Boy... this makes me really eager to stop advocating mens rights...

[Mayhem]

ok, again, i just answered your question about fairness... i don´t want this option to be removed, i might be jealous at the fact that only woman can get pregnant, but thats an entirely different topic i guess, i don´t get it how if both chose to use a condom, the fact that why you used it becomes irrelevant as soon as an obviously unwanted pregnancy occurs and only the woman has a say anymore but the man has to live with whatever the woman chooses (remember this can go both ways, like the man suddenly want´s to be a father but the girl refuses)

it certaintly is ok when she refuses and it should stay this, it is her body
but when he refuses she should be informed, as soon as possible and make her choice

i think a lot less single mothers with runaway man would happen if this was an option

[Deleted]

Yes, it was a joke.

don't do that to me when I've just woken up and sleeping pills still affecting me!

[FusedMass]

Wait do you agree or disagree with me? Because I agree with what you wrote. Well, maybe not this:



I agree with your example, but what if a man don't want the child, but the woman do?

I agree with most what you said. The talk of a joint contract or something drawn up. Is pure silly though. If a woman wants to keep the baby and not even tell the dad. That's her business. If she wants to talk about it and have joint custody or stay a couple. That's her choice. My point is a female is going do whatever regardless.

This is supposed be most important time in their life's. I doubt it would matter much. If a guy knocks her up. Yes indeed he should pay for child support. Just because you assumed the women was taking the responsibility and she was not. Is no excuse for not paying child support for the kid. Its not their fault. I feel like this thread going in circles.

We have courts to establish parental rights. If this thread is about Parental Finance then why does the title read "Boy this almost makes me want stop advocating men's right?"..complete back track..

[Cybran]

I agree with most what you said. The talk of a joint contract or something drawn up. Is pure silly though. If a woman wants to keep the baby and not even tell the dad. That's her business. If she wants to talk about it and have joint custody or stay a couple. That's her choice. My point is a female is going do whatever regardless.

Here lies the problem. Woman want all the power and only half of the responsibility. This is the core issue. It's not fair towards the man. He is in a biological disadvantage. He is the inferior gender biologically and in the court when it comes to reproduction. This is why the MRM exists, to bring to light the blatant disparity.

PS: Your avatar is a witch that stole the Hero of Ferelden's baby ffs

[Ebildays]

Here lies the problem. Woman want all the power and only half of the responsibility. This is the core issue. It's not fair towards the man. He is in a biological disadvantage. He is the inferior gender biologically and in the court when it comes to reproduction. This is why the MRM exists, to bring to light the blatant disparity.

PS: Your avatar is a witch that stole the Hero of Ferelden's baby ffs

Paying child support does not equal half of the responsibility, in most cases it does not even cover half of the expense of having a child. Writing a check will never be equal to raising a child in fact it is so much easier because the person paying child support does nothing at all for the child but fork over some cash. A child support payment never stayed up late with a sick child. A child support payment never had to rush to have finish a late project. A child support payment never told a child a good job or I love you.

There is nothing you can do to change biology and I highly doubt that most men would jump up and down in joy at the idea of an artifical womb so they can carry a child. What men can do is look at the options they have and see where they can change it. Family Court laws are messed up because not every mother needs to have her children. Some mothers are horrible and the child would be better off with the father but the problem is the whole idea that men by nature are not nurturers. Now the problem with the MRM is that you have a lot of people (just look at the posters on here) that will say they don't give a damn about the children which enforces the myth that men are not nurturers by nature. This enforces the belief by the courts that children are better off with their mothers and the cycle repeats.

No matter how noble the cause of MRM maybe when you have so many of the men that follow it say things that to most sound like hate against woman and children the core issues will be over shadowed.

[Rukentuts]

No matter how noble the cause of MRM maybe when you have so many of the men that follow it say things that to most sound like hate against woman and children the core issues will be over shadowed.

And this is exactly why my usually vocal self has been avoiding this thread; it makes men out to be factually unfounded assholes.

