Questions for the Women

[Brennabean]

The right to leave his wife without having to lose half of his salary. I dig it, but child support should definitely stay mandatory. 

If the man is not allowed to live with his child, why should he pay for it?

Well I grew up in poverty eating beans on toast for dinner every day and wearing school clothes that were too small for me because my dad took a job cash in hand with his dad so he didn't have to pay child support. My dad was a horrible **** to my mum and is leeching off of some rich clueless woman now living a nice life while my mum doesn't even have a pension. Lived hand to mouth our entire lives.  He wanted to have me and then changed his mind once I was born and once my mum had the sense to leave him. Who payed for it? Myself, my mum, brother and sister. He was allowed to see me anytime, and instead chose not to.
In my opinion if you choose to have a child you ******* look after him or her.   Ezpz.

 

[TheRealCallie]

Man takes off his pants to screw a woman, gets said woman pregnant....HIS responsibility too. He didn't HAVE to have *** with her. Damn straight he should help pay for that child, whether he wanted the child or not.

Man has children in committed relationship, decides to leave woman and children...STILL his responsibility. He chose to leave, he should damn well have to help support the children.

And before anyone says anything, I feel the same way if it were the other way around. If you don't want children, you have two options....don't have *** or get castrated/get your uterus taken out. Otherwise, it's damn well your responsibility.

 

[user 139760]

Come on. Women only had the right to work starting in the 40's. Beating your wife senseless wasn't exactly a big thing in the 20's. Women used to be treated like second class citizens. That's not the case anymore. But slowly inversing evrything isn't going to fix anything, is what I mean. We're gunning for equal rights, but in certain cases, such as MANY child seperation cases, father's rights are less important than mothers rights. That's not better either.
I'm part of a fathers group for the last month and I can't begin to tell you the amount of sad stories where fathers tried to implicate themselves in their children lives but lost and ultimately quit because the courts and the systems automatically favored the mother. It's not right.

I don't mean this as a debate on feminism, I think it has it's place, I believe a middle line in all things is always better. IN seperation cases, that's often not the case.
The system needs to be changed and re-thought by people more intelligent than I am.

Everyone who wasn't rich was treated as a second class citizen. Women that were rich had way more power in society than any poor dude, even white ones -- and that's going back to the 1800s, probably even further back.
Women were always able to work, they had the privilege to not have to work in dangerous environments and not have to be drafted to be blown up in a war.

They had less responsibilities and, in accordance, less rights. Then they fought for it and ended up with more rights and the same amount of responsibilities. Still less than that of any man.

Any targeted disadvantage you can think of will have an equal/similar one targeting the opposite ***. Not only that, but like the points you're making right now, a lot of those disadvantages are not really that -- maybe if you only look at it from one perspective.

I'm not trying to deny your point about the judicial system because you're absolutely correct, but your argument is one of the fundamentals that everyone seems to get wrong and one that everyone still uses.

Yet the still had the tar beaten out of them when the husband felt so inclined and there was little to no repercussions. Hence why the system for child support and divorce evolved into what it is today. In my case it was my grandma who spent 25 years in jail for murder of my grandpa, when it was justified. She barely survived afterwards.

It wasn't for lack of reasons. It's because those women were often left destitute, literally to die on the street, on the whims of their husbands. Some went cuckoo.
Like I said, that wasn't really my point. More to illustrate that the system has become obsolete. My cousin works for the federal gov of Canada and you cannot believe the number of calls they get every months from women inquiring into how many X children they need to get X money out of the governements and how they can screw with their ex-husbands or fathers. I'm literally talking thousands. It's disgusting and an oft ignored reality, but a reality nonetheless.

I'm saying the system needs to be overhauled to be just; right now, it isn't.
Also like I said, by people more intelligent than I am. I don't have any answer, only the questions and that's because I'm living them; I'm also far from being the only one. And it's irking me off no end. To see people complain about their lives yet not even have the decency to get up before noon and complain on how hard it is to manage their kids all day when those kids are a JOY to be around, is not right.
The system isn't right. That's the only point I wanted to make. And it causes REAL suffering that's often ignored. At least, I never read about poor seperated dads in the papers. More like the opposite.

