https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAskReddit/comments/1iw6rqc/should_reproductive_deception_whether_a_man/
created by SinghStar1 on 23/02/2025 at 09:54 UTC
410 upvotes, 136 top-level comments (showing 25)
Consent in sexual relationships is widely discussed, particularly regarding deception or lack of full disclosure. If a man misleads a woman about wearing protection and impregnates her, many would argue it’s a violation of consent. But if a woman falsely claims to be on birth control, leading to an unplanned pregnancy, should the same logic apply? If consent is conditional on accurate information, does the man have a fair argument against responsibility for the child? Or is he obligated despite the deception? Should there be legal parity in reproductive rights when deception occurs?
Comment by AutoModerator at 23/02/2025 at 09:54 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Welcome to r/TrueAskReddit. Remember that this subreddit is aimed at high quality discussion, so please elaborate on your answer as much as you can and avoid off-topic or jokey answers as per subreddit rules[1].
1: https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAskReddit/about/sidebar
2: /message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAskReddit
Comment by SenatorPardek at 23/02/2025 at 16:42 UTC
27 upvotes, 11 direct replies
So in the hypothetical; the woman lies and says she’s on birth control. The man has sex with her without any form of protection because he thinks she’s on birth control. He finishes in her, and she becomes pregnant. Does he have any rights because he was lied too?
The law currently treats “physical” birth control and “biological/internal” birth control very differently.
A guy can’t be arrested for rape if he lied about having a vasectomy. At least, i’m not aware of any cases of this.
However: a woman “can” go to jail for sexual assault for tampering with a condom. There are cases of it though it’s difficult to prove.
In both cases “stealthing” or removing a condom without the woman’s knowledge basically is a physical act involving a physical item. Just like poking holes in it would be.
In the other case: the other is telling a lie about how fertile they are. So far; we have not chosen to pursue these folks, considering the lie to be immoral but not criminal
Comment by AHippieDude at 23/02/2025 at 12:27 UTC
76 upvotes, 5 direct replies
I knew a couple ( through other people ) that got married based on him wanting children ( he wanted kids, and was willing to move on and find someone else) and she was secretly on birth control to prevent it.
She literally bragged about deceiving him and how she was never going to have kids, and would "take him for everything" if he divorced her.
He eventually discovered her deception, and divorced her. The judge was not kind to her, she tried to get alimony and the judge reminded her he could actually get financial compensation for supporting her while she was intentionally deceiving him
Comment by Ellen6723 at 23/02/2025 at 16:29 UTC*
12 upvotes, 3 direct replies
Your saying that if the outcome of the deceit results in a pregnancy and the women was the deceiving part that absolves the male from responsibility of the subsequent child. I get where your heads at but no. A baby’s rights are not impacted at all by the morality or legality of their conception. So a baby from a rape can still obtain child support form said rapist - without him gaining access to that child.
No birth control method is 100% and so anyone who ejaculates into a vagina assumes risk of impregnating that person as a potential outcome.
But say your logic prevailed - and who knows man shits cray cray these days - that would mean a woman who got pregnant through the misrepresentation of being on birth control would forgo the right to hold that man accountable to support the unintended (at least on his part) child. OK then the reverse would be applied under the law. The man who impregnated a woman through false pretenses of using a condom would have to incur an equal punishment. What’s that then … paying 2X the norm child support?
Comment by HerpesIsItchy at 23/02/2025 at 10:05 UTC
49 upvotes, 3 direct replies
I think the challenge here is that consent is not usually documented when it comes to sexual Congress
Also, if a condom was used and or birth control was engaged, there's still no guarantee that conception could not happen.
Now if deception could be proven, then I would support this being addressed through legal means.
At the end of the day we do have to appreciate that a life form will come out of this and we'll need support
Comment by OGputa at 24/02/2025 at 02:20 UTC*
4 upvotes, 3 direct replies
Condoms and birth control aren't equivalent. One protects from STD's and pregnancy. The other only protects from pregnancy. One is external, the other is internal.
A vasectomy is the only real equivalent to birth control, in this conversation. Men can lie about having vasectomies, women can lie about birth control. Both are internal, neither protect from STD's, and you're essentially taking somebody at their word for both. Both can fail without malicious intent.
