Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar or introduce generic flamewar tangents. The odds that anyone has anything new or interesting to say about this are very low, and the odds of people bashing each other very high. That makes it off topic here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

This is something I truly believe is draconic. Men have virtually zero reproductive rights. If the conversation comes to it, I will bring it up. If you dislike it you are free to choose another platform.

It's not a tangent it's a direct corollary.

The conversation didn't "come to it", it was pushed. That's what I mean about generic tangents. Somehow we got from the specifics of the Assange case to that's-not-really-rape to "men have no reproductive rights". At each step that's a move into making the topic more grandiose and indignant. Grandiose plus indignant equals flamewar. Flamewars are off topic here. If people keep doing that, we have to ban them, because that's the only way to preserve the site for curiosity, community, and thoughtful discussion—HN's purpose. I don't want to ban you. Therefore, please stop posting like this.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

This is the most "what about men" comment I've read in a while.

Every man should be prepared for every one of their sexual partners to become pregnant, even if BC or condoms or other contraception are involved. It comes with the territory, and you can be sure that women are aware of the risk (since pregnancy is a first-person risk for them).

Because birth control is not the issue. At all.

Sterile men are not allowed to initiate unconsented sex, just because there can be no pregnancy.

> Or at least to have sex without bc if she made the guy think she had it?

Isn't it?

I've never seen a law in the US that would make it so, but I'd be happy to see one.