Make a stupid choice with a stupid person and you're surprised when stupidity ensues?

[Green Cymbeline]

Dear Facebook friend,

Today your status update said you are:

excited, I finally got a CHILD SUPPORT payment, 1st one in years, wow, for $10.96! LOL ya it's like why bother? I am sure it's only because he went to one of those Job force places that has labor jobs "as needed" and he did it enough to get some quick cash , and they had to take out $

Clearly your comment is designed to malign or embarrass your child's father and his deadbeatedness, but do you realize you are also embarrassing yourself by drawing attention to your terribly poor decision making skills?

You chose to let this apparently uneducated, chronically unemployed or underemployed man stick his dick in you and ejaculate, presumably while neither of you utilized birth control, and chose to bear his offspring. So why are you surprised when this loser doesn't make child support payments? Or do you want us to believe that, out of spite, he has remained unemployed or underemployed for the 13-some years since your child has been around just to avoid paying child support?

You chose to copulate and procreate with a man who, 13 years later, the only job he can get is a "labor job" through "job force," and you're surprised that you're only getting $10 and change after years of nothing? Certainly you should have caught on to the fact that this guy wasn't good "daddy" material when you opened your legs for him.

Yes the guy is a scumbag for not supporting his child. But he was probably a scumbag before he fathered your child. It's too bad you weren't more discerning about who you let impregnate you.

The same goes for your Facebook friends who added these comments:

I have a friend who's daughter is now 18, and her baby daddy hasn't paid in 15 yrs. He is in jail now, only out on work release until the back child support is paid. So he works during the day, and sleeps in the jail. He actually had the nerve to not want to pay because he says that the child is now 18. LOL, the judge said that he had 15yrs worth of paymentss to make before that issue can even be addressed. Don't give up, your child is entitled to it.

And...

that is more than the first one i got after several years....it was $1.82. Hope it gets better :-)

I am so sick of hearing you and many other women I know complain about how their "baby daddies" don't pay them enough child support. Are you really surprised? You knew the guy was a loser before you got knocked up, what made you think he would change and be able to produce the big bucks for you and your kid after the kid is born?

Yes your child is entitled to support from their father, but they are also entitled to being mothered by a person with a sense of responsibility and good judgment.

Sincerely,
Your friend nyctea scandiaca
Who has managed to make it to age 33 without bearing the illegitimate offspring of destitute losers through the use of modern birth control technology and good judgment

[ivn1188]

<popcorn>

[Green Cymbeline]

Originally Posted by ivn1188

<popcorn>

I know, right?

Enjoy the show!

[Eliahna]

Allow me to apologize for the way my poor life choice affects you. Clearly it's causing you distress. Next time I think about hooking up with a loser, I'll think of you and take a pass in case two forms of birth control* fail me again.

* - Ok, one form failed me (the condom). I failed the other, I screwed up the dose and didn't even realise for, oh, about four weeks, when I began to suspect that maybe something was going on.

[Green Cymbeline]

A related or maybe unrelated pondering...

Is evolution dead for the human race? In nature, you see countless examples of the male of the species putting on some sort of display of his worthiness in order to convince the female to mate with him. This is to demonstrate his superior genetic stock and in many cases his ability and willingness to provide for the offspring. Witness the many bird species whose males are brightly colored or marked and carry out elaborate mating displays in order to get a mate. Hopefully the female choses wisely because she needs the male to participate in the chicks' upbringing. It's beautiful to see how dedicated some of these male birds are to sharing parenting duties with the females.

Also true is that in other animal species, the male simply mates and then disappears, and the female does all the work in raising the offspring. But that's only in species who do not pair-bond. Aren't humans supposed to pair-bond? Or is this evolutionary trait dying off with the advent of modern society?

[Green Cymbeline]

Originally Posted by Cazzle

Allow me to apologize for the way my poor life choice affects you. Clearly it's causing you distress. Next time I think about hooking up with a loser, I'll think of you and take a pass in case two forms of birth control* fail me again.

* - Ok, one form failed me (the condom). I failed the other, I screwed up the dose and didn't even realise for, oh, about four weeks, when I began to suspect that maybe something was going on.

