PeterMP Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 What if the man is tricked or forced into having sex, the woman uses him to get a baby, or lies about using birth control? If he's forced into sex that would be rape, and I believe even being "tricked" into sex could be considered rape. I'd be curious to see what a court would do with things like child support where the mother was a convicted of rape. Lying I think is less likely to get you much sympathy. The man still had options. It is possible for men to practice birth control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 these threads always sadden me.... because of the degree of pathetic whining by so many of the "men". 1. THe situation of pregnancy is inherently unequal. It is the very DEFINITION of unequal. Women can get pregnant, men cannot. 2. Historically, women were basically screwed by this inequality-- or more accurately, bt the way that society handled this inequal situation. 3. In recent years US society, supported by the US justice system has tried to shift how unequally single mothers have been forced to bear the burdens of child rearing. 4. Even with these changes, single mothers are much more likely to bear a disproportianate share (if not all) of the burdens of child rearing. 5. Abortion is a separate issue, fraught with its own taught issues and serious concerns... but the people that try to pull IT into a prominent (hell THE prominent) position in the question of child support are, quite simply full of poop. ---------- Post added June-7th-2011 at 04:28 PM ---------- Nah, I'm a father of three and have 33 years experience in life. You, tossing out verbiage and language to insult shows your lack of wisdom. Seriously. This ain't math we are discussing.It would appear to me that many in this thread that are arguing for the woman's right have never found themselves personally involved in similar situations. Here's a news nugget for you sluggo. It is now more common for children to be born out of wedlock. When this happens, the father has far less rights then the mother. Now, I understand this "policy" is due to years of men not owing up to their responsibility. The mother has no choice. That's not what is being argued here. What is being argued here is that unless the man can convince the woman into his way of thinking, he has no right or choice. Sure, he impregnated the woman, but why should the woman get 100% of the decision power? Hardly seems equal. And isn't that what we are striving for? Equality? Years of wrong should not be righted by a law that is written under the guise of equality when in reality it is punishment for more uncivilized times. I believe most men want to own up to their responsibility. For me, I guess this hits hard due to my belief that the pendulum has swayed too far in the woman's direction. Deciding to abort or keep your unexpected child is a decision I wish on no one. But that decision must be made in today's society. It's a pity the man has no legal say. That's the argument. Is it really that moronic? I changed that post right after i posted it... but, while I disagree with many of your conclusions in THIS post, it certainly isn't moronic. Stand up for your own sex once in a while, no one will label you a sexist. this one, however.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 4. Even with these changes, single mothers are much more likely to bear a disproportianate share (if not all) of the burdens of child rearing. I can understand most of your points, even if I disagree with them. But this one is so far beyond ridiculous that it can't even SEE ridiculous from where it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I can understand most of your points, even if I disagree with them. But this one is so far beyond ridiculous that it can't even SEE ridiculous from where it is. you know the difference between a population average, and a single data point, don't you? overall single mothers EASILY get the short of the stick. That doesn't mean that it is the case in every specific case. I have no idea about the reality of YOUR situation. I know that you feel shafted, but none of us know the details, nor the "other side's" assessment of the situation. but looking at population data, the conclusion that single women overall still bear a disproportionate share of the burden of raising children is beyond question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I can understand most of your points, even if I disagree with them. But this one is so far beyond ridiculous that it can't even SEE ridiculous from where it is. Then tell us how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 you know the difference between a population average, and a single data point, don't you?overall single mothers EASILY get the short of the stick. That doesn't mean that it is the case in every specific case. I have no idea about the reality of YOUR situation. I know that you feel shafted, but none of us know the details, nor the "other side's" assessment of the situation. but looking at population data, the conclusion that single women overall still bear a disproportionate share of the burden of raising children is beyond question. They're disproportionately more likely to get physical custody, and FAR more likely to NOT have to provide for two households. If you consider those things advantages, then your point holds true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 you know the difference between a population average, and a single data point, don't you?overall single mothers EASILY get the short of the stick. That doesn't mean that it is the case in every specific case. I have no idea about the reality of YOUR situation. I know that you feel shafted, but none of us know the details, nor the "other side's" assessment of the situation. but looking at population data, the conclusion that single women overall still bear a disproportionate share of the burden of raising children is beyond question. What about the exceptions when it's reversed such as this case? I think most understand the overall gist of why what happened happened but do we just let the exceptions die due to the majority? There are many many cases where the father wants to be a father in a nuclear family but the female doesn't. What then? Since the mother carried and birthed the child, sh gets all the rights because the majority of males needn't be bothered? I think this is what this thread should be discussing. The