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

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

yes they are. they both must, by law, contribute to raising the kid or find someone who will.

Or abort it, if you are female, and don't feel like raising it.

---------- Post added 2013-01-17 at 06:56 PM ----------

The woman also DECIDES to BANG US. You're right, you're at the mercy of her decision, and this is WRONG, and SEXISM. This is why I think it should be one way or the other. Abortion is legal and can be used by women to opt out, so should a man have a choice in this matter.

You're right. If you opt out, it would still give her a choice. Nothing is forced on her. This is why the system now is terrible, sexist and archaic. Maybe when abortions weren't available, or legal it would make sense. But in a world where you can go get an abortion, why should liberty only be taken from the man?

[Deleted]

The best analogy I can think of is russian roulette, I'm aware of the risk, I choose to roll the dice and play the game, the odds are on my side but sometimes you will get unlucky and end up shooting yourself in the head.

But the problem is when the woman has filled every chamber with a bullet because she's lying.

A woman in a long term relationship can essentially fuck the guy's finance over at any time if she wants to. All she has to do is lie about contraceptives, get pregnant and voila. There's litterally nothing he can do except shoot himself to get rid of his financial burden. The worst of all is that she can dump him, win custody in court with almost certainty and force him to pay for a kid he doesn't even get to raise.

Sounds like a really fucked up balance to me. But no, it's just misogyny. Wah Wah we're getting oppressed by the pathriarchy, check your privilegie.

[Grizzly Willy]

its not hers thats the problem, its the kids. who did nothing wrong. lets look at another scenario: hospital sent home the wrong baby. should the child be tossed out on the street because its "not theirs"?

If the female partner gets pregnant by an individual other than their partner, then that partner shouldn't have any responsibility to care for that child.

[starlord]

If the female partner gets pregnant by an individual other than their partner, then that partner shouldn't have any responsibility to care for that child.

thats not the point i was trying to make. the child is an innocent party as well, and requires care.

[Jackmoves]

I think most guys would be fair about if they got a women pregnant due to bad luck, that its only fair you pay. Its in the situations that the women has lied that is the problem, because right now you still don't get let off when technically all you played was a friendly game of monopoly!

Yeah if she lies, sabotage condoms etc then it all changes, that could even be a criminal offense as far as I'm concerned. I'm just speaking of unintended accidents, which I think is far more common then a woman going fucking psycho on you.

You're right. If you opt out, it would still give her a choice. Nothing is forced on her. This is why the system now is terrible, sexist and archaic. Maybe when abortions weren't available, or legal it would make sense. But in a world where you can go get an abortion, why should liberty only be taken from the man?

It can be percieved as a forced decision, raising a child on your own with no financial support is not that easy. If she is well off then sure, no problem but if she will struggle then she might feel like the only option is abortion, something that she(in my example) really don't want to do.

But the problem is when the woman has filled every chamber with a bullet because she's lying.

A woman in a long term relationship can essentially fuck the guy's finance over at any time if she wants to. All she has to do is lie about contraceptives, get pregnant and voila. There's litterally nothing he can do except shoot himself to get rid of his financial burden. The worst of all is that she can dump him, win custody in court with almost certainty and force him to pay for a kid he doesn't even get to raise.

Sounds like a really fucked up balance to me. But no, it's just misogyny. Wah Wah we're getting oppressed by the pathriarchy, check your privilegie.

I'm not talking about lies, I'm talking about unintended accidential pregnencies.
Basic child support is a little bit over 1000 SEK a month here btw. I think it's 1300 or something like that, most men don't pay more then maybe 2000 SEK a month, and thats if you got a pretty decent job. Thats affordable for pretty much anyone who got a job without fucking over their personal finances in any major way.

Custody is shared in most cases where the dad wants an active role in raising the kid as well.

[Grizzly Willy]

thats not the point i was trying to make. the child is an innocent party as well, and requires care.

Ah, apologies then.

[starlord]

Or abort it, if you are female, and don't feel like raising it.

---------- Post added 2013-01-17 at 06:56 PM ----------

The woman also DECIDES to BANG US. You're right, you're at the mercy of her decision, and this is WRONG, and SEXISM. This is why I think it should be one way or the other. Abortion is legal and can be used by women to opt out, so should a man have a choice in this matter.

You're right. If you opt out, it would still give her a choice. Nothing is forced on her. This is why the system now is terrible, sexist and archaic. Maybe when abortions weren't available, or legal it would make sense. But in a world where you can go get an abortion, why should liberty only be taken from the man?

i'll try to explain again.

when a woman aborts, the man is at liberty. no harm no foul.

when a man walks out, she must either abort or have a huge burden place on her.

who lies about what is entirely irrelevant.
he lied and she had it -> too bad it must be supported
she lied and had it -> too bad it must be supported.

child support is about children, not about "favoring a gender" or "taking away liberty" any more than any other parenting laws are.
which is why i find the claims of sexism absurd.

[Grizzly Willy]

If she lies, who pays to support the child?

[Cybran]

"One bizarre finding was that a third of women (33%) said they would stay with their husband if they found out he was a "secret transvestite", but only half that number (17%) would put up with him if he refused to wash"

Oh the humanity!

I shower twice a day... Ladies..?

yes they are. they both must, by law, contribute to raising the kid or find someone who will.

