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

[Daez]

Maybe we should force all men that want to avoid being a father to have vasectomies since your approach basically makes all women that have boyfriends (partners) that are unwilling to be fathers get an abortion.

Simple solution for any man... If you are not ready to be a daddy then do not put your penis where it will create a child.

I would love to see you try to make the argument that if you got an STI from sleeping around that it is completely your partners fault that you failed to protect yourself. I am certain that they can not take the STI away from you.

[Ebildays]

The woman decides for herself and the man decides for himself. Does this sound fair? If the man wants nothing to do with raising the child he signs a contract that the birth is against his wishes and pays only a minimal amount of Child Support. The rest of the burden falls on the woman that made the decision unilaterally, cause she was dealth with the better cards gender wise.



This is an exteremely sexist remark. For the sake of the children there should be calculated a minimal amount of child support. If the man is 100% certain he doesn't want anything to do with the child he signs that and it's done. Women that chase after rich guys or are looking for a graivy train raid in life will lose their interest. I think the better part of the men will suck it up and pay more to be allowed to be a part of their children's life. There could be a limit as well. If you abandon a second kid, fuck you you pay full for both.

Sexist or not you and I both know those are the views that many have. I am not going to dance around some of the popular views against why some people don't want an "opt out" for men. And the same goes for abortion with women there are some out there that believe women just want to run away as well after having their fun.

Now I do agree that there should be limits set on child support and alimony a long with what we have now, a cap so to speak of. And I really don't like the idea of men having to pay a certain amount if they want to be a part of their childs life. If they want no part of their childs life they should not have to pay anything but if they do they should pay a reasonable amount for the up keep of the child, not so the mom can quit working and live off child support. If a man asks for it he should be able to get an account of where his money is going so he will know that his child is being taken care of.

The only reason these children are born is that they are a tool for the mothers. The whole world would be better off if the single moms got their funding cut and their numbers started going down.

That is a real messed up way of thinking you have there.

[DisposableHero]

Maybe we should force all men that want to avoid being a father to have vasectomies since your approach basically makes all women that have boyfriends (partners) that are unwilling to be fathers get an abortion.

How about, instead of focusing on what men who don't want children should do, we talk about what reasonable things women who do want children should do instead of lying about paternity and birth control to trick men into financing their motherhood. Things like finding a partner who wants to be a father.

Where I come from, the person who wants something is the one who has to do something to obtain it. Not the other way around.

[Cybran]

Sexist or not you and I both know those are the views that many have. I am not going to dance around some of the popular views against why some people don't want an "opt out" for men. And the same goes for abortion with women there are some out there that believe women just want to run away as well after having their fun.

Popular = stereotype.

Now I do agree that there should be limits set on child support and alimony a long with what we have now, a cap so to speak of. And I really don't like the idea of men having to pay a certain amount if they want to be a part of their childs life. If they want no part of their childs life they should not have to pay anything but if they do they should pay a reasonable amount for the up keep of the child, not so the mom can quit working and live off child support. If a man asks for it he should be able to get an account of where his money is going so he will know that his child is being taken care of.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6542031.stm

"If you take almost any measure - how well children do in school, whether they turn to crime, whether they commit suicide, etc - it's better to have two parents.

"It's also the biggest disadvantage of lone parenthood that you're much more likely to be poor."

But Jane Ahrends, from One Parent Families, said while single parents might face poverty, the image of them as "young, feckless women who deliberately get pregnant" was wrong.

"The vast majority of lone parents are ordinary working mums and dads in their 30s and 40s, who are just trying to do their best in circumstances they didn't choose," she said

In the course of the thread we might have blown numbers out of proportion, but there are men that suffer inequal treatment and no one cares. There was a small protest on 26th December in my city. Around 30 dads and some mothers wanted a better and fairer system, no one cared.

That is a real messed up way of thinking you have there.

I'm sorry. Im just a man after all.

[Spectral]

I'm sorry. Im just a man after all.

This is actually the first thing in the thread that I've seen that actually is notable for its misandric content. The idea that being a man means one must have contempt for single mothers is pretty nasty, and demonstrably false.

[DeeEss]

I agree. Here is what I'm getting at. The entity in question is only ever at a given time either a fetus or a child. This is something we have a definition for. When a woman is pregnant, legally, the entity growing inside her is a fetus. At that time she can legally choose to abort the fetus.

We are arguing that at that time men should be allowed to surrender their parental rights and responsibilities legally, and we are being told that at that time they cannot, because it violates the child's rights. So at that time is it a fetus or a child?

That seems to be one of the major problems with this thread, either due to misreading or willful misunderstanding. I'm all for giving people benefit of the doubt, but there was one post where darenyon acknowledged this and responded with something along the lines of it being wrong because the woman would feel pressure to abort it.

From what I'm seeing, people seem to see this as the MRA side saying, "Men should totally be able to tell little Timmy on his 11th birthday, "Sorry bud, I don't want to pay for you anymore. Bye, and tell your mom to suck it up!"", and the MRA side saying, "Men should have the ability, before the option for a woman to abort the fetus is up, to be able to say, "I want no part of this and if you want to carry the abortable fetus to term, I'm out."

[Raiju]

I think most of the reasonable people stepped against MRA/M originally stepped out once they individually realized that. Darenyon is the one to continue throughout with no actual argument against it yet.

