Modern Feminism - What's the deal?

[Cybran]

This video sums up what many "misogynists" think and get hate for. This thread is a prime example of man hating and how harmful Feminism is.

[FusedMass]

You are ignoring it. This isn't even about what a potential father wants. You are in favour of the state forcing men to support a child they didn't mean to have and yet you do not demand it of women. Your only solution for this is to allow men to sign a legally binding document prior to intercourse in the event they accidently impregnate their partner and yet you don't demand women to do the same.


Do you think women should be able to abort their child?


A good thing I don't actually believe that.

Yet by your logic, if the state was interested in being non-sexist they would have to force women facing an unwanted pregnancy to have the child.

No. Again in the United States the child does not always end up with the Mother. I personally know several situations where the child ended up with the Father and It was the Mother who had to pay child support. Whomever the child ends up with male or women the other partner is expected to pay child support. There is no biased based on gender. Its based on who has custody of the child.

I think women if they want the choice to abort they should if that's their intention.

You may not agree with my standing of no forced abortions or forced carrying the child. But its immoral to force a person to keep the child even if she clearly doesn't want to or not to keep it by forcing her to abort. That's her body. Its not property. Its a human being and should be treated with dignity and respect.

[Kasierith]

This video sums up what many "misogynists" think and get hate for. This thread is a prime example of man hating and how harmful Feminism is.

Yes, because nothing adds to a discussion like strawmanning an entire movement because you don't like the implications of it and don't understand it.

[Deleted]

No. Again in the United States the child does not always end up with the Father.

I suspect so. At any rate this is irrelevant. We're talking about your ideas and your solutions. Your ideas and solutions are inherently sexist.

I personally know several situations where the child ended up with the Father and It was the Mother who had to pay child support. Whomever the child ends up with male or women the other partner is expected to pay child support. There is no biased based on gender. Its based on who has custody of the child.

That is not why I am calling your system sexist. Read what I said again. Under your system:

Men have to sign a piece of paper signalling their intent to not support any potential child before having sexual intercourse.

Women do not have to sign a piece of paper signalling their intent and can abort or put the child straight up for adoption.

I think women if they want the choice to abort they should if that's their intention.

Should women who would abort their child be required to sign that intent off on a piece of paper if they get pregnant?

You may not agree with my standing of no forced abortions or forced carrying the child.

I do. Women should be able to abort. Women should be able to have a child if they want. I also extend that bit further to men and say that they, if they want should be allowed to not be responsible for a child they did not ask for. Your system compels men to be responsible for causing an accidental pregnancy but allows women accidentally impregnated to abort it or put it for adoption. That is a system that is inherently sexist.

But its immoral to force a person to keep the child even if she clearly doesn't want to or not to keep it by forcing her to abort. That's her body. Its not property. Its a human being and should be treated with dignity and respect.

I agree. You still don't seem to understand my argument. I am arguing against your double standards.

[Radux]

No. Again in the United States the child does not always end up with the Mother. I personally know several situations where the child ended up with the Father and It was the Mother who had to pay child support. Whomever the child ends up with male or women the other partner is expected to pay child support. There is no biased based on gender. Its based on who has custody of the child.

So, to be clear, there's no problem when 84% of child custody cases go in favor of the woman, and that more than 66% of failed custody payments from said women are unpunished?

[Kasierith]

So, to be clear, there's no problem when 84% of child custody cases go in favor of the woman, and that more than 66% of failed custody payments from said women are unpunished?

Of course there is a problem with that; the courts should be as neutral and unbiased as possible, and they have shown a pattern of distinct bias towards one side. That said, in this specific area there are two things to consider: first, women are given the benefit of the doubt in child custody cases because by nature, they have already put in 9 months more effort in caring for a child as well as massive deal of physical, mental, and emotional strain in order to do it; such a burden being placed on someone only to have the child taken away shortly after seems almost cruel, does it not? Then there is another thing to consider: social trends take longer to shift than the law. Women may no longer be associated with domestic life by law, but there are plenty of areas where you can see societal trends push towards mothers being the caretakers of the household, and the father being the breadwinner. This isn't right or fair, but it definitely exists, and ultimately it's something that only time will shift out of society.

[Xanjori]

You've been to court and tested this theory I assume. Again when both partys come to court the judge looks for anything binding in cases when people are being sued.

