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

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Excellent, thank you, much better than lemonparty's sniveling.

Well, it appears I was wrong in some of the cases, and that US law isn't consistent on the issue.

Yes, you were wrong in all cases. Now get your BS out of here so people can actually discuss things.

He's actually right. The burden of proof is on the one making the ontologically positive claim. It's a good thing I did your work for you.

No, like I said. I will not "do the work" for that guy. He has only cried and whined the whole he was here. I will not burden myself with proving anything who will just reply with some sarcastic bullshit, or use straw men to change the subject etc. All he does is call names, so he doesn't deserve a single thing.

[Stelio Kontos]

Yes, you were wrong in all cases. Now get your BS out of here so people can actually discuss things.



No, like I said. I will not "do the work" for that guy. He has only cried and whined the whole he was here. I will not burden myself with proving anything who will just reply with some sarcastic bullshit, or use straw men to change the subject etc. All he does is call names, so he doesn't deserve a single thing.

Simple rules of debate and logic, has nothing to do with my behavior. The one making the claim has to support it. And when I got some proof and not your temperamental sniveling, I admitted my point on that issue was wrong and that my information wasn't complete.

But please, do continue sniveling, because I do so love using that word.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Laize, that father is paying child support to a child that is effectively still his daughter. He still gets visitation and still fathers her. If you position yourself as a child's parent you become responsible for that child. He is not paying money to an "intact family" he is making support payments to his daughter. The only weird thing about this situation is that the guy who the mother hooked up with happens to be the original sperm donor.

So a woman who cheats on her husband and has thatkid is now entitled to his child support, not to mention any alimony?

---------- Post added 2013-01-17 at 09:23 AM ----------

Simple rules of debate and logic, has nothing to do with my behavior. The one making the claim has to support it. And when I got some proof and not your temperamental sniveling, I admitted my point on that issue was wrong and that my information wasn't complete.

But please, do continue sniveling, because I do so love using that word.

It has 100% to do with your behavior.

[Cybran]

That is why I am staying single, if they get pregnant with casual sex, not mine.

So naive... She will still get money from you till its 18.

[Deleted]

So naive...

So you claim to understand what he wrote ? because his post makes no sense to me

[Raiju]

Gotta say the article was very in depth and considered most viewpoints (QQ Rob the no-shower didn't get one, maybe he should fucking go to at least the court hearing then..) in the 2-3 cases brought up.

The problem there is at the root though, the woman lies about their fidelity, the male is either confident he is the father, believes noone else will step up to be the father, or believes he will be legally screwed for not signing. Raising awareness and defending (oh look, here it is) men's rights with the signing of paternity solves the issues straight up. I liked the suggestion that you waive your rights to step out if you don't take a paternity test. If a guy can't stomach taking the test and finding out the truth, then I'm sure he's ok raising the kid instead.

It doesn't really change much, though. I don't see how Rob has any claim on the child here. At the time of the case (child 9) he had not been involved for over half her life. I don't understand who a man who was late to the party, didn't defend himself in court, etc. got away with everything with the cheating bitch.

[Daskapital]

So a woman who cheats on her husband and has thatkid is now entitled to his child support, not to mention any alimony.

The fact that you even see CHILD support as money for the mom shows how unaware you are of your own privilege. Child support us the BARE MINIMUM you do as a father.

If your wife cheats and you stay with her and raise the kid, yes, its yours.

Alimony is a support payment for your spouse fucking up their education and career for you. So if you get your wife to quit school and not work for 20 years because you cant be fucked to make your own samwiches, iron your own shirts, and vacuum, then yes, you pay for that shit. If the genders are reversed or if the spouses are of the same sex, the exact same rule applies.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

The fact that you even see CHILD support as money for the mom shows how unaware you are of your own privilege. Child support us the BARE MINIMUM you do as a father.

If your wife cheats and you stay with her and raise the kid, yes, its yours.

Alimony is a support payment for your spouse fucking up their education and career for you. So if you get your wife to quit school and not work for 20 years because you cant be fucked to make your own samwiches, iron your own shirts, and vacuum, then yes, you pay for that shit. If the genders are reversed or if the spouses are of the same sex, the exact same rule applies.

I do not agree. Laws regarding Alimony/Child support in the US are not so black and white, and heavily favor females.

Did you read the article?

The revelation from a DNA test was devastating and prompted him to leave his wife —

Sorry, I think when you cheat on your husband, get a divorce, then marry the man you cheated with, your right to demand child support from your first husband should be null.

[Cybran]

So you claim to understand what he wrote ? because his post makes no sense to me

He thinks that only married couples have to pay for their children.

[Daskapital]

I do not agree. Laws regarding Alimony/Child support in the US are not so black and white, and heavily favor females.

Did you read the article?

The revelation from a DNA test was devastating and prompted him to leave his wife —

Sorry, I think when you cheat on your husband, get a divorce, then marry the man you cheated with, your right to demand child support from your first husband should be null.

I did read the article, he is still raising that child.

[Deleted]

The fact that you even see CHILD support as money for the mom shows how unaware you are of your own privilege. Child support us the BARE MINIMUM you do as a father.

If your wife cheats and you stay with her and raise the kid, yes, its yours.

Alimony is a support payment for your spouse fucking up their education and career for you. So if you get your wife to quit school and not work for 20 years because you cant be fucked to make your own samwiches, iron your own shirts, and vacuum, then yes, you pay for that shit. If the genders are reversed or if the spouses are of the same sex, the exact same rule applies.

Alimony is fine if the father willingly became one.