Condoms are external, and can be supplied or sabotaged by either person. They protect from STD's and pregnancy. A woman or man can poke holes, and a man can secretly remove it during sex. The risk is greater with sabotaged condoms, because STD's are a risk too.
Therefor, deception with condoms is always going to be worse than lying about internal birth control/vasectomies. The risk is greater. Both genders can do it. I would consider it to always be rape if somebody knowingly sabotages or removes a confom without consent.
If a vasectomy or birth control pill fails? That can be natural. If somebody intentionally lies about being fixed when they are not, or lies about being on the pill when they are not, that can cause pregnancy without consent, and I would consider it, at bare minimum, sexual assault.
If somebody claims they don't have a vasectomy or aren't on birth control, when they actually do/are, there's no measurable harm actually being done. It's no different than somebody lying about their occupation or life in order to trick somebody into thinking they're more desireable. It can be dirty and scummy if you lie, knowing somebody wants a baby, and you're a POS for it, but lying isn't sexual assault. Fraud? Maybe. Assault/Sexual Assault/Rape? No.
Comment by LaMadreDelCantante at 23/02/2025 at 12:08 UTC
35 upvotes, 4 direct replies
I think a key difference here is the physical differences in the way this affects men vs women. In the case of stealthing, there is direct physical contact that wasn't consented to (as well as an increased risk for an STI). In the case of pregnancy, the woman is the one who bears the physical effects, making it more like an assault. You just can't compare having to pay child support with having a fetus inside your body, risking death, permanent bodily harm, months of illness, painful delivery, etc. And abortion isn't a walk in the park either. A biological woman simply can't put a biological man through all that.
That's not to say I don't think there should be consequences to lying about birth control, if it can be proven. I just don't think it's an equivalent to sneaking off a condom. And honestly nobody should be taking *anyone's* word for contraception before that level of trust is established, meaning men need to take control of their own fertility whether their partners are on birth control or not.
Comment by ElectronGuru at 23/02/2025 at 12:23 UTC
26 upvotes, 5 direct replies
Child support is about children. If we can’t have universal support for parents then all potential parents are inherently responsible. If a man doesn’t want to risk being a potential parent he can avoid sex or get sterilized.
Comment by VividlyDissociating at 23/02/2025 at 13:24 UTC
6 upvotes, 1 direct replies
not wearing a condom is worse because you are potentially subjecting the other person (man or woman) to sexual disease and they didnt consent to taking *that much* of a risk.
birth control is only baby making prevention condoms are baby making and std prevention.
not 100% tho obviously. both have failures
Comment by Britannkic_ at 23/02/2025 at 12:30 UTC
7 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Firstly I would ask the question in a simpler manner:
Does a man have responsibility for his child? The only answer is yes
What you are looking at is the actions of the man and woman and conflating the scenarios of consent
Comment by InterestedEr79 at 23/02/2025 at 12:59 UTC
6 upvotes, 3 direct replies
The woman should be allowed to decide whether or not to keep the baby. The man should be allowed to say he’s not prepared to support an unwanted child financially.
Comment by LadyDatura9497 at 23/02/2025 at 13:25 UTC
5 upvotes, 2 direct replies
You’d have to prove she lied. Is there documentation of her telling you when that wasn’t the case? Did she lie, or did her contraceptive fail? Men already have the ability to sign away all rights and responsibilities for their offspring (unless ruled otherwise by a judge) in the US, and males can’t carry the physical or psychological weight of pregnancy. You’d have to argue why it’s a crime.
Comment by Sunset_Tiger at 23/02/2025 at 14:26 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Honestly, if it can be proven, I think it should be able to be filed as a criminal case.
Unfortunately, it can be difficult to prove if the instigating party doesn’t admit it! Without it, birth control absolutely fails and someone can get pregnant on the pill- especially if the use is improper (ie actually forgetting days), so it may be seen as this without any admission
Comment by _weedkiller_ at 23/02/2025 at 12:35 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
The child comes first. They should not lose out financially because of their parent’s bad luck. Yes it sucks. Yes it’s unfair to whoever was misled, but unfortunate events happen in life. You get in a car knowing it could crash, you choose to take the risk.
Contributing purely financially is getting off very very lightly!! It’s nothing compared to the responsibility of raising the kid. Nothing. Anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant about parenting responsibilities.