[Cybran]

This is actually the first thing in the thread that I've seen that actually is notable for its misandric content. The idea that being a man means one must have contempt for single mothers is pretty nasty, and demonstrably false.

I just said that children born with the intent to be used by the mother are likely going to suffer their whole life for her choice. Therefor maybe shouldn't be born in the first place. Since the woman has the say, all the incentives she gets for keeping the kid should be removed and she should bare the whole load of her decisions. And I only meant the single moms that will abuse the money they will get.

Being a man just means i am limited emotionally and messed up in the head.

[whathump]

I should stop reading these types of threads for my own sake. All this facepalming cannot be healthy.

[Spectral]

Therefor maybe shouldn't be born in the first place. Since the woman has the say, all the incentives she gets for keeping the kid should be removed and she should bare the whole load of her decisions.

Those glorious incentives are vastly outstripped by the costs of a child and lost income potential in nearly every case.

And I only meant the single moms that will abuse the money they will get.

All 17 of them deserve your ire. They're probably not a great way to build a cogent argument though.

Being a man just means i am limited emotionally and messed up in the head.

That's not because you're male.

[starlord]

That seems to be one of the major problems with this thread, either due to misreading or willful misunderstanding. I'm all for giving people benefit of the doubt, but there was one post where darenyon acknowledged this and responded with something along the lines of it being wrong because the woman would feel pressure to abort it.

From what I'm seeing, people seem to see this as the MRA side saying, "Men should totally be able to tell little Timmy on his 11th birthday, "Sorry bud, I don't want to pay for you anymore. Bye, and tell your mom to suck it up!"", and the MRA side saying, "Men should have the ability, before the option for a woman to abort the fetus is up, to be able to say, "I want no part of this and if you want to carry the abortable fetus to term, I'm out."

It doesn't matter if he decides to abandon little Timmy when he's 11 or when he's -0.8, he's still making the decision to abandon little Timmy. And then telling the mom to "Suck it up, you can always abort little Timmy!" Whereas if she does do that, there is no little Timmy being abandoned. That's my issue with the whole thing. Its not that I don't think men shouldn't be able to decide, just that there's no feasible solution that doesn't involve little Timmy bearing the cost.

With the exception of some pretty sweeping changes to how our country handles single parent support.

[Deleted]

It doesn't matter if he decides to abandon little Timmy when he's 11 or when he's -0.8, he's still making the decision to abandon little Timmy.

That's like saying there's no difference in murdering little Timmy when he's 11 or when he's -0.8, you're still murdering little timmy.

For fucks sake Darenyon atleast think your arguments through.

[Cybran]

That's like saying there's no difference in murdering little Timmy when he's 11 or when he's -0.8, you're still murdering little timmy.

For fucks sake Darenyon atleast think your arguments through.

You see, this rule doesn't apply to women. They are in a better possition so it makes their choice to ruin a man's life okay. Their whole agenda is based on this double standard.

And yes. It is a double standard. Both parents have half a fetus. The woman decides for both and the laws force the man pay for her dicision for 20 years or life.

[Spectral]

They are in a better possition so it makes their choice to ruin a man's life okay.

I can't imagine feeling like being the one that has to deal with pregnancy is a better position to be in. Then again, I can't really imagine any of the shit that you feel, so I guess this isn't unique.

Their whole agenda is based on this double standard.

You're still using it wrong.

[Wells]

That's like saying there's no difference in murdering little Timmy when he's 11 or when he's -0.8, you're still murdering little timmy.

For fucks sake Darenyon atleast think your arguments through.

That's not what he said at all.

What he's saying is that when you decide to not pay to support your child doesn't change the fact you're deciding you aren't going to pay to support your child.

[Deleted]

Ladies and gentleman, the MRA movement! The solution to kids being poor? Blame the women.

To some degree this is true though. If a woman doesn't abort a kid that doesn't have parents that are willing to support it, then she's consciously choosing to increase the amount of kids with poor prospects by 1.

What he's saying is that when you decide to not pay to support your child doesn't change the fact you're deciding you aren't going to pay to support your child.

Yeah, and the point is to give a que to the woman that, hey, maybe you shouldn't have the kid unless you can care for it on your own.

Wishing to get rid of the kid before it's born isn't the same as doing it after it's born.

[Wells]

To some degree this is true though. If a woman doesn't abort a kid that doesn't have parents that are willing to support it, then she's consciously choosing to increase the amount of kids with poor prospects by 1.

So let me get this straight. When kids are poor don't blame the fathers who don't care to support their children. Blame the mothers who are doing their best.

Ladies and gentlemen, the MRA movement!

[Cybran]

What he's saying is that when you decide to not pay to support your child doesn't change the fact you're deciding you aren't going to pay to support your child.

How can you abandon something that you never had or never wanted?

[Deleted]

So let me get this straight. When kids are poor don't blame the fathers who don't care to support their children. Blame the mothers who are doing their best.

Ladies and gentlemen, the MRA movement!

Yeah, no. Blame the mother who decided to give birth to a kid with poor future prospects.

But yeah, you don't think abortion gives women any new responsibility so it's pretty useless to argue with you.

[Cybran]

So let me get this straight. When kids are poor don't blame the fathers who don't care to support their children. Blame the mothers who are doing their best.

Ladies and gentlemen, the MRA movement!

If the mother decides to keep the child after it's painfully obvious she will be raising it on her own she should be ready to live with the consequences of her choices.