Here's a good article that lays the issue bare.
http://www.salon.com/2000/10/19/mens_choice/
Here's a good article that lays the issue bare.
http://www.salon.com/2000/10/19/mens_choice/
What if she is giving it to the father to raise as a single dad?
And yes, that is an actual existing scenario.
---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 07:28 AM ----------
Which is why I had my first trimester proposal. It should be legally binding not only to give him the right out, but to protect the mother incase he says yes and flip flops after she's carried past the 21 week point of no return.
Ex-Mod. Technically retired, they just won't let me quit.
OK so after 113 pages it does indeed boil down to the claim that since women have the right to control their own bodies men's rights are being violated unless they get to walk away at will from any responsibility to a child that may result from their sexual activities. In other words, unless the man wants the child his rights are being violated if he is forced by law to step up and take responsibility. The same responsibility that a woman has to under the law.
Oh and Safe Haven laws are a feminist conspiracy against fathers and we shouldn't think that the MRM is anything other than a total joke. Got it!
then she pays child support.
it doesnt solve the financial difficulties present in raising a kid alone. child support is to help make up for the missing income.Which is why I had my first trimester proposal. It should be legally binding not only to give him the right out, but to protect the mother incase he says yes and flip flops after she's carried past the 21 week point of no return.
But she shouldn't have to. That's my point, if she doesn't want to be a mother and the father is willing to raise it alone then she should be able to opt out.
But it does, if you can't afford to raise a child alone, don't have the child!it doesnt solve the financial difficulties present in raising a kid alone. child support is to help make up for the missing income.
Ex-Mod. Technically retired, they just won't let me quit.
Of course, men’s lack of reproductive rights has another side: being forced to assume the burden of unwanted parenthood, at least financially. In the eyes of the law, it seems that virtually no circumstances, however bizarre or outrageous, can mitigate the biological father’s liability for child support, as an overview of cases published in Divorce Litigation journal in 1999 shows.
Did the woman ask him to impregnate her and sign an agreement relieving him of any financial obligations? He’s still liable if she changes her mind. Was he underage and legally a victim of statutory rape? Makes no difference. (One such case, in Kansas in 1993, involved a 12-year-old boy molested by a baby sitter.) Did the woman have her way with him when he had passed out from drinking and brag to friends that she had saved herself a trip to the sperm bank? Tough luck, said Alabama courts. Did she retrieve his semen from the condom she had asked him to wear during oral sex and inseminate herself with a syringe? Yes, it’s a true story, and in 1997 the Louisiana Court of Appeals told the man to pay up, saying that a male who has any sexual contact with a woman — even oral sex with a condom — should assume that a pregnancy may ensue.Both from Laize's linked article. A good read, thank you. Also quite a balanced view overall, despite what my above quotes might make it seem like.Advocates of “choice for men” have a point when they charge that there is a certain hypocrisy in these declarations, now that the link between sex and procreation has ceased to be binding for women. “We are no longer being truthful when we chide the male defendant: ‘It took two to make the baby,’” writes Fred Hayward. “It might have taken two to conceive an embryo, but thanks to legalized abortion, only one person controlled whether or not the baby was made.”
Last edited by Eremiel; 2012-11-27 at 07:53 AM.
he should be able to opt out of her payments, yes. laws state that a parent bears an inherent responsibility for their childs welfare, however. accidental or no.
if you agree that unmarried parents should recieve no aid then thats not really a discussion of mens rights imo.But it does, if you can't afford to raise a child alone, don't have the child!
That's treading over agreed ground though, Wells said IIRC he agreed in defence of the male in those circumstances.
I just wondered if there was actually a precedent for rape, discussion aside.
---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 07:49 AM ----------
That's not what I said, that's not what I said at all, infact how the shit did you get that from what I said?if you agree that unmarried parents should recieve no aid then thats not really a discussion of mens rights imo.
Being unmarried doesn't mean you're raising it single, you can have joint custody from people who are separated pre-birth.
What I'm saying is, both genders should have the right to say "I do not want this child" and should either the mother or (in rarer cases) the father be in a position where they want the child, and are aware they're doing so without financial support, then they should raise the child alone without any connection to their paternal partner.
However the decision to single handedly raise that child would be made in the knowledge there is no financial support. If you can't afford it, don't have it.
Ex-Mod. Technically retired, they just won't let me quit.
Yea, I am aghast. You cannot read into another persons statements and expect to have a meaningful debate. It is as simple as that, what is said is what is said. And frankly I'm out after this because that is what a few select people keep doing.
PS. Aalyy
"OK so after 113 pages it does indeed boil down to the claim that since women have the right to control their own bodies men's rights are being violated unless they get to walk away at will from any responsibility to a child that may result from their sexual activities. In other words, unless the man wants the child his rights are being violated if he is forced by law to step up and take responsibility. The same responsibility that a woman has to under the law.
Oh and Safe Haven laws are a feminist conspiracy against fathers and we shouldn't think that the MRM is anything other than a total joke. Got it! "
Nobody, at, all, is, advocating, that.
Stop reading into the comments.
If I for example say an orange walks into the house, it does not mean that I said a pear did not walk into the house. Get that?
Last edited by Humungo; 2012-11-27 at 08:14 AM.
I still don't see what you propose as a solution at all. You choose not to respond to me when I bring this up so I doubt you will this time. What you propose in no way actually fixes a broken system, it just gives men a way out. You've offered nothing about the complexities of an awful situation. You just added an escape clause. That's not a solution. It's just using equal rights as a mask for selfishness.
How in gods name would that even happen, you are not likely to have a massive boner if you are about to get "violated", I don't know about others but I need to be turned on to get a hardon and if someone is "raping" me I doubt I'd feel up for it. Would she force you to take viagra prior to it?
Nor are you going to knock a chick up if she rams a dildo up your ass.
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...
He's not talking about the stereotype, "rape" can imply many things. A woman could intoxicate/sedate a man and proceed to rape him anally. Extremely rare, but has happened. But "forcing" a man to impregnate herself is completely beyond understanding, that's what he's asking. It just can't happen unless the man is somewhat willing.
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.
Last edited by Xuvial; 2012-11-27 at 10:59 AM.
WoW Character: Wintel - Frostmourne (OCE)
Gaming rig: i7 7700K, GTX 1080 Ti, 16GB DDR4, BenQ 144hz 1440p
Signature art courtesy of Blitzkatze
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.
Well then there will be a law somewhere which dictates what happens regarding child support.
Last edited by Xuvial; 2012-11-27 at 11:08 AM.
WoW Character: Wintel - Frostmourne (OCE)
Gaming rig: i7 7700K, GTX 1080 Ti, 16GB DDR4, BenQ 144hz 1440p
Signature art courtesy of Blitzkatze
So you're going with the usual "just suck it up you wimp" attitude...
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 don't disagree with that, what I'm saying is, boners usually doesn't happen just like that. And she will not be able to "milk" you without you having a hardon. So practically it would be a massive problem to create such a situation.
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...
So, it can happen, even if it is a mission. Just like you can hold down a woman and rape her, but its a mission. So that makes it ok?
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.
Never said it was ok did I? I didn't mean to come off as a "raped by a woman, thats a laugh, stop complaining and be happy".
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 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...