There is a guy in Houston that is suing a fertility clinic for using his sperm to fertilize his ex-girlfriend, resulting in the birth of twins which he is of course now obligated to pay support for. He claims that the sperm used was stolen, taken from him without his knowledge or consent.
How was this accomplished, you might ask?
The gentleman claims that during their relationship, he and his girlfriend would only have sex while using a condom, and she had what he considered the odd habit of insisting on disposing of the used condoms for him. He proposes that instead of simply disposing of the ejaculate, she was actually storing it for later use in a nefarious plot!
I know, this is far out. I KNOW that this guy is just trying to get out of paying some child support... but, MAN I hope he pulls this off!
Here's the thing, ladies. You have been demanding equality for decades now. First off, how equal are you when you have to ask that your equality be granted to you by those you wish to be equal with? Equality is earned, not granted. Still, I know you gals are fighting the good fight, and I totally support your struggle for true equality with males. In fact, I might be more of an advocate for your equality than you are.
Take the following common situation. A guy and a gal hook up. They are together for a few months, and the relationship is almost purely physical. She's on birth control and he uses condoms. They are rutting like rabbits for about 3 months, until one day they actually have a conversation and discover that they each think the other is an idiot, based on their mutually incompatible ideologies. There's a major argument, and the two break-up.
THE NEXT MONTH, she is late. Not late for work, or for a date, but LATE. She gets herself a home-pregnancy test and discovers that, yep, she is knocked-up. At this point, if she chooses to keep the baby, despite her not being with the father or having any interest in having a family with that asshole (her opinion, not mine). She is fully aware that she can take him to court for child-support and WIN.
The guy has no say in the matter. He has no input. He cannot say, "Your Honor, I did not intend to have a family, especially not with that bitch (his opinion, not mine). I took every precaution short of abstinence to avoid this situation, and despite our no longer being together she has chosen to go forward with this pregnancy. I cannot see how I can be held financially responsible for a decision she has made." Nope, as sound as that argument might be, a simple blood-test establishing he is the father is all that the State needs to make him beholden to that woman and child for the next 18 years.
That's the problem. Women say "keep your laws of my body", and "it's my body and my choice", but they sure as hell won't say "and I am financially responsible for my choices." Having EQUALITY means also taking RESPONSIBILITY. As a man, I say it is high-time that we have the same reproductive rights as women. If you do not have our permission to use our sperm, regardless of the manner by which you came into possession of it or it's potential byproduct (a child), then we should not be obligated to support you in your decision with our money. Keep your laws out of our genitals, and it's my sperm and my choice.
Back to our guy in Houston. If he wins his case, establishing that this clinic and woman used his sperm without his knowledge or consent and he is therefore not beholden financially for the resulting child (or, in this case, is entitled to a cash reward from the clinic), then it is just a matter of gradual escalation based on the precedence established by this case.
The next guy will say that he was not aware of the pregnancy until after the relationship had ended, and he did not consent to the use of his sperm to produce a child.
Then the next guy will say that he consented to having a child on the contingent basis that he and the mother would remain together as a family to raise the child. If she wants a divorce, then he is should be released from his obligations because the situation in which he was willing to consent no longer exists.
Finally, a man who impregnates a woman will have to give his explicit consent for the use of his sperm and express the desire to have a child in order for financial responsibility to be established. If the woman chooses to have a child using the sperm of a man where this express consent is not provided, or chooses to discontinue the relationship (and access to the shared finances) she then also assumes all financial responsibilities for her choice.
Frankly, if a man who donates to a sperm bank cannot be held liable for the resulting off-spring, then the precedence to absolve all men who do not provide their consent for a woman's choice to keep a child by them has already been established.
All we want is to be treated as equals to our more empowered female counterparts.