I know as well as anyone that birth control can fail. As I have said on this board before, I have had to have two abortions because I became pregnant while on the pill, despite taking it as directed.

People get to choose who they procreate with... and they have a measure of personal responsibility. It's annoying to me when I see women who act surprised when the losers they procreated with can't pay their child support, then bitch about it and act like pitiful victims.

[Green Cymbeline]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

It's annoying to me when I see women who act surprised when the losers they procreated with can't pay their child support, then bitch about it and act like pitiful victims.

Just to clarify: it's the children who are the victims. They got unlucky in the parent department - a father who can't support the child or himself, and a mother who chose such a father for her child.

[ToeJam]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

Aren't humans supposed to pair-bond? Or is this evolutionary trait dying off with the advent of modern society?

I don't think there's been many studies that say humans pair-bond actually. It's a strategy sure, but it's not a hardwired one into all humans I believe, so it's not something that we as a species tend to do. Though if you have a cite for that, i'd love to read more about it.

[torie]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

Just to clarify: it's the children who are the victims. They got unlucky in the parent department - a father who can't support the child or himself, and a mother who chose such a father for her child.

It may not have been the ideal choice, but you sound as though you are assuming that bad choice automatically makes them bad mothers. Maybe these women were irresponsible (or birth control failed) But then when they found a child was coming, they whipped into shape a bit, and are now failing to understand why the father couldn't do the same, if they managed it. Sometimes that happens.

Only you know whether or not that's the case with your friend. I don't know anything about her to determine whether she's otherwise a good mother. But again, I don't see why they lose their right to bitch. They have managed to step up and take some responsibility for the care of their child, whatever their circumstances were before. Why is it unreasonable that they should expect the same of the co-parent?

[Green Cymbeline]

Originally Posted by Ro0sh

I don't think there's been many studies that say humans pair-bond actually. It's a strategy sure, but it's not a hardwired one into all humans I believe, so it's not something that we as a species tend to do. Though if you have a cite for that, i'd love to read more about it.

Good question. From wiki:

Pair bond: In biology, a pair bond is the strong affinity that develops in some species between the males and or females in a pair, potentially leading to breeding. The term often implies either a lifelong socially monogamous relationship or a stage of mating interaction in socially monogamous species. It is sometimes used in reference to human relationships.

That description sounds like it matches the overwhelming majority of humans throughout recorded history, does it not?

Just as we describe certain species as pair-bonding due to observations of this behaviors, can't we generally describe humans as pair-bonding due to simple observations that the majority of humans have behaved in this manner for as long as we can remember?

I don't have a cite right now, although I will look for one. However, I would be interested to see a cite that says that humans DO NOT tend to pair-bond, as you say.

[Green Cymbeline]

Originally Posted by torie

It may not have been the ideal choice, but you sound as though you are assuming that bad choice automatically makes them bad mothers.

No, I don't automatically think that a woman who makes a child with less-than-desirable father material is a bad mother. She is just a woman who acted with poor judgment and made poor decisions. It's how she acts after the child is born, and how she raises him, that makes her a good or bad mother.

Originally Posted by torie

They have managed to step up and take some responsibility for the care of their child, whatever their circumstances were before. Why is it unreasonable that they should expect the same of the co-parent?

It may not be unreasonable for them to expect the father to provide support, but when you're dealing with a guy like the one in the OP, it's unrealistic.

The child in the OP is at least 13 or 14, and his mother is 34 or 35. And the kid's father is working odd unskilled labor jobs, and makes so little that his first child support payment in years is a mere $10. So what state do you think this man was in when he made the baby 13 years ago? I'm guessing he wasn't in college or starting a promising career. Yet she chose him to father her child anyway.

So for this woman to hold her deadbeat "baby daddy" up to ridicule while portraying herself as a victim actually results in the opposite of the desired outcome: it just highlights her poor choices.

[Green Cymbeline]

Also, to Ro0sh - maybe not a cite, but this post by JR Brown which says that "One of the primary evolutionary functions of sex is pair-bonding..." Reading that post may have been what got my mind on that tangent.

