"The Lost Boys" – young men opt for virtual life of pornography and gaming

[Kyriani]

Regardless of who keeps the child/children, I strongly dislike the idea of one parent paying child support for children left with another parent. This is a crazy system, you shouldn't have to pay something to someone who you have nothing to do with anymore and who you don't owe anything. If anyone should pay the support, it is the government.

But you DO owe something to someone. You owe something to the child you sired. That's why it's called child support. That kid didn't ask to be brought into this world and until their full grown they rely on those that brought them here to survive and for their quality of life. Why should the government pay to support kids resulting from every pump and dump you decide to engage in? How many should the government support if you continue to leave a string of broken hearts and full wombs across your country? The fact is the government is not responsible for paying to raise your child. You are.

So ultimately if you don't want to be responsible for children its up to you to make sure you don't produce any. You've got a number of options too. As unrealistic an expectation as it is, abstinence is a guaranteed way to avoid producing a child. More realistically you've got condoms to prevent pregnancy and the next best thing to abstinence which is a vasectomy. At the end of the day the key to remaining child free is to take responsibility. That means not leaving the decision up to someone else about pregnancy prevention. Just cause a woman says she's on the pill, or using this or that doesn't mean you just dive in. Use a condom always if for no other reason than protection from STD's. If you can't live with that then get a vasectomy and never tell anyone you had one. It not only protects you from unwanted pregnancies (especially if your partner is unscrupulous and tries to get pregnant "by accident"), it also functions as "cheater detection" if your partner shows up with a bun in the oven claiming its yours.

[Freese]

Wow. Some of the responses in this thread are just...bizarre. Life exists outside of a computer screen; if all you do is search the Internet for information to confirm your beliefs about "feminism" or whatever other target you're blaming for an unsuccessful dating life, then it doesn't surprise me that women won't talk to you or sleep with you.

In the words of Pink Floyd, "All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be."

[May90]

But you DO owe something to someone. You owe something to the child you sired. That's why it's called child support. That kid didn't ask to be brought into this world and until their full grown they rely on those that brought them here to survive and for their quality of life. Why should the government pay to support kids resulting from every pump and dump you decide to engage in? How many should the government support if you continue to leave a string of broken hearts and full wombs across your country? The fact is the government is not responsible for paying to raise your child. You are.

So ultimately if you don't want to be responsible for children its up to you to make sure you don't produce any. You've got a number of options too. As unrealistic an expectation as it is, abstinence is a guaranteed way to avoid producing a child. More realistically you've got condoms to prevent pregnancy and the next best thing to abstinence which is a vasectomy. At the end of the day the key to remaining child free is to take responsibility. That means not leaving the decision up to someone else about pregnancy prevention. Just cause a woman says she's on the pill, or using this or that doesn't mean you just dive in. Use a condom always if for no other reason than protection from STD's. If you can't live with that then get a vasectomy and never tell anyone you had one. It not only protects you from unwanted pregnancies (especially if your partner is unscrupulous and tries to get pregnant "by accident"), it also functions as "cheater detection" if your partner shows up with a bun in the oven claiming its yours.

I understand the reasoning, but the system is crazy. Imagine this: I love my kid, but I split with my wife. The system gives the kid to her, which kills me: the most precious person in my life has been taken away. This is horrible... And now - another kick: "Half your income will go to the child support". I say, "Give me the kid, I won't need any child support, I will raise the kid myself", and they say, "Nooo, the kid belongs to the mother". You can see how unfair the system can be. Granted, same way, if I get the kid, then my former spouse will be devastated. Either way, someone's life is broken. And all because we wanted the best for both of us: we realized we can't live together any more, and staying together will only deteriorate the situation further...

I don't think someone who walks around, impregnating women and then bailing out, should not face any consequences. But I also don't think that a good, faithful father or mother should have their financial life ruined because they had to go for divorce and they didn't part on good terms. I think these questions should be determined by the context. If it turns out that both the father and the mother did everything right, but went for divorce for reasons of incompatibility - then no one should be penalized, and the child should be supported by the government.