Just on this. When my parents split and my younger brother lived with his mother, she didn't want my dad to have to pay child support. However the CSA made her reveal his name and his address or she would have received 0 support.

[Sorrior]

So, to be clear, there's no problem when 84% of child custody cases go in favor of the woman, and that more than 66% of failed custody payments from said women are unpunished?

Honestly i think Fuses is selectively reading our posts to exclude how we APROVE of abortion right but merely want a male version...One that is NOT a mood killer and does NOT infringe a womans rights.

[FusedMass]

I suspect so. At any rate this is irrelevant. We're talking about your ideas and your solutions. Your ideas and solutions are inherently sexist.


That is not why I am calling your system sexist. Read what I said again. Under your system:

Men have to sign a piece of paper signalling their intent to not support any potential child before having sexual intercourse.

Women do not have to sign a piece of paper signalling their intent and can abort or put the child straight up for adoption.


Should women who would abort their child be required to sign that intent off on a piece of paper if they get pregnant?


I do. Women should be able to abort. Women should be able to have a child if they want. I also extend that bit further to men and say that they, if they want should be allowed to not be responsible for a child they did not ask for. Your system compels men to be responsible for causing an accidental pregnancy but allows women accidentally impregnated to abort it or put it for adoption. That is a system that is inherently sexist.


I agree. You still don't seem to understand my argument. I am arguing against your double standards.

It's not Sexist. Really? You're advocating its sexiest that women have the personal choice to keep or not keep their child because its their body. What you seem to fail to understand the major difference its their body. They have to go through hell with mood swings, hormone changes, mourning sickness etc for 9 months. That's almost a year.

Yes I believe the Father should have virtually no legal right to drop his responsibilities. Sure some men hate paying child support. I know that. Then make your intentions clear BEFORE tearing off your clothes and think before the outcome of the situation not after. Its not sexist. Its their body. If men could carry a child. I'd aruge they have a right to do whatever they want with it.

The law has been like this forever. You cannot simply opt out of you're required legal right to pay child support. That only happens if mother or whomever parent has the child does not wish you have pay child support. I'm not going to sit here and have a ridiculous debate about "Mens Rights" arguing its sexist to allow the women the personal choice to keep the child or not but not the man.

A: The child does not always end up with the mother. It goes both ways.

B: Yes the women has a PERSONAL choice the man does not. Because its her BODY. That's not a double standard. A double standard would be if men could also have a child but they were refused the rights if they wanted to keep it or abort it. THAT is a double standard.

If you want to be honest simply make your intentions fully transparent to your partner. Even get it in writing.

To poster above me. Are you serious? You want a legal way that the man can force the women to abort the child. Are you seriously suggesting that? There is no possible way to have a male side to abortion that does not infringe on a women s right if she doesn't wish it done because we're talking about her BODY. To do something she doesn't want is defined as against her will.

[Raiju]

If you want to be honest simply make your intentions fully transparent to your partner. Even get it in writing.

Given how after 2 threads totalling near 200 pages you still don't understand a majority (like 95%+ of the posters) against you aren't against abortion despite it being spelled out to you hundreds and possibly thousands of times, writing clearly wouldn't be enough.

[Xanjori]

To poster above me. Are you serious? You want a legal way that the man can force the women to abort the child. Are you seriously suggesting that? There is no possible way to have a male side to abortion that does not infringe on a women s right if she doesn't wish it done because we're talking about her BODY. To do something she doesn't want is defined as against her will.

I think you failed to read that. A male abortion= the man is no longer associated with the child, it doesn't equal forcing the woman to have an abortion. Seriously it wasn't exactly written in binary.

[Kasierith]

Yes I believe the Father should have virtually no legal right to drop his responsibilities. Sure some men hate paying child support. I know that. Then make your intentions clear BEFORE tearing off your clothes and think before the outcome of the situation not after. Its not sexist. Its their body. If men could carry a child. I'd aruge they have a right to do whatever they want with it.

Of course men should have some legal recourse to drop their responsibilities. Even if the father was directly involved in producing the child, no child support system should place an unsustainable burden on the father to the point where child support directly interferes with his financial well being. I'm talking about people who eventually go bankrupt under the system. Child support laws need drastic refinement to take the interests of the father further into account, and allow for the father to have more abilities to escape having to pay these child support laws depending on specific circumstances.