exceptions, not the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 If I could bear children inside my body, there is absolutely zero chance I would let anyone tell me what to do with my own body and what is going on inside of it. I believe that the same is true for every single one of you. It ain't equal. It can never be equal. And the guy who did this billboard didn't break the law, but he is a complete jerk. IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 this issue raises another question (the child support issue, not the abortion one). Why in this issue is it always the free-loving hippie pinko granola munching liberals that are screaming out for personal responsibility, rather than the self declared conservatives ? I realize that an issue/thread like this is going to self select people with a specific interest in the issue at hand, and generally people that talk loudest have a large personal stake because of real life considerations... but jeez. Men, be "men" about this. Show some responsibility, either before or after conception. Stand up and be responibility and do your duty as a man, and as a father. Fatherhood is hard, and it sure as hell ain't cheap. But isn't it worth it? ---------- Post added June-7th-2011 at 04:53 PM ---------- And the guy who did this billboard didn't break the law, but he is a complete jerk. IMO. this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I guess boyfriends/girlfriends and husbands/wives need to start writing up legal contracts before they have sex each time, about whether they agree to keep any baby that comes out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 What about the exceptions when it's reversed such as this case? I think most understand the overall gist of why what happened happened but do we just let the exceptions die due to the majority? There are many many cases where the father wants to be a father in a nuclear family but the female doesn't. What then? Since the mother carried and birthed the child, sh gets all the rights because the majority of males needn't be bothered? I think this is what this thread should be discussing. The exceptions, not the rule. EVERY situation is "the exception". they are never the same. but the situation you are descibing... the father wants to stay (or get) married, and the mother doesn't? ---------- Post added June-7th-2011 at 04:59 PM ---------- I guess boyfriends/girlfriends and husbands/wives need to start writing up legal contracts before they have sex each time, about whether they agree to keep any baby that comes out of it. i haven't found the need to do that. and i am pretty happy with the outcome. Three beautiful children... and plenty of practice makng more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 They're disproportionately more likely to get physical custody, and FAR more likely to NOT have to provide for two households. If you consider those things advantages, then your point holds true. This is the only point in this thread I say I can agree with you. When it comes to child support or visitation, i feel the courts don't split the tangible costs 50/50. It's very skewed towards the male paying a heavier share. But some of that could also be a result of men typically earning more on average. The role of child support should be just that. support of the child. Not support of the child and mother's superfluous expenses such as cable, cell phones or trips to the beauty salon. In the end, the decision to have a child ultimately resides with YOU. Whether you are male or female, you initially control that decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedr01 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 there are so many replies that i disagree with in this thread that im not going to respond to one directly.childraising should not be one sided, its equal. so at this point, women have all say in whether they want to have the baby or not. if they decide not to, the male has no opinion. if they decide to have the baby, the male is bound by law to support the baby through the first 18 years of its life. tell me how much sense that makes. so right now, women have much more say in this arena. yet to give more power to males would also be unfair, because having children should lay equal responsibility on the mother and father. the only clear answer here is dont have sex before marriage. i know its not the popular opinion, but it prevent such cases from ever happening. as for the story in the OP, i agree with the male. QFT, people need to take some personal responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 And the guy who did this billboard didn't break the law, but he is a complete jerk. IMO. I'm pondering this, and I don't think any state authority could force him to take it down. But the woman could almost certainly sue him and perhaps the billboard company for intentional infliction of emotional distress and win. Your thoughts? PS HH cannot be rational on these types of threads. He is carrying a huge open wound of some kind and these threads irritate it to no end. But just because one man feels beaten down by the legal system does not mean the system is inherently broken. ---------- Post added June-7th-2011 at 12:08 PM ---------- I wonder how this thread would look if the woman said she aborted her child because there was a very good chance it was going to be gay?Would people who are pro abortion be so willing to give her a pass then? Is this your new thing? Throw some kind of weird gay angle into every Tailgate thread because you think it is going to make the liberals squirm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 If I could bear children inside my body, there is absolutely zero chance I would let anyone tell me what to do with my own body and what is going on inside of it. I believe that the same is true for every single one of you. It ain't equal. It can never be equal. That doesn't mean however that men are unaffected by the pregancy, or that whatever decision the woman makes has no consequences for them. This discussion does make me wonder though if at some point in the future pregnancies will take place almost entirely out of the womb. (I'm getting this image of women of the future sitting around and rolling their eyes about some traditionalists who still have pregancies the old way, lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 They're disproportionately more likely to get physical custody, and FAR more likely to NOT