[Mormolyce]

I'm not going to "quote you the law" because it's in Danish and because there's a metric ton of it and because some of it isn't even law but is simply unclear but the judge is feminist, but what I will do is link you to where women in Denmark go to extract money.

http://www.statsforvaltningen.dk/site.aspx?p=4557
Particularly look at Børnebidrag, Ægtefællebidrag, separation. The site tries to put a spin on it to claim that it *can* go from woman to man, but it never does.

That's not spin. The law doesn't specify gender, does it?

I know this is anecdotal, but I doubt it is random - of the ~90 kids I knew at school, about 40% of them had divorced parents. This was in 2004. In 100% of those cases, the father had either been removed entirely from the child's life and was paying child support or the mother had the child for 12 days every 2 weeks, after which the father had the child for 2 days, i.e. the father had the child once every 2 weekends. This is completely standard and still goes on routinely.

So the woman gets lumped with the kid? No shit.

I love how you spin that as if she's somehow winning. Of course the fathers have to pay child support if the mother has custody. Because she has to pay all the kid's expenses.

[Freese]

If "feminism" and "social justice warriors" are supposedly ruining our society, then how are people successfully falling in love and getting married every day of each year? I just ask because the default argument on this board is to blame feminism and SJW for all of your troubles, yet millions of people every year still get married, have sex, reproduce, etc. without difficulty. What's the true problem here?

[May90]

If "feminism" and "social justice warriors" are supposedly ruining our society, then how are people successfully falling in love and getting married every day of each year? I just ask because the default argument on this board is to blame feminism and SJW for all of your troubles, yet millions of people every year still get married, have sex, reproduce, etc. without difficulty. What's the true problem here?

It is just like you said in your previous comment: people who spend too much time on that side of the Internet start thinking that real life resembles that side. Overall, these people seem to be in the negligible minority, they are just very vocal in the Internet, for obvious reasons.

[BuckSparkles]

If "feminism" and "social justice warriors" are supposedly ruining our society, then how are people successfully falling in love and getting married every day of each year? I just ask because the default argument on this board is to blame feminism and SJW for all of your troubles, yet millions of people every year still get married, have sex, reproduce, etc. without difficulty. What's the true problem here?

The idea is they are plaguing young people with less than idea traits and beliefs which makes it harder for any male to find somebody appropriate.

In a society of increasingly insecure people, people cling to SJW ideals for maximum feelgood points.

[Deleted]

If "feminism" and "social justice warriors" are supposedly ruining our society, then how are people successfully falling in love and getting married every day of each year? I just ask because the default argument on this board is to blame feminism and SJW for all of your troubles, yet millions of people every year still get married, have sex, reproduce, etc. without difficulty. What's the true problem here?

It's like your saying the data isn't correct; it is, despite your desire for it not to be

Marriage rates are at all time lows, divorce rates as a proportion of marriages are very high, society is moving away from families and having children and becoming increasingly individualistic and Tinder-y

You can say this is only true on the internet because of SJWs/feminists/etc being loud and that is true -- but it's also true in reality, out there in that real world of facts you don't seem to want to face

I am not big on relationships. I do not care about sex at all, I would like a relationship, but not just any relationship - I would like a relationship with a like-minded person with whom we experience strong mutual attraction. I do not have any ideas like "Most men are blablabla", or "Most women are blablabla"; I am willing to give anyone a chance, and I won't judge anyone for anything.

I think you watched too many Disney movies and believed in the message, your beliefs are pretty naive

Real life isn't like that and I'm sure you'll realise that after a couple of decades of relationships / encounters / fun

Look, I'm going to cut you some slack here but come on, you're giving a lot of relationship advice and making a lot of wild claims about love, marriage, etc - for someone who claims to be asexual and clearly doesn't have much if any actual experience of relationships

Maybe you need to step back, realise you maybe don't have the experience to see where your biases and blind spots are

[Deleted]

"More women of course will be asking 'where are all the good men?' as they become more educated and financially well-off than their male peers," Ms Coulombe said.