[Deleted]

It's not Sexist. Really? You're advocating its sexiest that women have the personal choice to keep or not keep their child because its their body.

I'm not saying that at all. You appear to have almost no understanding of my argument. I am saying that it is "sexiest" to impose different standards of responsibility on men and women. You think men should be immediately and in complete totality responsible financially and/or emotionally for causing any unwanted pregnancies but you do not think that women should be held to the same level of responsibility.

That is what is sexist.

What you seem to fail to understand the major difference its their body. They have to go through hell with mood swings, hormone changes, mourning sickness etc for 9 months. That's almost a year.

Since your original statement on what I think is sexist was a strawman, I can ignore this comment except to say that the burden of pregnancy of women is entirely noticed and appreciated by me. I don't wish to restrict women's rights to abort or put their child up for adoption and have never said anything like that.

Yes I believe the Father should have virtually no legal right to drop his responsibilities.

Yet not with women. That is by definition, sexist. It imposes different standards on people based on their sex.

Sure some men hate paying child support. I know that. Then make your intentions clear BEFORE tearing off your clothes and think before the outcome of the situation not after.

Yet, I note that you don't demand that women should "make their intentions clear BEFORE tearing off their clothes".

Nope, you grant and allow for women to abort at any time and immediately put their child up for adoption. That is hypocrisy and it is becoming glaringly obvious.

Its not sexist. Its their body. If men could carry a child. I'd aruge they have a right to do whatever they want with it.

Again: That is not what I am calling sexist. I am calling your different standards of responsibility sexist. You also act like the financial and/or emotional burden of supporting a child for 18 years is no burden at all. I'd say that such involvement over a length of time on a child you did not anticipate and did not want outdoes the physical and emotional consequences of pregnancy.

The law has been like this forever. You cannot simply opt out of you're required legal right to pay child support.

This isn't about the fucking law. This is about your hypocritical standards that you appear completely oblivious to.

That only happens if mother or whomever parent has the child does not wish you have pay child support. I'm not going to sit here and have a ridiculous debate about "Mens Rights" arguing its sexist to allow the women the personal choice to keep the child or not but not the man.

Women can choose to keep the child if they want. They can abort it if they like. Never said or suggested otherwise. But your system mandates that the father must involve himself regardless of his intent prior to conception. You don't require that of women and that is the hypocrisy.

A: The child does not always end up with the mother. It goes both ways.

???

What does this have to do with my argument?

B: Yes the women has a PERSONAL choice the man does not. Because its her BODY.

Yet by your standards you require men to deal with the consequences and accept the responsibility - yet not women. Hypocritical.

If you want to be honest simply make your intentions fully transparent to your partner. Even get it in writing.

Yet you do not require women to make the same statement of intent. Your system is and remains sexist.

[Sorrior]

It's not Sexist. Really? You're advocating its sexiest that women have the personal choice to keep or not keep their child because its their body. What you seem to fail to understand the major difference its their body. They have to go through hell with mood swings, hormone changes, mourning sickness etc for 9 months. That's almost a year.

Yes I believe the Father should have virtually no legal right to drop his responsibilities. Sure some men hate paying child support. I know that. Then make your intentions clear BEFORE tearing off your clothes and think before the outcome of the situation not after. Its not sexist. Its their body. If men could carry a child. I'd aruge they have a right to do whatever they want with it.

The law has been like this forever. You cannot simply opt out of you're required legal right to pay child support. That only happens if mother or whomever parent has the child does not wish you have pay child support. I'm not going to sit here and have a ridiculous debate about "Mens Rights" arguing its sexist to allow the women the personal choice to keep the child or not but not the man.

A: The child does not always end up with the mother. It goes both ways.

B: Yes the women has a PERSONAL choice the man does not. Because its her BODY. That's not a double standard. A double standard would be if men could also have a child but they were refused the rights if they wanted to keep it or abort it. THAT is a double standard.

If you want to be honest simply make your intentions fully transparent to your partner. Even get it in writing.

To poster above me. Are you serious? You want a legal way that the man can force the women to abort the child. Are you seriously suggesting that?

You're seeing all this through a lense it seems.

Name ONE PLACE we have said we want to control a womans body...I haven't seen one.