Men have legitimate issues. Are they are frequent in number as women? No; but this doesn't make them any less existent. However spouting off a cherry-picked hypothetical survey about what women in one country might do in a hypothetical scenario and applying it to real life doesn't do men any favors. On the contrary, it belittles what seemingly little credibility we have. If people in this thread truly knew what was in the best interest of their rights' movements (not just MRM), it is a cold dissemination of proven facts in a logical argument, not hypothetical conjecture.

[Raiju]

Paying child support does not equal half of the responsibility, in most cases it does not even cover half of the expense of having a child. Writing a check will never be equal to raising a child in fact it is so much easier because the person paying child support does nothing at all for the child but fork over some cash. A child support payment never stayed up late with a sick child. A child support payment never had to rush to have finish a late project. A child support payment never told a child a good job or I love you.

Neither do most parents these days if you ever visit a public school.

[Ebildays]

And this is exactly why my usually vocal self has been avoiding this thread; it makes men out to be factually unfounded assholes.

Men have legitimate issues. Are they are frequent in number as women? No; but this doesn't make them any less existent. However spouting off a cherry-picked hypothetical survey about what women in one country might do in a hypothetical scenario and applying it to real life doesn't do men any favors. On the contrary, it belittles what seemingly little credibility we have. If people in this thread truly knew what was in the best interest of their rights' movements (not just MRM), it is a cold dissemination of proven facts in a logical argument, not hypothetical conjecture.

A bit of hypothetical conjecture would work fine if we are talking about proposed solutions but what people are doing here is making one person/ group out to be the villain while the other person/ group is a victim. In most cases both groups are victims of circumstance and the problem becomes even worst when they are not on the same page so to speak.

Like I have said before there are so many more legit cases that could have been used to make a better case for the MRM.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/mom-...amily-17883143

But instead people use old out dated stories to build a case for craziness.

Neither do most parents these days if you ever visit a public school.

I won't say most but there is a problem with that as well but that is a different issue all together.

[DisposableHero]

If people in this thread truly knew what was in the best interest of their rights' movements (not just MRM), it is a cold dissemination of proven facts in a logical argument, not hypothetical conjecture.

When trying to unseat gender norms that have been developed from the natural instincts of both genders for centuries, some shock value is often required to overcome the inertia of tradition and get people to honestly analyze why they feel the way they do. Cold logical arguments sway cold logical people, but the laws would not reflect discriminatory action or sanctioned theft from any group if they were written and passed by cold logical people. Credibility will carry the day when the argument is on the merits of reality, but that isn't the landscape the battle is being fought on. The current landscape is sympathy, or rather the complete lack thereof, for any issue affecting a group that has rightly or wrongly been seen as holding the power for centuries.

The myth that men holding the dominant positions of our social hierarchy means that hierarchy acts in the best interest of men is a difficult one to make people even analyze let alone reject as untrue. The survey in the OP doesn't prove much of anything other than women who would tamper with, and lie about birth control or paternity to dishonestly acquire financial provision for themselves and their children exist. It may not be a good springboard into useful discussion but that doesn't mean the discussion it results in is not useful.

[Rukentuts]

A bit of hypothetical conjecture would work fine if we are talking about proposed solutions but what people are doing here is making one person/ group out to be the villain while the other person/ group is a victim.

That's where the hypothetical problem manifests fully; we're saying they're hypothetically victims and yet posters in this thread are arguing as if they really are.

[FusedMass]

Here lies the problem. Woman want all the power and only half of the responsibility. This is the core issue. It's not fair towards the man. He is in a biological disadvantage. He is the inferior gender biologically and in the court when it comes to reproduction. This is why the MRM exists, to bring to light the blatant disparity.

PS: Your avatar is a witch that stole the Hero of Ferelden's baby ffs

Actually to be fair. She told the Hero of Ferelden about her plans. She wanted to have a kid with soul of an Old God. The other parent got to slay the Arch Demon without dying. I'd say everyone that did not die was the winner. Plus put that her family was trying to steal her body she had issues.

My point is when you label something ..Men's Rights..Not their is anything wrong with that. Why try to disuse it as something other then that. I have a few sisters they go through complete hell for 9 months and then when they deliver the baby. They likely feel more pain in one day then most of us experience in our lifes. We have a natural order to decide who pays for child support and how much etc.