Its funny how these women cant even see that one of the major factors in this problem is that there is an increasing number of males consciously keeping away from women. This SJW, Feminist world being created within our young is scaring the shit out of young white men.

This is a sad truth which will be ignored simply because its uncomfortable to hear.

[Freese]

It's like your saying the data isn't correct; it is, despite your desire for it not to be

Marriage rates are at all time lows, divorce rates as a proportion of marriages are very high, society is moving away from families and having children and becoming increasingly individualistic and Tinder-y

You can say this is only true on the internet because of SJWs/feminists/etc being loud and that is true -- but it's also true in reality, out there in that real world of facts you don't seem to want to face

I'm aware that marriage rates among millennials have declined. That said, this cannot be entirely blamed on the ambiguous threat that is "feminism" or "social justice warriors." There are more plausible reasons for why millennials are delaying marriage. For instance, the economy has provided less-than-stellar job prospects for those who are not well-educated. Many of these people, both men and women, may not be seen as good marriage prospects without secure employment and education.

Fewer people are affiliated with religious institutions than in the past, also contributing to a decline in marriage, since religions have been among the staunchest advocates of marriage.

Given that the divorce rate is so high, many millennials who saw their parents divorced are delaying marriage until their 30s to avoid divorce.

So, again, you're not wrong in stating that marriage rates are declining and that divorce rates are high. I just don't agree that "feminism" and "SJWs" are to blame entirely for that.

[Deleted]

If "feminism" and "social justice warriors" are supposedly ruining our society, then how are people successfully falling in love and getting married every day of each year?

Men and women have been doing that for years... the point of the article is due to evidence that more and more men are keeping out of society, theyre unavailable as marriage material. Obviously therefore there are LESS people successfully marrying and falling in love.

I suggest u firstly understand the evidence presented.

[theostrichsays]

I understand the reasoning, but the system is crazy. Imagine this: I love my kid, but I split with my wife. The system gives the kid to her, which kills me: the most precious person in my life has been taken away. This is horrible... And now - another kick: "Half your income will go to the child support".

I'm not sure where you are from, and am of the opinion there should be some changes to child support here in America, but where in the world do you pay 1/2 of your income for child support? If it is just hyperbole I understand, but looking at my states calculator I would have to have 8 children with one person for that to happen (with the custodial parent having 0 income or insurance) and even then I'm fairly certain it caps out before 50%.

[tankbug]

Its funny how these women cant even see that one of the major factors in this problem is that there is an increasing number of males consciously keeping away from women. This SJW, Feminist world being created within our young is scaring the shit out of young white men.

This is a sad truth which will be ignored simply because its uncomfortable to hear.

"I have given up on women because society thinks that I can't treat women or minorities like shit"

-No One Ever

[Kyriani]

I understand the reasoning, but the system is crazy. Imagine this: I love my kid, but I split with my wife. The system gives the kid to her, which kills me: the most precious person in my life has been taken away. This is horrible... And now - another kick: "Half your income will go to the child support". I say, "Give me the kid, I won't need any child support, I will raise the kid myself", and they say, "Nooo, the kid belongs to the mother". You can see how unfair the system can be. Granted, same way, if I get the kid, then my former spouse will be devastated. Either way, someone's life is broken. And all because we wanted the best for both of us: we realized we can't live together any more, and staying together will only deteriorate the situation further...

I don't think someone who walks around, impregnating women and then bailing out, should not face any consequences. But I also don't think that a good, faithful father or mother should have their financial life ruined because they had to go for divorce and they didn't part on good terms. I think these questions should be determined by the context. If it turns out that both the father and the mother did everything right, but went for divorce for reasons of incompatibility - then no one should be penalized, and the child should be supported by the government.

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying the system is fair in regards to who gets custody. The parent best able to provide for the child should get custody and the child's own wishes should at least be given some consideration as well IMO.

With that said... if the child you sired is as you said "the most precious person in your life", how can you justify letting that child do without just because you aren't the custodial parent?

