There's a reason why it's a "hypothetical" situation, because it doesn't exist out of hypothesis. 99% of laws are created AFTER a situation has happened (at least once) and therefore demands the need for those laws.
Regarding this whole "men's rights movement" topic in general, the reason I (as a man) can't take it seriously is because men have never needed and will never need such "movements" to hold themselves in power. Frankly I find such a notion that men need "help" with their rights a tad insulting, no we bloody don't, we are in charge of ourselves and the primary driving force behind why the world has taken such huge leaps forward in the last ~500 years. Men CREATED the concept of rights and laws (look it up).
In the last 20,000 years of evolution no culture/society/tribe has ever existed where women dominated men in ALL roles/positions, and if such a society did exist then they obviously went extinct pretty quickly. And I don't see it happening in the next 10,000 years either. It's biology, genetics and evolution at their deepest level.
Laws/government can't even make a scratch on stuff that goes that deep and that far back.
I don't know of any such laws but I do know I've read about such rapes taking place (and women being convicted). Don't know if any pregnancies resulted from the rapes though.Well then there will be a law somewhere which dictates what happens regarding child support.
I am the Kwisatz Haderach
I know men can be raped by women, by for example inserting objects etc.
Stimulation can cause hardons even in uncomfortable situations I guess, but thats a mission and a half.
Saw a british docu about pornography a few years back, was a big line of dudes trying out to be pornstars, they had a pretty decent looking blond to work with, most of them were unable to perform/get it up, because doing it infront of a whole camera crew simply didn't work for them. Just an example.
Last edited by Jackmoves; 2012-11-27 at 11:19 AM.
The nerve is called the "nerve of awareness". You cant dissect it. Its a current that runs up the center of your spine. I dont know if any of you have sat down, crossed your legs, smoked DMT, and watch what happens... but what happens to me is this big thing goes RRRRRRRRRAAAAAWWW! up my spine and flashes in my brain... well apparently thats whats going to happen if I do this stuff...
And, the question was, if a man is raped by a woman and he ejaculates inside her and there is a child, does the woman give up all rights to the child as the man gives up all rights to the child if he rapes a woman? I think the answer would be yes but I don't know.
I just wondered, how is it possible, I have personally never read or heard about anything like it.
Men being raped yes, but nothing like the situation Fengore layed out.
The problem i see with female rights, especialy in Denmark, is the law that says you need 50% i think it is, of women in then Board of Directors in big companys.
This is simply not fair. i would not care if there was 90% women or 90% men, but having to hire someone because of gender, and not hiering the best suited for the job, is just ridiculous.
We have gone from male dominance (witch is also wrong), to female dominance. They wanted equalty, well, so do we men.
And saying: I want the same payment as he do, if i doesn't, you are discriminating! is absurd when it comes to heavy weight jobs. Yes, if you can do the SAME work, in the SAME amount of time, yes, you should get the SAME paycheck in the end of the month, but most women can't carry as much weight as a normal built man.
Again, i fully support the Mens rights movement.
You are however correct that it's very rare.
---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 11:45 AM ----------
I welcome you to watch this, it's called the "Norwegian Gender Equality Paradox" where despite women having some of the highest representation in the workforce in Norway (compared to any other country), the jobs themselves still show an extremely high segregation depending upon gender. It's something that is completely voluntary, something that has happened on it's own and never been "forced".
The women are extremely happy working where they are, same as the men. They are also getting paid less on average than men because - you guessed it - their choice of work is DIFFERENT, in most cases the jobs women picked aren't as high-level, complex or demanding as the jobs men picked. A Health Nurse is not going to get paid as much as a Senior Civil Engineer (apples to oranges!!), and Norwegian women understand that.
But you're right in saying that feminists demanding "equal pay" while completely missing the fact that women tend to pick easier jobs = stupid as hell.
I never said men should be able to walk away from children at will. Nor have I said safe haven laws are a conspiracy.
Men should have a window of opportunity to reject parentage of a child as a means to family planning. Preferably before the child is born so it gives the woman time to decide what to do. There's no sound reason the unilateral decision to keep or abort a child should leave him entirely on the hook for 21 years because of a 1 night stand. If she wants to keep the kid, she can raise it on her own or if she's unable to handle it on her own she can abort. No one is taking that decision away from her. Again, there's no good reason a decision that SHE'S the only one allowed to make should be the deciding factor in the fate of the man.
Second, Safe Haven laws weren't designed as a feminist conspiracy. They can simply be used as a way to walk away from a child that the mother is unable or unwilling to care for.
What about men who are unable or unwilling to support a child? Where's their out?
When women have rights, and men expectations, something's wrong. When women are allowed to do stuff because of their gender that men aren't allowed, something's wrong. When women can't be prosecuted for doing things men can be prosecuted for, something's wrong.
And when we get proposals to have 40% of board members as women (or however it went), I wonder why we don't enforce a 40% male quotient on kindergarten teachers. Since they're both equally ill-thought through.
There are so many situations where men are just expected to be silent and take it, while women are allowed to do whatever they want (since it's their legal right). Not saying women don't face similar issues in other areas, but it doesn't justify injustice. Either way.
First off, thank for acknowledging that not feminists are insane extremists; that viewpoint gets thrown around far too often in the thread.
I think the primary problem barring the progress of the Men's Right Movement, which has perfectly valid concerns such as men's health issues and cases involving child custody, is men themselves. More specifically, men who are misogynists, and see movements like this as opportunities to establish some sort of male supremacy. It muddles the efforts of others focusing on legitimate issues, and overall tarnishes the perception of the group as a whole. Feminism can survive because it is well established and overall, both historically and still in a modern sense especially in health issues, it has more needs to meet and therefore has relatively more numerical need in society.