 

[MisterLonely]

Maybe one day a man who doesn't want a child when it was conceived will also have the right to decline supporting the mom's decision to keep it.

This is one of the things I feel is worth fighting for, even though it in no way applies to me, there is a severe mismatch in rights and responsibilities here. A woman gas the right to decide about her body, and whether to keep or discard a fetus. 

This is a right that is taken for granted nowadays, and what's also taken for granted is the right to decide over the other persons financial future with it. And this in my opinion is very wrong!

Since both parties are equally responsible for conception, both should have equal rights. Men do not get the right to have no further involvement if the woman keeps the child, financial or otherwise, unless the woman agrees to the terms and signs away her "right" to support in upbringing.
(Laws may vary)

The right to leave his wife without having to lose half of his salary. I dig it, but child support should definitely stay mandatory. 

If the man is not allowed to live with his child, why should he pay for it?

Well I grew up in poverty eating beans on toast for dinner every day and wearing school clothes that were too small for me because my dad took a job cash in hand with his dad so he didn't have to pay child support. My dad was a horrible **** to my mum and is leeching off of some rich clueless woman now living a nice life while my mum doesn't even have a pension. Lived hand to mouth our entire lives.  He wanted to have me and then changed his mind once I was born and once my mum had the sense to leave him. Who payed for it? Myself, my mum, brother and sister. He was allowed to see me anytime, and instead chose not to.
In my opinion if you choose to have a child you ******* look after him or her.   Ezpz.

In this instance both parties went into a relationship, and children willingly, the choice was on them both to bear offspring, and in my opinion this "contract" is binding even when the relationship itself falls apart.

 

[Brennabean]

Maybe one day a man who doesn't want a child when it was conceived will also have the right to decline supporting the mom's decision to keep it.

This is one of the things I feel is worth fighting for, even though it in no way applies to me, there is a severe mismatch in rights and responsibilities here. A woman gas the right to decide about her body, and whether to keep or discard a fetus. 

This is a right that is taken for granted nowadays, and what's also taken for granted is the right to decide over the other persons financial future with it. And this in my opinion is very wrong!

Since both parties are equally responsible for conception, both should have equal rights. Men do not get the right to have no further involvement if the woman keeps the child, financial or otherwise, unless the woman agrees to the terms and signs away her "right" to support in upbringing.
(Laws may vary)

The right to leave his wife without having to lose half of his salary. I dig it, but child support should definitely stay mandatory. 

If the man is not allowed to live with his child, why should he pay for it?

Well I grew up in poverty eating beans on toast for dinner every day and wearing school clothes that were too small for me because my dad took a job cash in hand with his dad so he didn't have to pay child support. My dad was a horrible **** to my mum and is leeching off of some rich clueless woman now living a nice life while my mum doesn't even have a pension. Lived hand to mouth our entire lives.  He wanted to have me and then changed his mind once I was born and once my mum had the sense to leave him. Who payed for it? Myself, my mum, brother and sister. He was allowed to see me anytime, and instead chose not to.
In my opinion if you choose to have a child you ******* look after him or her.   Ezpz.

In this instance both parties went into a relationship, and children willingly, the choice was on them both to bear offspring, and in my opinion this "contract" is binding even when the relationship itself falls apart.

I can agree to that. But, for arguments sake, what if the child was an accident, and one of the parents made the choice to keep it for the both of them, and then their relationship fell apart.  I'd imagine this happens, especially in families with traditional Christian values and anti-abortionists. I'm not giving my opinion I'm just open for debate

 

[DarkSelene]

Man takes off his pants to screw a woman, gets said woman pregnant....HIS responsibility too. He didn't HAVE to have *** with her. Damn straight he should help pay for that child, whether he wanted the child or not.

Man has children in committed relationship, decides to leave woman and children...STILL his responsibility. He chose to leave, he should damn well have to help support the children.

And before anyone says anything, I feel the same way if it were the other way around. If you don't want children, you have two options....don't have *** or get castrated/get your uterus taken out. Otherwise, it's damn well your responsibility.