When I was 20, but autistic therefore very vulnerable, I was misled by a man who said he was infertile. I protested a lot about coming off birth control but he wore me down, said it was making me fat and would give me cancer. It didn’t occur to me he might be lying about fertility because the stereotype is that women want babies and men don’t.
Turns out if a girl/woman is from a wealthy family they have another incentive.
17 years later, I’m sat here at a club for disabled teenagers, bored out my mind watching the 16 year old he contributes a little bit of money to and fuck all else.
I can’t work, very hard to have a relationship or socialise, if I’m unwell tough shit, if I am tired tough, haven’t had a holiday (vacation) in years.
I have no sympathy for people who get off with just having to pay child support and nothing else.
I had a hip replacement and had this kid back in my care 4 days later with no help. Life is unfair. Don’t make it more unfair on the kid than it has to be.
Comment by Objective-Row-2791 at 23/02/2025 at 13:05 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I think your claim that 'deception invalidates consent' needs qualification because, as it is, it is too broad and unworkable. For example, if I pretend to be rich when I'm not and then seduce someone, this is deception but it doesn't invalidate consent (at least in the current framework).
Comment by Salt-Lingonberry-853 at 23/02/2025 at 10:33 UTC
1 upvotes, 3 direct replies
1. They should be treated identically, though of course each is difficult to prove
2. In any area where women have the right to abort, they should not be able to force a man into child support unless he **agrees** to take on parental responsibilities. If you can abort, and you **choose** not to, knowing the father wants no part... You should be on your own, unable to get child support.
Comment by The1Bonesaw at 23/02/2025 at 10:25 UTC
0 upvotes, 1 direct replies
As far as U.S. Courts are concerned... No. The court will always side with the child receiving support, and they will view the crime committed by the woman as a separate issue. This is the reason why a man who is listed incorrectly on a birth certificate (because it's later discovered that he isn't the father) will still be required by the state to continue supporting the child (especially when the actual father can no longer be found or is otherwise unknown).
There have even been cases where, although the father is known to the court, where the state has found the incorrectly listed father still be required to pay support because the actual father is otherwise destitute. It's not about "fairness for the incorrectly listed father", it's about making sure that the child continues receiving support.
That said, I'm not saying that this current policy of the court cannot be challenged moving forward, I'm merely stating the courts current thinking on the matter.
Comment by beagleherder at 23/02/2025 at 12:39 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Well….yes…they should be treated the same. In some places…that is treated as rape. So…when the woman goes to jail and loses custody of her kid…the man doesn’t have to worry about child support because he has a kid to raise.
Comment by Medical_Flower2568 at 23/02/2025 at 15:43 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
If deception can be proven either way (innocent until proven guilty, after all) then restitution should be owed to the victimized party.
Though it would not be nearly as severe as violent rape or drug-based rape, this situation is still non-consensual (in this case fraudulent) sexual relations, and as such should be criminalized in a manner consistent with equality before the law.
It is worth noting, though, that damages and hence just restitution will likely not be equal in average value between men and women.
Comment by Brave-Improvement299 at 23/02/2025 at 16:59 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Unfortunately, you're asking the child to be punished for the behavior of a parent.
That aside, anytime one chooses to have sex with someone there's a possibility of a pregnancy. The owner of a penis or vagina has to accept that reality or not have sex. It doesn't matter it if is deception or not. The only 100% way to not have an unintended pregnancy is to not have sex.
Comment by shitshowboxer at 23/02/2025 at 17:14 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
does a man impregnated under false pretenses
Doesn't happen. But that's besides the point.
Honestly this can't be an actionable offense in a country where women don't have the right to their own medical decisions. What he's doing is littering and with biohazard material. He should be fined at the very least.
Comment by MsAgentM at 23/02/2025 at 17:52 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
The difference between these situations is when a child results. If a child is here, alive, and needs to be taken care of, then that must happen and is the responsibility of both parents.
Comment by Sabbathius at 23/02/2025 at 17:54 UTC
1 upvotes, 2 direct replies
Yep, I think so. Deception is deception and should be treated the same way, regardless which way it goes.
And also child support/parentage should be possible to opt out of.
