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.”

  • Magiilaro@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    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.

    • tiny_hedgehog@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 hours ago

      That wasn’t my point. My point was that the world is run by men. Policymakers and politicians are, in general, men. And since abortion is about giving women freedom over their bodies and life decisions, (most) men don’t allow that. Therefore there’s a very unfair disconnect. My point was that if men were the target of anti-abortion policies, then such policies would by and large not exist.

      ETA: As another commenter pointed out, perhaps statistically most men are pro-choice, but unfortunately in general the backwards few who go into and succeed in politics are the ones who make the call.

  • nitroemdash@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    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

  • Scrogu@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      if both sexes were hermaphroditic, then there would be less conflict as in other animals whom posesses both sexes gonads.

  • ironycanal@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is it a hostility to some essential concept of women, or a way to devalue reproduction caring and domestic labor? Which force is stronger, more original?

    • Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Sexism is the strongest of all oppression. It is the most common, widespread, and ignored of all oppression and causes a huge amount of human suffering.

      When women are dehumanized it usually relies on the prejudices that have been developed and reinforced through culture. So I think the essential concept is the driving force.

      The devaluing of domestic labor is a side effect of a class of people without rights viewed as property.

  • binux@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    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.

  • Pudutr0n@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    2 days ago

    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.

    • ILikeTraaaains@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      62
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.

    • iturnedintoanewt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.

      • too_high_for_this@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        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.

    • tiny_hedgehog@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t see hyenas oppressing one another through systems of well orchestrated indoctrination. They may just nibble each other once in a while.

      • Count042@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        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.

    • Scrollone@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      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

      • arrow74@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        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

    • Bristlecone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      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

  • Krudler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    If men bore the children then women would have to do the sexual pursuing. The human race would quickly die out.

    • polariscap@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      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?