[Kimstu]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

So for this woman to hold her deadbeat "baby daddy" up to ridicule while portraying herself as a victim actually results in the opposite of the desired outcome: it just highlights her poor choices.

Well, that certainly wasn't my reaction to reading the Facebook remarks that you quoted. I was disgusted with the deadbeat father and sympathetic to the child and mother as victims of his irresponsibility, just as the mother presumably intended.

Even if she did, thirteen years ago, make a horrendously bad choice about a sex partner and/or screw up her birth control, I think she looks pretty good by comparison with the loser she's complaining about.

[Manda JO]

There's something frightfully archaic about the idea that once you've made your bed, you have to lie in it. This was the attitude that kept abuse and neglect secret and shameful. I can see how a particular person who never stops bitching about the consequences of a particular poor choice and who never sees that choice as having any role in their circumstances could be annoying--I work with a woman like that, and there are days when I want to pull my hair out in frustration rather than listen to another identical story about her life. But I think it's really inappropriate and unfair to generalize out to all women who ever complain at all about a sub-standard partner.

[SomeUserName]

Just because a parent is a deadbeat now does not mean they were always that way.

We were married and we had two kids. At the time he worked and took care of the house and the bills.

It was not until many years after the divorce that he became a deadbeat dad. Not all single parents that are not getting support made a stupid mistake with some loser a million years ago.

Many non-custodial parents think that since the child is not living with them that they don't have to pay or they refuse to pay because they hate the ex so bad they lose sight of the child.

Whether a mistake happened or it was a planned child, the fact is that the custodial parent is now raising the child on only half of the income it takes. I applaud all parents that are going though it or have been through it.

That Facebook comment to me was just a vent. I am sure there are times she gets frustrated. It is very hard to keep those sort of feelings away from the child so maybe she used Facebook to let off some steam.

[PunditLisa]

Stupid people abound.

You sleep with a loser and you shouldn't be surprised that he remains a loser after you bear his child.

And if you complicate your mistake by going on government assistance because you can't afford to raise your own child, then you involve me in your stupidity because money is taken away from feeding and educating my own children to feed and educate yours. And that is patently unfair. Hence the angst.

[Martiju]

Originally Posted by PunditLisa

And if you complicate your mistake by going on government assistance because you can't afford to raise your own child, then you involve me in your stupidity because money is taken away from feeding and educating my own children to feed and educate yours. And that is patently unfair. Hence the angst.

What a lovely sentiment. I think that we should instigate a rule with immediate effect that prevents some people from procreating because others don't wish to be in a society that supports the child.

Or perhaps form a colony somewhere else for all the people that don't understand what being in a civilised society means.

[Telperien]

Originally Posted by Martiju

What a lovely sentiment. I think that we should instigate a rule with immediate effect that prevents some people from procreating because others don't wish to be in a society that supports the child.

Or perhaps form a colony somewhere else for all the people that don't understand what being in a civilised society means.

Many Americans do not seem to agree with the rest of the Western world (or the rest of the world, period) on what constitutes a civilized society. I leave it as an exercise for the reader whether this is a good or bad thing.

[Mona Lisa Simpson]

For whatever reasons, I married someone because I loved his potential. His reality was a slow pathetic slide into alchoholism. Someone who feels like searching can find some of my stories of my marriage, and my separation. When my son was six months old. Alanon and a family friend showed me that the only change I could make was in myself. I decided I didn't want to live that way, not when I have the means to support myself very well. I left my husband, took my six month old baby and although the first few months had some rough spots I never looked back. He however moved to the other side of the country, and has not had a phone in his name in several years. His mother tells me he couch surfs, lives in residential hotels, and so forth. She sees him about once a year despite being in the same city. He has alienated friends and family.

I also chose not to persue child support. His attitude is people who work more than 30 hours a week are "chumps". I really am not interested in whatever government mandated child support a 30 hour a week worker making minimum wage can provide. I get flack for not persuing it... its my sons money and not mine to refuse.