I have a friend who had 2 children with a women and planned to marry her but she ultimately left him. But even though she got custodial rights, he ever remained a part of his children's lives, so much so that their mother didn't ask for child support for years because of how good a provider he was while she wasn't working. Years later however she got a job and got the idea that he should be paying more even though she now had a substantial income of her own. She took him to court and ended up getting far less than she was previously getting from him and he even warned her when she started the proceedings that he would not pay a penny more than the courts ordered if she went through with it. It blew up in her face. He was and still is a damn good father. He sees his kids for several days every week. When they stay with him money is the furthest thing from his mind. But even when they aren't with him, he doesn't regret the child support he's paying because it is improving his sons quality of life.

The fact is, while not always the case, many men are all too quick to give up their parental rights and responsibilities. The bias towards women getting custody stems from the fact that traditionally they are seen as the child rearers. That's not fair of course but until more men strive to change the system, until more men step up and fight for their children, their right to be a parent, it will remain that way. Too many men are more than happy to walk away from their responsibilities just paying some money... if they even end up paying anything at all regardless of what the courts say they are obligated to pay. Many children grow up with less than they should because one parent (usually the father, but not always) abandons their responsibilities.

Why should the government pay for someone's child just because a couple couldn't make their relationship work? What do you mean "did everything right"? Right or wrong is irrelevant when it comes to the supporting of a child you created except insofar that its right for the father and mother to both be obligated to support that child and its wrong to try and shift that responsibility upon the government just because they were "incompatible" in a relationship. The government already offers support to families without the income to take care of their children. Any child support the courts say you must pay is based entirely on your income ad the income of the other parent. Like the case of my friend mentioned above. He makes damn good money and the mother of his two sons was unemployed for years. He took care of nearly all child expenses. But when she got a job and tried to get "official" child support she found herself getting less because she now had a substantial income. She thought she would keep all her income and he'd continue to pay as he always did... and much to her surprise she found out that's not the way child support works. BOTH parents are financially obligated regardless of whose house the children live in.

The government is not financially responsible for your children regardless of any compatibility issues you have with your partner. The government offers assistance when parents don't have enough income to care for their kids, but they certainly shouldn't just foot the bill because a parent wants to abandon their responsibilities.

[Deleted]

So, again, you're not wrong in stating that marriage rates are declining and that divorce rates are high. I just don't agree that "feminism" and "SJWs" are to blame entirely for that.

Whereas i do agree with u that there are other factors contributing to this unfortunate phenomenen i do feel that the SLW/Feminist mentality is a major factor. The overall change in how the young view our society has been butchered into a very negative overview.

Right now white boys are taught that theyre pretty much worthless.

- Theyre taught their opinions are worthless because they top the privilege scale.
- Theyre taught that if they wake up with a young girl after a drunken night out that they might be convicted of rape because that girl might regret sleeping with him.
- Theyre taught that they are the main oppressors in society and that they personally are responsible for the bad stuff done in history.
- Theyre taught that masculinity is toxic.

Is is any surprise these young boys/men are hiding away from the world right now?

[BuckSparkles]

I'm aware that marriage rates among millennials have declined. That said, this cannot be entirely blamed on the ambiguous threat that is "feminism" or "social justice warriors." There are more plausible reasons for why millennials are delaying marriage. For instance, the economy has provided less-than-stellar job prospects for those who are not well-educated. Many of these people, both men and women, may not be seen as good marriage prospects without secure employment and education. I just don't agree that "feminism" and "SJWs" are to blame entirely for that.

Many people in the new generation are raised to have faith in me me me and to have no sense of responsibility or value, hence why the family unit is suffering.

And yes, feminism and SJW's are to blame a little. I mean, hell, groups like Huff Post Women™ release an article every other day that men are rapists and that women don't need them.

Oh and white people are evil. Eviiil.

- - - Updated - - -

Whereas i do agree with u that there are other factors contributing to this unfortunate phenomenen i do feel that the SLW/Feminist mentality is a major factor. The overall change in how the young view our society has been butchered into a very negative overview.

Right now white boys are taught that theyre pretty much worthless.