No, they both decided to have *** and both knows what *** can lead to. The big difference and the point of weakness of that argument is that the rights are not equal so the responsibility also shouldn't be. The male doesn't have the right to decide that he doesn't want a child because if the female decides she wants it, she can do whatever she wants and he'll have to abide by it. He'll have to pay for a child that could possibly even not be his, because she also has the right to refuse letting him do a DNA test until the child is of age to decide for themselves.

A woman can lie to a man about taking birth control, because he doesn't have the option to take a pill and we all know that just a condom is not enough, then decide to have a child that no one wants and make this guy work his entire life to pay for it while also being able to file for full custody and deny the rights of the father to see the kids for more than a weekend.

It's too easy to say get a vasectomy (something doctors won't do if you're too young and have no health issues) or become celibate when YOU (as a woman) have way more options than that.

 

[user 139760]

because she also has the right to refuse letting him do a DNA test until the child is of age to decide for themselves.

Is that a US thing only? Pretty sure I've never heard of such. When paternity is being questionned, a man has a right to a paternity test.
OKAY granted, the burden of paying the 800 dollar test falls on him, as is the 10k+ cost of the trial, but he does have the right. I'm just curious.

 

[DarkSelene]

Maybe one day a man who doesn't want a child when it was conceived will also have the right to decline supporting the mom's decision to keep it.

This is one of the things I feel is worth fighting for, even though it in no way applies to me, there is a severe mismatch in rights and responsibilities here. A woman gas the right to decide about her body, and whether to keep or discard a fetus. 

This is a right that is taken for granted nowadays, and what's also taken for granted is the right to decide over the other persons financial future with it. And this in my opinion is very wrong!

Since both parties are equally responsible for conception, both should have equal rights. Men do not get the right to have no further involvement if the woman keeps the child, financial or otherwise, unless the woman agrees to the terms and signs away her "right" to support in upbringing.
(Laws may vary)

This actually adds to my reply to Callie, thank you.

Yes, it's the female body and another point where males lose their rights. They cannot choose to have the child if the female doesn't want it.

---

because she also has the right to refuse letting him do a DNA test until the child is of age to decide for themselves.

Is that a US thing only? Pretty sure I've never heard of such. When paternity is being questionned, a man has a right to a paternity test.
OKAY granted, the burden of paying the 800 dollar test falls on him, as is the 10k+ cost of the trial, but he does have the right. I'm just curious.

It was the case for France, I don't know if it's like that still. It's still like that here (not US).

 

[MisterLonely]

I can agree to that. But, for arguments sake, what if the child was an accident, and one of the parents made the choice to keep it for the both of them, and then their relationship fell apart.  I'd imagine this happens, especially in families with traditional Christian values and anti-abortionists. I'm not giving my opinion I'm just open for debate

It depends I guess, if you choose to stay in a relationship like that one could argue that you chose for that relationship and all that comes with it. I'm not american, but I know american law has something called "separation of church and state", and so does the Netherlands, so by law, personal believes should not matter, if law states you accepted the responsibility for your offspring by staying in a relationship, even if you didn't want that child, it's still the decision you made.

Another option would be to have an opt-out legal document, in which one party forgoes all legal responsibilities for a child and thus also all legal rights to that child, any contribution made from both sides would be voluntary of nature and subject to change when conditions change.

 

[user 139760]

Maybe one day a man who doesn't want a child when it was conceived will also have the right to decline supporting the mom's decision to keep it.

This is one of the things I feel is worth fighting for, even though it in no way applies to me, there is a severe mismatch in rights and responsibilities here. A woman gas the right to decide about her body, and whether to keep or discard a fetus. 

This is a right that is taken for granted nowadays, and what's also taken for granted is the right to decide over the other persons financial future with it. And this in my opinion is very wrong!

Since both parties are equally responsible for conception, both should have equal rights. Men do not get the right to have no further involvement if the woman keeps the child, financial or otherwise, unless the woman agrees to the terms and signs away her "right" to support in upbringing.
(Laws may vary)

This actually adds to my reply to Callie, thank you.

Yes, it's the female body and another point where males lose their rights. They cannot choose to have the child if the female doesn't want it.

---

because she also has the right to refuse letting him do a DNA test until the child is of age to decide for themselves.