What we WANT is a way to say that we will abdicate ALL rights as a father AND financial aid to the child.

Thus it is the womans choice to have the child or not but also the mans to not be entrapt by a payment system.


Oh and seriously your solution is just silly and more like a pre sex version of what we're trying to say.

Just that the pre sex version isn't practical. As well as still being unfair since the woman can choose for a time.

All in all all we ask for is to be able to say no to child support. Not all or even most men are out to impregnate.

If anything things like this make men want families LESS.

[Deleted]

Of course men should have some legal recourse to drop their responsibilities. Even if the father was directly involved in producing the child, no child support system should place an unsustainable burden on the father to the point where child support directly interferes with his financial well being. I'm talking about people who eventually go bankrupt under the system. Child support laws need drastic refinement to take the interests of the father further into account, and allow for the father to have more abilities to escape having to pay these child support laws depending on specific circumstances.

This is a reasonable statement. +1. The suggestion made by many that men should be compelled to accept the responsibility for not "keeping it in their pants" is eerily similar to the foul suggestion made by many of the religious-right that women should accept the responsibility of getting pregnant.

Both are foul and closely akin to "victim blaming". Both put unreasonable demands on women and men.

Also FusedMass: What is your opinion on adoption? Should only women be allowed to say they want their child up for adoption? If a man argues for the child to be put up for adoption and the woman disagrees should the man be then compelled to put in financial support for 18 years?

[FusedMass]

So, to be clear, there's no problem when 84% of child custody cases go in favor of the woman, and that more than 66% of failed custody payments from said women are unpunished?

Not all of the cases it goes to the mother. I know of a situation personally where a woman gave birth to a child. Yet it was the Father who gained custody and it was the Mother forced to pay child support. It goes both ways. The matter of custody is a complex issue and its one for the courts to decide. A person does not have to purse child support mother/father if they do not want to.

Should we make the father take custody of the child in all court cases to make it fair? no case is legally predictable. Its not based on gender who gets the child. Its based on income, level of support etc. There are several, several factors but a persons gender is not one of them.

[Raiju]

Not all of the cases it goes to the mother. I know of a situation personally where a woman gave birth to a child. Yet it was the Father who gained custody and it was the Mother forced to pay child support. It goes both ways. The matter of custody is a complex issue and its one for the courts to decide. A person does not have to purse child support mother/father if they do not want to.

Yes radux, your statistics just got refuted with an anecdote. The person I had to ask if I needed to rephrase the argument in simpler terms...

Should we make the father take custody of the child in all court cases to make it fair? no case is legally predictable. Its not based on gender who gets the child. Its based on income, level of support etc. There are several, several factors but a persons gender is not one of them.

don't remember anyone stating or implying that, ever. Nice strawman though.

[pucko97]

Not all of the cases it goes to the mother. I know of a situation personally where a woman gave birth to a child. Yet it was the Father who gained custody and it was the Mother forced to pay child support. It goes both ways. The matter of custody is a complex issue and its one for the courts to decide. A person does not have to purse child support mother/father if they do not want to.

Should we make the father take custody of the child in all court cases to make it fair? no case is legally predictable. Its not based on gender who gets the child. Its based on income, level of support etc. There are several, several factors but a persons gender is not one of them.

No, it depends on who have the best lawyer. Atleast in the USA.

[Dezerte]

Pregnancy is by "unfair" by default, you can never claim equal rights when clearly one part has to put her body under much more duress. The rights should represent that.

Other than that, I don't know.

[Kasierith]

Not all of the cases it goes to the mother. I know of a situation personally where a woman gave birth to a child. Yet it was the Father who gained custody and it was the Mother forced to pay child support. It goes both ways. The matter of custody is a complex issue and its one for the courts to decide. A person does not have to purse child support mother/father if they do not want to.

The matter of custody is not complex at all. Because of societal trends and because of the strains of pregnancy, unless a woman is shown to be grossly negligent in her child care or the disparity in child-rearing capacity is extremely significant, the mother will gain custody of the child. Pretending like 16% balances out 84% is pretty far out there, though.

Should we make the father take custody of the child in all court cases to make it fair? no case is legally predictable. Its not based on gender who gets the child. Its based on income, level of support etc. There are several, several factors but a persons gender is not one of them.

Than explain the 84%.