By not persuing child support I eliminate one possible source of grief for myself, and an alchoholic who is prone to public scenes, and unable to follow through on his promises from my son's life. I'm lucky. I don't NEED his money. I don't whine about my ex, he has made his own choices and they are sad ones. I'm in contact with my ex mother in law because she is a) a nice lady, b) my son's grandmother c) a way my ex can make contact if he ever choses, and vice versa.

My son is a happy bright child who has never had a failed promise made by an alcoholic parent. (since six months of age...) He has loving grandparents, and a "step-dad" (not married but live in partner) who calls my boy "our boy". He is raised in a home where both parents work, and work hard, I have a full tiime job and my partner and I are starting a business (yes in this economy and its doing well by any measure of success) and any alcohol that is consumed is in moderation. He knows there are pictures of a certain man in his baby book, and that that person used to live with us, but "he made Mommy cry, and we used to fight alot, and then we decided not to live with the yelling anymore."

I too find public whining about child support or lack there of embarassing and sad. But my income is good, I can support myself. Others are not so lucky. Despite being a "heart NDP pinko," I have no illusion the world owes me a living, nor does the dead beat ex. Others aren't so lucky. So I pay my taxes, and vote for universal daycare, and donate clothes to women's shelters, and volunteer at food banks, I employ single mom's and let them flex their schedule for child care reasons... but I still feel the sentiments of some in this thread that think I should not have had my child.

Because I got involved with someone who has a disease and its made me a single mom.

[PunditLisa]

Originally Posted by Martiju

What a lovely sentiment. I think that we should instigate a rule with immediate effect that prevents some people from procreating because others don't wish to be in a society that supports the child.

Or perhaps form a colony somewhere else for all the people that don't understand what being in a civilised society means.

Please spare me the sanctimony. If you have a healthy mind and body, you should support yourself and your offspring. That is your duty as a member of a civilized society.

If you CHOOSE not to work to clothe and house yourself and your children, like the men in the OP, then you have earned the contempt of people who do.

I'd cheerfully voluntarily give up a portion my wages for people who have been shat on by life and are physically or mentally incapable of taking care of themselves. Or the good people who'd LOVE to work but can't find it.

But I'm justifiably angry that so many of the dollars that should be going to support truly needy people are being diverted to people who COULD work but choose not to. And there are plenty of them, including some relatives of mine. I'm especially angry when those men and women then create another generation for the already over-taxed workers to support. It's not fair and it's not ethical.

If that notion offends you, then so be it.

[PunditLisa]

Originally Posted by Juliefoolie

So I pay my taxes, and vote for universal daycare, and donate clothes to women's shelters, and volunteer at food banks, I employ single mom's and let them flex their schedule for child care reasons... but I still feel the sentiments of some in this thread that think I should not have had my child.

Any contempt I have is reserved for your ex-husband. He deserves it. You do not. In fact, you never did, because you didn't willfully marry a loser. That is different than meeting your husband in his current state (not working, living hand to mouth) and then creating a baby with him. I don't care how lonely you are; don't recklessly or willfully create babies if you can't care for them. Ethics 101.

You, on the other hand, are the model for decent and responsible behavior.

[HMS Irruncible]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

Also true is that in other animal species, the male simply mates and then disappears, and the female does all the work in raising the offspring. But that's only in species who do not pair-bond. Aren't humans supposed to pair-bond? Or is this evolutionary trait dying off with the advent of modern society?

Humans have the ability to pair-bond but no particular inclination to do so for a lifetime. Evolutionary psychology suggests that a part of our mating habits are the result of a continuing cognitive arms race between women, whose main strategy is the quality of resources devoted to raising her children, and men, whose main strategy is putting some resources toward siring a number of children. It's a continuous tug of war that has resulted in the semi-polygamous society we have today. I say polygamous because it is extremely common for one person, male or female, to have children with multiple partners nowadays. We don't call it polygamy or polyandry because we sprinkle the magic fairy dust of marriage and divorce over it, but Americans are just as polygamous as other cultures that they like to think are their inferiors.