Is that a US thing only? Pretty sure I've never heard of such. When paternity is being questionned, a man has a right to a paternity test.
OKAY granted, the burden of paying the 800 dollar test falls on him, as is the 10k+ cost of the trial, but he does have the right. I'm just curious.

It was the case for France, I don't know if it's like that still. It's still like that here (not US).

---

Um, I'm french, but not from France ;-)
I'm in Canada, Quebec to be precise. WE follow pretty much the same law system as the UK, with notable exceptions I believe. Okay, thanks for the info.

 

[TheRealCallie]

The only way to KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that a child will not be created is to either not have *** or to make sure your baby making parts don't work.  If you choose to have *** with those parts working, you know a baby could be created.  It's not just on the man or woman to make sure birth control is being used, even when they are, you could still get pregnant, birth control fails, condoms break.  If you choose to have ***, you are responsible, regardless of whether you want to be or not. 

In America, if paternity is in question, you have a right to a paternity test, no matter the age of the child.

 

[kamya]

  If you choose to have ***, you are responsible, regardless of whether you want to be or not. 

Only if you have the *****.

If you have the ****** you have options. You can get an abortion or give the kid up for adoption. Boom! No financial responsibility.

If the man doesn't want to have a baby and the woman decides she wants to keep the baby and not put it up for adoption, then she should be able to provide for it on her own without child support. 

That is the logical way things should be.

The only reason It's not how things are is because the courts are more concerned with the child's best interest and reducing the state's financial burden in paying for unwanted kids. They already drain the system as it is.

 

[ardour]

What's your take/thoughts on men's rights advocacy ?

Good question! Hard to answer though, how would I know what it's like to be man? 
So what kind of things do men fight for? 

The right to get custody over children. I dig it. 

The right to leave his wife without having to lose half of his salary. I dig it, but child support should definitely stay mandatory. 

The right to not be a victim of domestic abuse. Also dig it. 

The right to not be expected to pay the bill on a date? This one I don't know too well as I've always paid my half or even the whole bill if I wanted it to be my treat. But from what my male friends have told me a lot of girls expect it and I guess that's pretty wrong. 

The right to have their emotions heard and understood without the words "patriarchy" or "*****" or any of the like interrupting them. I dig that too. 

The right not to be over penalised by the justice system. Definitely dig it. 

What else do mens rights activists advocate for?

They often have extreme libertarian politics that I personally can't stand. Saying, as a average man, that you support MRAs is like your average women with midly feminist politics calling herself a Rad Fem. You need to be a bit better informed....Some of their attitudes the 'manosphere' very questionable, or openly hateful. Quick couple of examples: defending Bill Cosby along with other high profile wretches who are cleary guilty. Providing a platform for Roosh (a former PUA **** advocate) on a A Voice for Men.

 

[user 139760]

What's your take/thoughts on men's rights advocacy ?

Good question! Hard to answer though, how would I know what it's like to be man? 
So what kind of things do men fight for? 

The right to get custody over children. I dig it. 

The right to leave his wife without having to lose half of his salary. I dig it, but child support should definitely stay mandatory. 

The right to not be a victim of domestic abuse. Also dig it. 

The right to not be expected to pay the bill on a date? This one I don't know too well as I've always paid my half or even the whole bill if I wanted it to be my treat. But from what my male friends have told me a lot of girls expect it and I guess that's pretty wrong. 

The right to have their emotions heard and understood without the words "patriarchy" or "*****" or any of the like interrupting them. I dig that too. 

The right not to be over penalised by the justice system. Definitely dig it. 

What else do mens rights activists advocate for?

They often have extreme  libertarian politics that I personally can't stand. Saying, as a average man, that you support MRAs is like your average  women with midly feminist politics calling herself a Rad Fem. You need to be a bit better informed....Some of their attitudes the 'manosphere' very questionable, or openly hateful. Quick couple of examples: defending Bill Cosby along with other high profile wretches who are cleary guilty.  Providing a platform for Roosh (a former PUA **** advocate) on a  A Voice for Men.

I actually know Roosh V personally.
There's a video online of a couple years ago of him coming to a club in Montreal.
I'm on it lol.
What a prick.

 

[ardour]

What a prick.