I really hate this argument. It implies that the money women get from the fathers (many never wanted to be fathers) is just enough to cover the expenses for the child... Total bull. So many women spend that money on themselves and also get additional benefits for being single. Kicking men out of your life, but keeping them as wage slaves is far too lucrative. This has to be addressed.

You are either super naive or super dishonest if you imply that a lot of women don't do better financially by being signle and collecting finanial aid.

The best analogy I can think of is russian roulette, I'm aware of the risk, I choose to roll the dice and play the game, the odds are on my side but sometimes you will get unlucky and end up shooting yourself in the head.

More like playing russian roulette without knowing that your girlfried/wife louded 6 bullets when you weren't looking.

[MagicMedicine]

If a man is aware that a woman is pregnant with a child he should be able to "opt out" of that child's life during the period in which it's still legal for the women to abort it, and in exchange he must forfeit his rights to be involved in the child's life. Beyond the point of conception, a woman has complete unwavering control over the existence of (or lack of) her offspring, whereas a man has none. Nobody in their right mind can claim that to be equality unless they're feigning stupidity.

"why are men's rights a joke?"

If men's rights are a joke then a woman should be allowed no right to complain about receiving less pay than a man for the same job... which everybody knows is archaic and wrong.

[starlord]

I shower twice a day... Ladies..?



I really hate this argument. It implies that the money women get from the fathers (many never wanted to be fathers) is just enough to cover the expenses for the child... Total bull. So many women spend that money on themselves and also get additional benefits for being single. Kicking men out of your life, but keeping them as wage slaves is far too lucrative. This has to be addressed.

You are either super naive or super dishonest if you imply that a lot of women don't do better financially by being signle and collecting finanial aid.



More like playing russian roulette without knowing that your girlfried/wife louded 6 bullets when you weren't looking.

its not supposed to cover the "bare necessities", its supposed to make up for the fathers income and presence. instead of sharing in parenting duties and responsibilities he pays money.

women must also pay it if they likewise dump the kid on their partner.

[Deleted]

If a man is aware that a woman is pregnant with a child he should be able to "opt out" of that child's life during the period in which it's still legal for the women to abort it, and in exchange he must forfeit his rights to be involved in the child's life. Beyond the point of conception, a woman has complete unwavering control over the existence of (or lack of) her offspring, whereas a man has none. Nobody in their right mind can claim that to be equality unless they're feigning stupidity.

Pregnancy can't be equal you know. Trying to "fix" equality in regards to pregnancy won't happen unless men can give birth aswell.

[semaphore]

Pregnancy can't be equal you know. Trying to "fix" equality in regards to pregnancy won't happen unless men can give birth aswell.

Artificial wombs to breed test-tube babies! Who's with me!??

[starlord]

If a man is aware that a woman is pregnant with a child he should be able to "opt out" of that child's life during the period in which it's still legal for the women to abort it, and in exchange he must forfeit his rights to be involved in the child's life. Beyond the point of conception, a woman has complete unwavering control over the existence of (or lack of) her offspring, whereas a man has none. Nobody in their right mind can claim that to be equality unless they're feigning stupidity.

and no one in their right mind can claim that a woman aborting and a man walking out are an equal decision with equal results.
unless they dont care about "equality".

If men's rights are a joke then a woman should be allowed no right to complain about receiving less pay than a man for the same job... which everybody knows is archaic and wrong.

its a rhetorical question.

[Deleted]

Pregnancy can't be equal you know. Trying to "fix" equality in regards to pregnancy won't happen unless men can give birth aswell.

You can still work to reduce inequality.

---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 01:09 AM ----------

Artificial wombs to breed test-tube babies! Who's with me!??

Don't do it! Women will become redundant and the pathriarchy will be reinstated!

[Laize]

thats not the point i was trying to make. the child is an innocent party as well, and requires care.

Again, if the woman is given ample notice that the father has no intentions of caring for that child, she can make an informed decision of whether to keep or abort it.

---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 01:14 AM ----------

While we're on the subject of some women being evil succubi, why can't we get stories like this in the US?

---------- Post added 2013-01-18 at 01:15 AM ----------

when a woman aborts, the man is at liberty. no harm no foul.

when a man walks out, she must either abort or willingly and informedly take up a huge burden on her own.

Fixed that for ya.

[Deleted]

You can still work to reduce inequality.

How does one reduce the inequality in that then?

If the man wants a kid and the woman does not, how do you fix that?

Don't do it! Women will become redundant and the pathriarchy will be reinstated!

I believe people would be like "NO, IT'S NOT ETHICALLY RIGHT TO DO THAT" tbh. Both men and women.

[gamingmuscle]

He should probably have a final answer within a few weeks of finding out that there either is or will be a child.

---------- Post added 2013-01-17 at 10:41 PM ----------



Really? You've never heard of anyone poking holes in condoms? Or other, more disgusting things?

What would opting out cost him?

[Deleted]

What would opting out cost him?

A relationship with his child.

[Rapecleave]

Both men and women are stupid, most of the worlds population is stupid and just dumb, dumb, dumb.

Ive seen fat and annoying men, ive seen fat and annoying women

Ive seen psychopathic men, ive seen psychopathic women

Ive seen women abused by men, ive seen men abused by women.

Theres machochists (however the f its spelt) and theres feminists, plus religious people, all as bad as each other, wipe em out.

Its the small individuals that count that make the 5% of life even worth looking forward to.

Our species really needs to be wiped out lol