[Broomstick]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

No, I don't automatically think that a woman who makes a child with less-than-desirable father material is a bad mother. She is just a woman who acted with poor judgment and made poor decisions.

You know, not every guy who is a loser is a loser all his life.

My mother-in-law married a guy who had a solid career in the military and was a good provider and father until the oldest kid was about 8, when daddy left the Marines and discovered the joys of pickling his brain cells in the local bars. After which he became a terrible drunk, an awful father, an abusive husband, and yes, a deadbeat. There was no way for my mother in law to know, at the time she married him, that 10 years into the marriage he'd opt for booze over all else. Looking at the man after he became a drunk you'd wonder why the woman picked such a piss-poor excuse of a human being to marry, but that would only be because you hadn't seen him when he was an upstanding citizen.

In other words, don't be too quite to attribute these situations to "poor judgment" on the part of the mother. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

[Anaamika]

Some people, like JulieFoolie, do indeed end up in a position they could not have forseen.

But we all know people who charge ahead, knocking over red flags left and right as they get into relationships, ignoring all of their friends and all well-meaning advice. They think they can change him - then they get pregnant, and suddenly he runs, and even though he showed every sign of being a terrible prospective father, suddenly they are SHOCKED, SHOCKED, I tell you, and he turns into the most horrible person. And they get hit over the head by every red flag on the way back out.

Yes, accidents happen, mistakes happen, but too often I see people deliberately putting their foot in the bear trap and then crying when it closes. And not just young people, either. There's something in the idea of "true love" that seems to make people crazy. I wish we'd do a little less romanticizing of relationships as a people, and try and teach a little more self-respect and value to both men and women.

[tdn]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

A related or maybe unrelated pondering...

Is evolution dead for the human race? In nature, you see countless examples of the male of the species putting on some sort of display of his worthiness in order to convince the female to mate with him.

I know, huh?

You'd almost think that women are hooking up with bad boys and other assholes. Inconceivable!

[WhyNot]

No. And fuck you, you sanctimonious bitch. You yourself had birth control failures and yet you "presume" that your "friend" (some friend you are!) didn't use any because she had a child?! Fuck you again.

Some of us were young and stupid. And some of us were indeed taken in by smooth talkers. And some of those smooth talkers have now CHOSEN to not work to spite their own children. Or they work illegally, for cash under the table, to spite their own children. Yes, they're assholes - but we couldn't really know they'd be assholes to their own children before they had any. We ARE victims - victims of men who promised us the world and then broke their word.

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

Good question. From wiki: Pair bond: In biology, a pair bond is the strong affinity that develops in some species between the males and or females in a pair, potentially leading to breeding. The term often implies either a lifelong socially monogamous relationship or a stage of mating interaction in socially monogamous species. It is sometimes used in reference to human relationships.
That description sounds like it matches the overwhelming majority of humans throughout recorded history, does it not?

Really? REALLY?! That matches exactly one couple I know - or did you not notice that the vast majority of people in history DATE and HAVE SEX with SEVERAL PEOPLE before they marry? Some even DIVORCE their spouses and have children with NEW ONES!

"Pair bond" means one sexual mate FOR LIFE. It's in your own quote. Humans are, at best, serial monogamists. Many, based on DNA tests of children and behavioral studies, are at best nominal monogamists - they promise and claim monogamy and then cheat.

I'm so fucking steamed right now I can barely put a post together, so you'll have to forgive me for not having a good wrap up here. I'm just so very disappointed that one of my favorite posters could have written these posts. Please, go back and think about what you're saying here.

[Kalhoun]

Originally Posted by Juliefoolie

For whatever reasons, I married someone because I loved his potential. His reality was a slow pathetic slide into alchoholism. Someone who feels like searching can find some of my stories of my marriage, and my separation. When my son was six months old. Alanon and a family friend showed me that the only change I could make was in myself. I decided I didn't want to live that way, not when I have the means to support myself very well. I left my husband, took my six month old baby and although the first few months had some rough spots I never looked back. He however moved to the other side of the country, and has not had a phone in his name in several years. His mother tells me he couch surfs, lives in residential hotels, and so forth. She sees him about once a year despite being in the same city. He has alienated friends and family.