Me or Roosh?
Roosh has said some horrendous things.

 

[Brennabean]

What's your take/thoughts on men's rights advocacy ?

Good question! Hard to answer though, how would I know what it's like to be man? 
So what kind of things do men fight for? 

The right to get custody over children. I dig it. 

The right to leave his wife without having to lose half of his salary. I dig it, but child support should definitely stay mandatory. 

The right to not be a victim of domestic abuse. Also dig it. 

The right to not be expected to pay the bill on a date? This one I don't know too well as I've always paid my half or even the whole bill if I wanted it to be my treat. But from what my male friends have told me a lot of girls expect it and I guess that's pretty wrong. 

The right to have their emotions heard and understood without the words "patriarchy" or "*****" or any of the like interrupting them. I dig that too. 

The right not to be over penalised by the justice system. Definitely dig it. 

What else do mens rights activists advocate for?

They often have extreme  libertarian politics that I personally can't stand. Saying, as a average man, that you support MRAs is like your average  feminist supporting women calling herself a Rad Fem. You need to be a bit better informed....Some of their attitudes the 'manosphere' very questionable, or openly hateful. Quick couple of examples: defending Bill Cosby and providing a platform for Roosh (a former PUA **** advocate).

Yikes! Who are these people? 
I'm wondering if that's more of an American thing, I don't think there are enough people in the UK to have a significant (enough) group like this... There's a bit of racism but barely hear about sexism like that.
A fight for feminism is about fairness and consideration, Father's for Justice are a relevant and admirable MRA group. I don't know anymore but I'm sure there are.

 

[DarkSelene]

They often have extreme libertarian politics that I personally can't stand. Saying, as a average man, that you support MRAs is like your average women with midly feminist politics calling herself a Rad Fem. You need to be a bit better informed....Some of their attitudes the 'manosphere' very questionable, or openly hateful. Quick couple of examples: defending Bill Cosby along with other high profile wretches who are cleary guilty. Providing a platform for Roosh (a former PUA **** advocate) on a A Voice for Men.

Certain principles of groups in the manosphere and MRA's might overlap, but they're definitely not the same thing. MGTOWs for instance might care for a part of things that MRAs care about, but it doesn't mean they're immediately MRAs or vice versa.
To be one is to advocate for men's rights, no ideologies go into that -- it's merely working to improve the law and the perspective of men's issues.

 

[M_also_lonely]

Yes, if you say that the man decided to have *** and that's why they had ***, because only he wanted it, then you are calling all fathers rapists. What did the woman say when he took his pants off? Was it not mutual then? Why did the mother's call disappear now? When it comes to deciding whether to keep the child or abort it, it comes to the woman
 And when it comes to raising the child, the father's call disappears? And when it comes to paying money, again, the mother disappears?

Hahahaha it becomes the father when someone is to be held responsible but becomes mother when it comes to the right. 
He shouldn't pay, if he doesn't get to raise the child. Simple. If the woman is not capable of raising the child herself, she shouldn't be given custody. Its like Sudan demanding nuclear weapons from Somalia while it doesn't yet have enough to feed its own citizens. It simply doesn't make sense.
If you want the man to pay child support he should have as much "right" as he pays for.  You can't have it both ways just because you are a woman. If you are not capable for raising a child don't demand custody. Because for your inability to provide sufficient resources, the child will have to suffer, and to prevent that, you are demanding it from a person who doesn't have the right to live with that child. No wonder why men are abandoning the idea of marriage, and going their own way.

 

[SofiasMami]

When did this turn into an MRA education/ whine about women thread. I must have missed that memo.

-Teresa

 

[TheRealCallie]

Do you bother to read what I say or do you just argue about what you think I said?  Seriously, READ what I write if you going to try to argue with me and stop trying to make it seem like I said something I didn't. 

But, yeah, okay, let me just pass my kids over to my ex since I can't afford them fully without the child support.  Maybe then he'll see them more than a few hours a month.  And before you argue there, he can see them WHENEVER he wants, he chooses not to.

Let my friend pass her kid over to the guy that beat the **** out of her while she was pregnant because she has to have government assistance to afford the child, even though she has a full time job.