[arrrg]

Your doctrine would in practice massively disadvantage both women and kids because it asymmetrically sets up hurdles.

The current way of dealing with things is kid-centered. Once a kid is there it needs to be taken care of and both parents share that responsibility. Wanting to wriggle out of this responsibility is, frankly, highly immoral.

Also, conception doesn’t impact bodily autonomy (of the person who is no pregnant). I find it shocking that you would jump to rape rhetorics for your political aims.

[NotableAlamode]

    Your doctrine would in practice massively disadvantage both women and kids

Your doctrine does in practice massively disadvantage both men and kids! Why do you insist that women need to be better off than men?

    The current way of dealing with things is kid-centered. 

No, it's not. It is female-centered. What the woman wants is the law. It's easy to see. If in a divorce case, the child wants to stay with dad, that will be ignored, and the child will be given to the mother. Please familiarise yourself with the facts.

    Once a kid is there

You keep trying to reframe the discussion so that you don't have to admit to the truth, which is that women have more rights than men. Please stop this! So let's start again:

        Once a kid is there

Women should not force, brutalise or rape men into fatherhood. And where they do, the biological father has absolutely no obligation whatsoever to look after the child, and even less to fund the lifestyle of the criminal party. It is shocking, shocking that you defend these sorts of crimes.

    conception doesn’t impact bodily autonomy 

So what? Stealing your money also doesn't impact bodily autonomy, should it therefore be legal?