- Theyre taught their opinions are worthless because they top of the privilege scale.
- Theyre taught that if they wake up with a young girl after a drunken night out that they might be convicted of rape because that girl might regret sleeping with him.
- Theyre taught that theyre main oppressors in society and that they personally are responsible for the bad stuff done in history.
- Theyre taught that masculinity is toxic.

Is is any surprise these young boys/men are hiding away from the world right now?

Well said. White Straight Men are not part of the victim Olympics and are the 'great oppressors."

[May90]

I think you watched too many Disney movies and believed in the message, your beliefs are pretty naive

Real life isn't like that and I'm sure you'll realise that after a couple of decades of relationships / encounters / fun

Look, I'm going to cut you some slack here but come on, you're giving a lot of relationship advice and making a lot of wild claims about love, marriage, etc - for someone who claims to be asexual and clearly doesn't have much if any actual experience of relationships

Maybe you need to step back, realise you maybe don't have the experience to see where your biases and blind spots are

Or maybe I've just seen enough examples of this happening to other people I know to know that there is nothing naive or idealistic about it. Those people didn't whine on forums, either. I wonder if there is correlation...

Why do you bring up individual experiences here? I've heard your claims about having been with dozens women or however many you keep saying - seeing the style of your comments, I don't have a slightest doubt that you have made it all up. I could make up a lot as well, just to look more knowledgeable - I didn't, because personal anecdotes mean crap. I'm not interested in sex; doesn't mean I'm not interested in interacting with the opposite sex extensively. That interaction tells me that most people, both men and women, are usual folks that want the same things in life as me; but those like you, who tend to always look for someone else to blame for anything, tend to attract a certain crowd of like-minded people - so it is really no wonder that things you say are true for you.

I don't have any biases, precisely for the same reason you have them: I don't let my negative experience get in the way of my reasoning. I've had PLENTY of negative experiences in my life, you have no idea. You have grown in the first world country, you don't know what the majority of folks have to deal with in their lives. I didn't let those experiences dictate how I see other people; I won't make any judgement about someone I have never even met, just because of their race, gender, profession, you name it. Perhaps you should rethink your attitude as well.

I'm not sure where you are from, and am of the opinion there should be some changes to child support here in America, but where in the world do you pay 1/2 of your income for child support? If it is just hyperbole I understand, but looking at my states calculator I would have to have 8 children with one person for that to happen (with the custodial parent having 0 income or insurance) and even then I'm fairly certain it caps out before 50%.

I don't know the details; I've just seen some folks here on forums pointing out the number of 50%. Whether it is correct or not, I have no idea.

~

See, I agree with you in that, and that actually has been my main point in these discussions on these forums: that, regardless of the law, if you are smart about it, you have little to fear. If I really care about my child, I would pay the child support voluntarily, without any court's decision, so in this sense it doesn't harm me anyway. I would try to do everything to make a relationship work, and if it doesn't - to part with my partner on good terms. If it fails, well, still not the end of the world.

The system itself, however, is unjust. There is little reason for it to be unjust, regardless of how easy it is to avoid being affected by it. Of course, it shouldn't discourage one from getting married, but I think awareness should be raised and the law corrected properly.

I would gladly pay child support myself under the circumstances. Me being required to do it after trial in court, however, is humiliating, it would make me feel as if I was guilty in something. I would prefer to part on good terms and, without any courts, just decide in a friendly talk on how much support I would pay. I think two adults should be able to figure these things out without getting the government involved in it.

[Kyriani]

I think two adults should be able to figure these things out without getting the government involved in it.

It would be nice if they could. But inevitably, many couples don't part on friendly terms. There's often a lot of anger and resentment between them with one or both trying to "hurt" the other in response for whatever caused the relationship to fail. They "hurt" each other by trying to deny them things they want like "property", "child visitation" or "custody", or to deny them or reduce the amount of "child support" they are obligated to pay. In these case (which are all too common) what's best for the child is often a side note, if not forgotten entirely, and it becomes just another power struggle between two people who have grown apart. The courts are needed to not only mediate these disputes due to the splitting of property, but also to make certain any children from a relationship are cared for and the people responsible for caring for them are doing so.