Not every couple is the same. I know of one where the Father wants nothing to do with the child. Another one where a father actually told the Mother the day before court hearing that it was cancelled. Lied through his teeth so the Court will grant him full cusody this is an abusive man who used to beat her now using her kid to control her.

To say its men's rights vs women..the moment men start giving birth. Then I will support it. You just cannot have the female go through hell then decide on equal rights of being a parent. It's unfair to one of those partners.

[Ebildays]

That's where the hypothetical problem manifests fully; we're saying they're hypothetically victims and yet posters in this thread are arguing as if they really are.

Would that not be more a problem with the posters understanding of what is going on? Now if this was a true debate there are plenty of cases that could be used for example but since it is not I feel that we should be able to use simple hypothetical examples. The other problem is that posters on here want 100% agreement with their views and I feel that it is not needed for change to start. If someone agrees with what you are saying 40% you can make changed based on that and keep moving forward.

To say its men's rights vs women..the moment men start giving birth. Then I will support it. You just cannot have the female go through hell then decide on equal rights of being a parent. It's unfair to one of those partners.

This view is not fair because men didn't have a choice in the fact they can't give birth. To punish them because of that is wrong, to say they are less of a parent to a child because of that is wrong. And yes by saying there is something wrong with them having equal rights as parents is saying they are less of a parent because they cannot give birth.

[Cybran]

To say its men's rights vs women..the moment men start giving birth. Then I will support it. You just cannot have the female go through hell then decide on equal rights of being a parent. It's unfair to one of those partners.

So men shouldn't have any custodial rights, because they don't have a uterus? Nice to see you use well thought out points in your opinions, like most white knights.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AdFdmE9A84

Lets make men wear one of these for 2 days. If they lasts that long they get the kid, fair? Will you be happy then?

[Deleted]

Lets make men wear one of these for 2 days. If they lasts that long they get the kid, fair? Will you be happy then?

Because all the births are the same for every women. Child birth can be deadly, that is not deadly. You're not taking any risks with that.

Though, the custody should go to the parent best suited for raising the kid no matter what, just because a woman gave birth to a kid doesn't mean she'd be the one most suitable to raising the kid.

[Deleted]

Its not about fairness with feminists you gotta know by now.
People like FusedMass and Darenyon just want to treat men like slot machines that if you jerk em just right you win the alimony jackpot.

[Stir]

Because all the births are the same for every women. Child birth can be deadly, that is not deadly. You're not taking any risks with that.

Maybe they're willing to eat pufferfish while doing that?

[Deleted]

Maybe they're willing to eat pufferfish while doing that?

I was more referring to the fact there's loads of things that can go wrong that you have no control over in birth. Intentionally poisoning yourself with one of the more dangerous toxins in the world is not 'having no control', that's just stupidity.

Custody should go to the parent best fit for raising the kid if they're separated.

[Cybran]

I was more referring to the fact there's loads of things that can go wrong that you have no control over in birth. Intentionally poisoning yourself with one of the more dangerous toxins in the world is not 'having no control', that's just stupidity.

Custody should go to the parent best fit for raising the kid if they're separated.

He meants having a spiky puffed up fish in your stomach. Anyway i have gotten an anestesia in the spine, not that bad and you have a whole set of doctors...

[starlord]

Its not about fairness with feminists you gotta know by now.
People like FusedMass and Darenyon just want to treat men like slot machines that if you jerk em just right you win the alimony jackpot.

yeah im such a man hating feminist for saying men have responsibilities.

i guess all those men who made the laws like that were also evil feminists.

this attitude is why the MRM is not taken seriously. instead of making logical arguments you scream about females oppressing you.

[Deleted]

He meants having a spiky puffed up fish in your stomach. Anyway i have gotten an anestesia in the spine, not that bad and you have a whole set of doctors...

I'm not on about the pain. Complications can arise. The uterus can rupture, placenta not detaching, the child having the cord around the neck, the child being too big to pass and needing to do a c-section out of nowhere and more complications.

None which is comparable to feeling some pain. Pain is not what would be worrying me about child birth, the risk of complications is. Even if you're surrounded by doctors you or the child can still die or suffer injury.