamed, like Obamacare or the PATRIOT act, but they’ve always been political and not descriptive.
And the people who write the laws are not the same people who “approve” them, in theory.
Yeah but If you want empirical & objective quantification of harm, good luck.
I don’t see hyenas oppressing one another through systems of well orchestrated indoctrination. They may just nibble each other once in a while.
You’d be surprised of how complex and rich hyena society is.
Well they do hate immigrants , so I wouldn’t be so quick to assume.
If men gave birth, then nothing else would be the same.
The systems of oppression that exist were created for a reason. Evil reasons, but reasons none the less. It’s not random.
There is a reason hunter/gatherer societies tend to be more egalitarian, and agricultural societies tend to be less egalitarian, and it isn’t because farming turns people evil and misogynistic.
Furthermore, abortion was largely accepted until increased birthrates were required for the needs of empire. Despite the arguments being religious in nature against abortion, the original drivers for outlawing it were non-religous.
This would be such an extreme warping of reality that it’s essentially impossible to make any assumptions about what it would entail like this. You know the joke about a time traveller moving a rock? Yeah, that times a million.
This here. If men would give birth, they would be women.
So much of what makes up the differences between the male and female experiences is down to the fact that women give birth.
If it was the men who gave birth and not the women, we’d have pretty much everything we have now, just gender-reversed.
This assumes it simply reverses the roles so men give birth and women don’t.
What if we all gave birth?
what if we all gave birth 👉👈
(???)
In that case, there likely wouldn’t be two separate genders at all, because why would there be? Hermaphrodite species exist, and they usually just have a single gender.
*sex
sexes are not the same as genders and should not be called genders
So, basically that one Red Dwarf episode. Cool.
What is up with Lemmy, men and pregnancy??
Did I miss the new meta?Someone is running a propaganda campaign, most likely. Shaping hearts and minds.
idiots tend to propagate stupid ideas because it makes them feel smart.
it’s not like this ‘if men got pregnant’ line of thinking is anything new, it’s been around since forever.
I was thinking the same thing. First something about moths(I don’t really get what that was about), then Loss, now this. What’s next?
Luigi board? /j
If men gave birth they would be called women
You’re joking but maybe that’s exactly the reason why men always had it easier in history. They didn’t have to spend 9 months × child suffering + menstrual cycle every month
Of course there have been a few periods in history where men died in droves from wars.
Not that war usually works at well for anyone
I’m not joking, it’s etymology.
That is actually incorrect. Woman comes from wifman (“man” at that time meaning “person”, so "female person), not from wombman.
A person with the ability to give birth would be female.
But a “female person” has a uterus so the etymology is wrong, but the argument stands.
eh, they could also be called sth else like “childmakingman” or sth
A childmaking man is a father or daddy
Then no one would have problems getting an abortion
Yes
Why
I was thinking this for a second, but the factor that makes this true is the near monopoly on violence that men have. So, theoretically as long as they still corner of the market on violence I think this would hold true in that theoretical society
Cool angle, but it breaks down biologically.
Obviously 🤣
If males gave birth then it would be females that competed for access to us and became physically stronger than males. The only thing that would change is the name of the physically and politically powerful gender.
It wouldn’t make society better. Hyenas have bigger stronger dominant females and they have no utopia. Seahorse males give birth, they are the more maternal, females cheat on them.
Only fundamental difference between male and female is size and motility of sex cells. Only reason animals like us vary in size and strength is due to difference in offspring investment strategies.
if both sexes were hermaphroditic, then there would be less conflict as in other animals whom posesses both sexes gonads.
No, there wouldn’t be.
The policy would be the same, because the issue of abortion makes the two ruling parties way too much money to make it worth legalizing or banning completely. Hell, when the leak of the Roe repeal occurred, Democrats raked in $80,000,000 alone. A cool $80,000,000 and all they had to do was pretend to care about abortion by making a tweet or something.
OP is incorrect.
It’s not that simple and I say that as a woman. It’s about ownership of the idea that having kids is a “right” even if no one likes you enough to want to carry your genes forward, putting health and body at risk to make it so. In addition to the lifelong commitment childbearing requires.
The fact that you have to take some degree of ownership of another human being to treat childbirth this way is obscene, but here we are. Roe fell.
It’s more about entitlement. I can’t conceive of doing the same in reverse positions.
Not to mention that it’s also about agency. Abortion restrictions or criminalisation is a matter of exerting control over people with a uterus.
I thought that’s what I just said. Granted, I’m only on Lemmy while winding down.
Boynecologist and boybortion should be Guynecologist and aboytion.
Just saying.
I want a transexual goth girlfriend…
If men bore the children then women would have to do the sexual pursuing. The human race would quickly die out.
I wonder if maybe women would have more time and energy to do the actual pursuing then, instead of being sidelined, oppressed, saddled with the labor of care work which is necessary for the continuation of the human race. Are you saying birthing men wouldn’t take on that care work?
You never see legislation on condoms.
Just birth control.
When it’s a man’s choice it’s uncontested.
But a woman shouldn’t have the same autonomy.
You never see legislation on condoms.
The Republic of Ireland wants to speak to you.
Welp
Not here but in Africa the Catholic Church pushed for total bans on birth control, condoms included, official in some places and socially in others. The result was huge spikes in HIV across swaths of Africa.
Also don’t be surprised if there is eventually a ban on all both control, not because of actual theocratic desire, but because billionaires don’t want us to have any. Deep down they know LLMs will not lead to AI powerful enough to replace all workers, like they were hoping for a few years back, so they know they need human slaves. They use evangelical idiocy to spur up theocratic chuds and convince the masses, they’re one of them. But these assholes have no set ethics or morals, good or bad, just greed and powerlust.
I bet they are planning all sorts of ways to force us to have future slaves for them. Not saying it will work, I think population decline is unavoidable and not that bad tbh, but they will absolutely try.
I know project 2025 has plans for forcing teenage girls to have pregnancy.
Which is illogical even by their standards as babies more likely to be still born and premature from teenage mothers. And pregnant teen girls more likely to have complications resulting in death and permanent sterility.
We gotta get rid of these insane psychopaths before they destroy the planet and everything on it.
Condoms are balloons that just fit your penis, lol. Jk. This world is f-d up.
If all things were the same, but it was men who fell pregnant and gave birth, well then all things but the one would be the same. Because it clearly says that all things, besides the one, would be the same.
True.