I also chose not to persue child support. His attitude is people who work more than 30 hours a week are "chumps". I really am not interested in whatever government mandated child support a 30 hour a week worker making minimum wage can provide. I get flack for not persuing it... its my sons money and not mine to refuse.

By not persuing child support I eliminate one possible source of grief for myself, and an alchoholic who is prone to public scenes, and unable to follow through on his promises from my son's life. I'm lucky. I don't NEED his money. I don't whine about my ex, he has made his own choices and they are sad ones. I'm in contact with my ex mother in law because she is a) a nice lady, b) my son's grandmother c) a way my ex can make contact if he ever choses, and vice versa.

My son is a happy bright child who has never had a failed promise made by an alcoholic parent. (since six months of age...) He has loving grandparents, and a "step-dad" (not married but live in partner) who calls my boy "our boy". He is raised in a home where both parents work, and work hard, I have a full tiime job and my partner and I are starting a business (yes in this economy and its doing well by any measure of success) and any alcohol that is consumed is in moderation. He knows there are pictures of a certain man in his baby book, and that that person used to live with us, but "he made Mommy cry, and we used to fight alot, and then we decided not to live with the yelling anymore."

I too find public whining about child support or lack there of embarassing and sad. But my income is good, I can support myself. Others are not so lucky. Despite being a "heart NDP pinko," I have no illusion the world owes me a living, nor does the dead beat ex. Others aren't so lucky. So I pay my taxes, and vote for universal daycare, and donate clothes to women's shelters, and volunteer at food banks, I employ single mom's and let them flex their schedule for child care reasons... but I still feel the sentiments of some in this thread that think I should not have had my child.

Because I got involved with someone who has a disease and its made me a single mom.

This is pretty much how I felt about it. Pursuit of "next-to-nothing" would have done nothing in the way of improving my son's life. He was a little pissed off about it for a while, but I think he's beginning to see the light. Personally, I didn't want to be the one to put a non-earner in jail for not paying child support that he didn't have. By not pursuing it, my son couldn't be mad at me for putting his dad behind bars, and consequently eliminating any opportunity for him to pay support that he wasn't going to pay anyway.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by WhyNot

No. And fuck you, you sanctimonious bitch. You yourself had birth control failures and yet you "presume" that your "friend" (some friend you are!) didn't use any because she had a child?! Fuck you again.

Yeah, that pretty much covered it.

-RNATB, child of a not-deadbeat-but-not-exactly-responsible-dad and a phenomenal mother

[Mona Lisa Simpson]

The thing is, I don't self identify as "a model for decent and responsible behavior". I self identify as a single mom who hooked up with a person who already showed signs of being unstable and irresponsible. It got worse, but he wasn't Mr MBA from Queens University when we met.

I know its a rare* thing on this board, but I was raised in a Christian tradition... a very open minded and small-l liberal Christian tradition. "Whatever you do unto the least of these you also do unto Me." Or, for those of you who reject Christian teachings, "what comes around goes around." Or love your neighbour. Or it takes a village.. whatever...

I don't like public displays of poor-me-ism. But I don't like the idea that only people with "Good Jobs" are allowed to procreate either. Yes, people should get a clue that the couch surfing, heavy drinking, pot-smoking, bad boy is not going to magically change into Clifford Huxtable when the stick turns blue. I'm not in love with the third generation welfare families I see around me.

But people like Punditlisa and Nyctea advocate a slippery slope. So is it mandatory abortions for welfare cases or forcible adoption?



* I mean the small-l liberal Christian tradition is rare... Neither liberalism nor Christianity is rare...

[DianaG]

Hmm... here's a thought. Sometimes, I have sex with people based on my desire for sex. I am not choosing a suitable father and life-partner every time I have sex. And bless your heart if you've never had sex with someone who wouldn't make a suitable father and life-partner. Sounds a little dreary and joyless to me, but whatever makes you happy.

[Sitnam]

I don't know, it's possible to have made poor life decisions and still not shower everyone you know with baby momma drama.