have to provide for two households. If you consider those things advantages, then your point holds true. you keep looking at YOUR feelings on YOUR situation. If there are X number of babies currently being raised out of the standard nuclear family model, then the proportion of X that has a single woman bearing over half of the burden (financially and otherwise) is FAR greater than the proportion of X that has a man bearing over half of teh burden (financially and otherwise). And the statistic isn't even close. But i do agree that the sub-question of being granted physical custody is another (and important) issue. And I don't doubt that fathers that seek to hold custody (when the mother ALSO wants primary custody) face an uphill battle--- and i agree that this is a very unfair and hurful situation. I really feel for both parents in that situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 IHH cannot be rational on these types of threads. He is carrying a huge open wound of some kind and these threads irritate it to no end. But just because one man feels beaten down by the legal system does not mean the system is inherently broken. Or just the opposite. Maybe someone who has actually BEEN through the discussed circumstances has more wisdom than those who have not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 this issue raises another question (the child support issue, not the abortion one). Why in this issue is it always the free-loving hippie pinko granola munching liberals that are screaming out for personal responsibility, rather than the self declared conservatives ?I realize that an issue/thread like this is going to self select people with a specific interest in the issue at hand, and generally people that talk loudest have a large personal stake because of real life considerations... but jeez. Men, be "men" about this. Show some responsibility, either before or after conception. Stand up and be responibility and do your duty as a man, and as a father. Fatherhood is hard, and it sure as hell ain't cheap. But isn't it worth it? ---------- Post added June-7th-2011 at 04:53 PM ---------- this. I remember a couple of similar pieces of advice I got a long time ago. Not saying I followed them all the time, but something I thought about most of the time..."don't have sex with someone you don't want to have a child with" and "don't have sex if you don't want to have a child". Where the second bit falls short is "don't have sex until you are ready to possibly have the "thing" aborted" I think that is where this diverts from personal responsibility. You have no input. Losing a child during pregnancy is generally regarded as a difficult thing to go through. Losing it by choice, a choice that you have no input on is probably at least as difficult a thing to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 What if the man is tricked or forced into having sex, the woman uses him to get a baby, or lies about using birth control? A. I'm trying to figure out how being tricked into sex is even possible B. As for the second two issues, once a man puts his penis inside a vagina, he should assume that a pregnancy could result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I'm pondering this' date=' and I don't think any state authority could force him to take it down. But the woman could almost certainly sue him and perhaps the billboard company for intentional infliction of emotional distress and win.Your thoughts? [/quote'] Yeah, I was focusing on whether he could be forced to take it down, or be barred in advance from putting it up. Clearly, she could bring an IIED claim against him, and it would survive summary judgment. Whether she would win? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedr01 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 this issue raises another question (the child support issue, not the abortion one). Why in this issue is it always the free-loving hippie pinko granola munching liberals that are screaming out for personal responsibility, rather than the self declared conservatives ?I realize that an issue/thread like this is going to self select people with a specific interest in the issue at hand, and generally people that talk loudest have a large personal stake because of real life considerations... but jeez. Men, be "men" about this. Show some responsibility, either before or after conception. Stand up and be responibility and do your duty as a man, and as a father. Fatherhood is hard, and it sure as hell ain't cheap. But isn't it worth it? i consider myself a conservative (while most would consider me a moderate conservative) but i specifically stated personal responsibility would fix all of these issues....nobody wants to be responsible though. these should really be done on a case by case basis as opposed to a template, cut and paste fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 A. I'm trying to figure out how being tricked into sex is even possibleB. As for the second two issues' date=' once a man puts his penis inside a vagina, he should assume that a pregnancy could result.[/quote'] wait.. that was her VAGINA!?? oh jeez... ::facepalm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Or just the opposite. Maybe someone who has actually BEEN through the discussed circumstances has more wisdom than those who have not. I doubt that. The person inside the car during a wreck probably knows far less about what happened than someone watching it from the side of the road. I honestly have no idea what happened to HH, but I can read enough studies to know that the number one problem encountered by the family courts is NOT mothers screwing over loving fathers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 A. I'm trying to figure out how being tricked into sex is even possible Easy. Convincing him they would have a baby together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 Yeah, I was focusing on whether he could be forced to take it down, or be barred in advance from putting it up.Clearly, she could bring an IIED claim against him, and it would survive summary judgment. Whether she would win? :whoknows: Jury selection would probably be the most important part of that case. ---------- Post added June-7th-2011 at 12:15 PM ---------- Easy. Convincing him they would have a baby together. G: Have sex with me. We will have a baby together. B: Okay! G: I'm pregnant. Where is the fraud? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.