The way I see it, men don't have any reproductive rights where I am. Zero. Think of it this way, F, M, R, where F is female, M is male and R is the result. There's four possible permutations in total: (0,0), (1,1), (0,1) and (1,0). Woman says I don't want a baby, man says I don't want a baby. What is the result? No baby. So (0,0)=0. If a woman says yes I want a baby, man says yes I want a baby, result is baby. So (1,1)=1. The only two other possible permutations are (0,1)=0 and (1,0)=1. That is, woman says I don't want a baby, and regardless of what the man says, there's no baby (as it should be, it's her body). And if woman says yes I want a baby, and man disagrees, man's input is again irrelevant and there is a baby (because, again, it's her body, as it should be). But end result is, R = F. Male isn't part of the equation. Male input doesn't match the result, except in cases where male input agrees with female input. So men have literally zero reproductive rights. But are still on the hook financially, despite a decision they had no say in. That's not OK either.
So what I would like to see there is, a baby is on the way. And, ultimately, it is woman's choice whether to have the baby or not, because it's located inside her body. But the man should also have the option to say no, I do not agree with this. It does cost him his parental rights, but he's also not on the hook in any way, socially or financially.
I think ultimately this is the part that really matters. Being lied too sucks, but what sucks even worse is being saddled for 18+ years with a responsibility you did not want and did not content to, and which creates an unwanted person who never asked for any of this. With two adult participants it's bad enough, but this adds a third, innocent participant who didn't ask or consent to anything.
Comment by BDMJoon at 23/02/2025 at 18:05 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Note: this comment is my opinion as a man. So given women are going to read this, I could be wrong. Just let me know and if I'm wrong, I will gladly correct my opinion. This opinion is also outside of the hugely important and necessary benefits of consensual mutual healthy pleasure and the recreational importance and emotional psychological value of orgasm in a healthy heterosexual sexual relationship between men and women.
Posit: "Natural" pregnancy is caused by a man physically forcing a series of sequential actions, that are required to inject sperm into a woman's egg.
(This comment does not address IVF, which technically also requires physical force to extract a woman's egg, physical force to inject sperm into it, and then physical force to return the fertilized egg back into a woman for successful gestation.)
There are 4 series of sequential physical actions required by a man to complete, that lead to pregnancy. Erection (arousal), Insertion, Thrusting, and Ejaculation (orgasm). All of these actions are highly pleasurable for men. I will argue that these required actions are therefore always within a man's control. If you add a 5th physical action of violently forcing entry, or rape, that is also controlled by the man.
Women consent to a man actively entering their body. While a woman's vaginal canal lubrication (via arousal) helps the process, technically speaking, since women cannot naturally suppress the presence of their egg in proximity to sperm, no other active series of physical actions is possible or required by a woman to create a pregnancy. To create a pregnancy, women must be willingly (or unwillingly via rape) passive, in order to allow the necessary required 4 actions by a man.
(Again, not talking about sexual pleasure)
Therefore given the 4 physically invasive series of sequential actions (erection, insertion, thrusting, ejaculation) that are required by a man to create a consensual (or non-consensual) pregnancy, the responsibility for all pregnancy is with the man.
There is are occasional vague suggestions that a man can be forcibly raped by a woman. This is incorrect in my opinion. Especially in the rare cases of extremely traumatic non-consensual physical violence by a woman that somehow forces a man's unerect penis into her body, it is physically impossible for a woman to force a man to complete all 4 of the required sequential actions inside her body, without a man's eventual willingness to participate.
To repeat, a woman "raping" a man requires a man to be forced into her body, and then complete all 4 actions that are always under a man's control, without his control. Which is technically impossible, and therefore not rape. It's merely an unwanted forced seduction that might begin violently, but ultimately requires a man to be willing to complete the 4 required sequential actions.
Since women cannot rape a man into creating an unwanted pregnancy, men are therefore solely responsible for all pregnancy, forced or unforced. Given the sheer amount of physical actions required by men, to deliver sperm to the close proximity to a woman's egg causing the creation of a pregnancy, all birth control medication, devices, and surgical procedures must be focused on preventing a man's sperm from reaching the egg.
It's the bullet that must be stopped, not shielding the target.
All pregnancy is caused by the 4 required actions of a man. Therefore it makes no sense for women to be solely responsible for birth control, or the resulting pregnancy.
Conclusion: All pregnancy is the direct responsibility of the man.
Comment by BothAnybody1520 at 23/02/2025 at 18:06 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Yes. And the feminist movement supports only one of those as “rape.”
Remember ladies, feminism isn’t about equality, it’s about special treatment and supremacy.