But when the woman decieves someone into being a father, he should not be liable for alimony. The woman can always interrupt the pregnancy through abortion or put the kid for adoption to avoid having to support a child. The father is stuck in financial slavery, out of no fault of his own with no way to stop it.

[Ebildays]

The problem of MRM is the feminists that want us to believe it's a joke.

http://ncfm.org/#/2011/10/news/consc...and-be-killed/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...he-rape-of-men

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00vxx55

There are enough cases of male physical, psychological and sexual abuse. The problem is that the feminists are deeply influencing the liberal media and stories that work against their agenda don't get publicity.

And this thread topic was on none of those but a crazy one about that 50% of women would lie to their husband about whose child it is. That screams joke and even more so when you read the story it came from.

I am just saying if you want it to be treated like it should be treated choose better stories to show your point. I mean he could have easily made it on the guy that was murdered by his ex-girlfriend that is not getting as much press as it would if it was reversed. Men do have problems but if you make a joke thread it will be treated as a joke.

When the couple has been together for a while and they agree that they will use only a pill it's absolutely unacceptable for the woman to stop using it without telling him. You skew the discussion against men again. When the man has a stable relationship with a woman it's only normal that he trusts her to use protection. Women abuse that trust to "bind" men for life, this is more than e "whoopsy", this is pathological. The fact that so many women are willing to do it is scary.

I am not skewing the discussion because not all women want to take the pill and would happily go with the man just wearing a condom. But no one wants to talk about that option. It just seems that men cannot wait to take off the condom and push all the responsible of birth control on the woman. It is not about trust but choosing to protect yourself rather than putting a greater value on "getting off" over becoming a dad against your will.

[Raiju]

I am not skewing the discussion because not all women want to take the pill and would happily go with the man just wearing a condom. But no one wants to talk about that option. It just seems that men cannot wait to take off the condom and push all the responsible of birth control on the woman. It is not about trust but choosing to protect yourself rather than putting a greater value on "getting off" over becoming a dad against your will.

"I forced my girlfriend to go on the pill and then she got pregnant"

said noone ever.

[Cybran]

The fact that you even see CHILD support as money for the mom shows how unaware you are of your own privilege. Child support us the BARE MINIMUM you do as a father.

Being turned in to a wage slave of your ex is a privilege?

If your wife cheats and you stay with her and raise the kid, yes, its yours.

It isn't. It's a bastard child that the man wasted his time raising.

Alimony is a support payment for your spouse fucking up their education and career for you. So if you get your wife to quit school and not work for 20 years because you cant be fucked to make your own samwiches, iron your own shirts, and vacuum, then yes, you pay for that shit. If the genders are reversed or if the spouses are of the same sex, the exact same rule applies.

I highly doubt that the wife of Tiger woulds would have made 250 000 000 on her own. Same on smaller scale applies to many of the other recipients.

[Serj Tankian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJfFGgzhfhY

I personally prefer George Carlin over Chris Rock.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

I did read the article, he is still raising that child.

You're right, because of ass-backwards laws.

[Daskapital]

Being turned in to a wage slave of your ex is a privilege?

No, but the privilege of jumping in and out of a family as it suits you, appears to be one you are looking for. Child support is for supporting your kid that you either made or chose to raise. Actions have consequences.

It isn't. It's a bastard child that the man wasted his time raising.

He starts raising it, then he takes responsibility for it. Pro tip: don't have or raise children if you can't live up to the responsibility.

I highly doubt that the wife of Tiger woulds would have made 250 000 000 on her own. Same on smaller scale applies to many of the other recipients.

If you avail yourself of the privileges of having what amounts to indentured labour and a fuck machine that stays in your house and waits for you, then you pay for that privilege. If you don't want to support an infantilized woman make your partnership an equal one where you both have careers and educations. How fucking hard is that to understand?

---------- Post added 2013-01-17 at 09:59 AM ----------

You're right, because of ass-backwards laws.

No, he says explicitly that he wants to be raising her because he loves her.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

No, he says explicitly that he wants to be raising her because he loves her.

Mike’s wages would be garnished because he was the legal father — even though, in this case, the biological father had more of the benefits of fatherhood and none of its obligations.

He said there was a chance, though small, that the courts or her mom would forbid him to see her. But if they did, Mike told L., he would fight back.

If you avail yourself of the privileges of having what amounts to indentured labour and a fuck machine that stays in your house and waits for you, then you pay for that privilege. If you don't want to support an infantilized woman make your partnership an equal one where you both have careers and educations. How fucking hard is that to understand?

You are also ignoring the part of how much money Tiger makes. Even if the wife CHOSE to work, (I'm sure he did not at all forbid it) she would not make 250k a year or anywhere close to his net worth. Even if she did, the courts would force Tiger to pay alimony in the difference of their salaries.

You aren't being logical when you assume every man with a stay at home wife FORCED HER TO STAY HOW TO BE A SAMMICH/FUCK MACHINE. That is a ridiculous claim, and not fair to the debate.

[Cybran]

If you avail yourself of the privileges of having what amounts to indentured labour and a fuck machine that stays in your house and waits for you, then you pay for that privilege. If you don't want to support an infantilized woman make your partnership an equal one where you both have careers and educations. How fucking hard is that to understand?

The problem is in the unfair and biased laws, not in the men that make a wrong partnership decision.

[Austilias]

You aren't being logical when you assume every man with a stay at home wife FORCED HER TO STAY HOW TO BE A SAMMICH/FUCK MACHINE. That is a ridiculous claim, and not fair to the debate.

Shh, we are the patriarchy, remember?