[Deleted]

Or maybe I've just seen enough examples of this happening to other people I know to know that there is nothing naive or idealistic about it. Those people didn't whine on forums, either. I wonder if there is correlation...

Why do you bring up individual experiences here? I've heard your claims about having been with dozens women or however many you keep saying - seeing the style of your comments, I don't have a slightest doubt that you have made it all up. I could make up a lot as well, just to look more knowledgeable - I didn't, because personal anecdotes mean crap. I'm not interested in sex; doesn't mean I'm not interested in interacting with the opposite sex extensively. That interaction tells me that most people, both men and women, are usual folks that want the same things in life as me; but those like you, who tend to always look for someone else to blame for anything, tend to attract a certain crowd of like-minded people - so it is really no wonder that things you say are true for you.

I don't have any biases, precisely for the same reason you have them: I don't let my negative experience get in the way of my reasoning. I've had PLENTY of negative experiences in my life, you have no idea. You have grown in the first world country, you don't know what the majority of folks have to deal with in their lives. I didn't let those experiences dictate how I see other people; I won't make any judgement about someone I have never even met, just because of their race, gender, profession, you name it. Perhaps you should rethink your attitude as well.

I get all this, but what I'm asking is how do you figure you have a good grasp on the dynamics of relationships

As anyone who has actually been in a long term relationship, FWB situation, etc (probably marriage also) knows - it's very hard for anyone outside the relationship to tell what is going on inside the relationship, there's just so much you cannot see from the outside, all those private moments, the everyday nature of it

You really see the inside of someone from that perspective, and it's far different from the naive Disney version of life that you have; love does not conquer all, people change, life changes, it's not easy

Feel free to doubt my experience, I'm just a font on a forum here; but that doesn't change the question of what qualifies you to dole out so much relationship advice

Especially the kind of dangerously hopeful advice that says "oh men should just blindly ignore all risks, get married, it'll be great"

[May90]

I get all this, but what I'm asking is how do you figure you have a good grasp on the dynamics of relationships

As anyone who has been in a long term relationship, FWB situation, etc knows - it's very hard for anyone outside the relationship to tell what is going on inside the private lives of the couple

You really see the inside of someone from that perspective, and it's far different from the naive Disney version of life that you have

Feel free to doubt my experience, I'm just a font on a forum here; but that doesn't change the question of what qualifies you to dole out so much relationship advice

Easy: I talk to people a lot, of both sexes; sometimes about very intimate things. Plus, use common sense. Precisely because I don't care about things like getting laid or being in a relationship just because I "have to", I lack the biases coming from things like frustration; I look at the things as they are, not as they have affected me - that is an important distinction.

You are right, I might not see all the details. I do see the general trends though.

I've never claimed to be an expert on these things; I'm probably the clunkiest person ever to walk this Earth in this regard, actually. Which doesn't make it hard for me to spot obvious fallacies coming from overgeneralization and frustration. If even I can see them, than anyone willing to question their preconceptions can.

It would be nice if they could. But inevitably, many couples don't part on friendly terms. There's often a lot of anger and resentment between them with one or both trying to "hurt" the other in response for whatever caused the relationship to fail. They "hurt" each other by trying to deny them things they want like "property", "child visitation" or "custody", or to deny them or reduce the amount of "child support" they are obligated to pay. In these case (which are all too common) what's best for the child is often a side note, if not forgotten entirely, and it becomes just another power struggle between two people who have grown apart. The courts are needed to not only mediate these disputes due to the splitting of property, but also to make certain any children from a relationship are cared for and the people responsible for caring for them are doing so.

That's true. But it still would be much better if more people, at least, tried talking about things; usually, as I understand it, they go directly into the court, after the first heated argument leads nowhere. Each wants to get as much as possible out of this, forgetting about why they got into a relationship in the first place: it definitely wasn't for a monetary gain (again, in most cases).

Especially the kind of dangerously hopeful advice that says "oh men should just blindly ignore all risks, get married, it'll be great"

I've never given this advice. I've said something different: "If you are smart about marriage, it is likely to be great". Blindly ignoring all risks is not being smart, it is the opposite.