[DianaG]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

Sincerely,
Your friend nyctea scandiaca
Who has managed to make it to age 33 without bearing the illegitimate offspring of destitute losers through the use of modern birth control technology and good judgment

By the way, is that sanctimony extra tasty with the cookie you seem to feel you deserve?

[Jimmy Joe Meager]

Originally Posted by Juliefoolie

So is it mandatory abortions for welfare cases or forcible adoption?

Give the mother the option of both, but if she doesn't choose then the default should be adoption. IMHO.

I you can't afford to raise babies, then you shouldn't be making them. I also thoroughly support long-term birth control options (Norplant? is there a long-term yet reversable option for men?) for all people, men and women, on welfare.

[HMS Irruncible]

Originally Posted by WhyNot

"Pair bond" means one sexual mate FOR LIFE. It's in your own quote. Humans are, at best, serial monogamists. Many, based on DNA tests of children and behavioral studies, are at best nominal monogamists - they promise and claim monogamy and then cheat.

Just so we're all talking about the same thing, I think the OP was using "pair bond" to mean "mate for life" just as you are, but that is only one kind of pair bonding. Serial monogamy is another kind of pair bonding. Getting married and divorced and hounding 5 baby daddies for child support, well, that's another kind of pair bonding. From the wikipedia quote, here's a variety of types of pair bonding:

* Short-term pair-bond: a transient mating or associations
* Long-term pair-bond: bonded for a significant portion of the life cycle of that pair
* Lifelong pair-bond: mated for the life of that pair
* Social pair-bond: attachments for territorial or social reasons, as in cuckold situations
* Clandestine pair-bond: quick extra-pair copulations
* Dynamic pair-bond: e.g. gibbon mating systems being analogous to "swingers"

Another error in that post... those elaborate displays of male bird plumage and song? Has nothing to do with pair bonding. That is purely a competitive display of genetic fitness to convince the female to provide sexual access. There are some edge case such as nest-building displays that show some fitness in the dimension of pair-bonding but these are not the most common situation.

And finally, another error. Those faithful birds that mate for life? Not so faithful for life, actually.

[DianaG]

Dammit, missed the edit window.

Originally Posted by Sitnam

I don't know, it's possible to have made poor life decisions and still not shower everyone you know with baby momma drama.

Of course it is. My daughter's father is a deadbeat and a loser, and I wasn't planning on reproducing with him, but sometimes when a mommy and a daddy get very drunk, and a mommy doesn't realize that her birth control is adversely affected by antibiotics... well, you know.

Thing is, since I KNEW he was a deadbeat and a loser, I simply disregarded him going forward. No contact, no drama, no harm, no foul. Never gave the man a thought for seventeen years, until he contacted my daughter via MySpace.

I'm not saying that posting bitchy facebook updates about it is okay. She should know better than to expect anything from him, and she should have known better at the time, and she made her choices, and she should quit her bitching.

But I'll eat my stylish-yet-affordable boots if nyctea scandiaca has never fucked a man she wouldn't necessarily want to marry and raise children with. And with her suggestion that the rest of us should feel bad about doing that, she can fuck right off.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Joe Meager

I you can't afford to raise babies, then you shouldn't be making them. I also thoroughly support long-term birth control options (Norplant? is there a long-term yet reversable option for men?) for all people, men and women, on welfare.

We could always go the Indian route of forcible sterilization. That worked well.

[Anaamika]

I don't really want to get into this argument, but there are distinct differences between, say,

1. People who are young, innocent, and naive, and have children out of wedlock, and then make the best of a bad situation,
2. People who have done this more than once, i.e., not learned from the previous situation,
3. People who do it despite every warning sign, out of some sort of misplaced belief that the person "loves them".

Etc.

And I don't think there's any harm in getting out one's feelings here and then still being able to respond nicely to the person. It gets difficult when day in day out the person is forever complaining about the injustice of all of the world, and basically claiming he tricked her and knocked her up, and when you realize it's her third kid achieved in the same way, and you hear the whining ALL DAY, you start to want to slap her.

Yes, I know someone just like this. And no, I don't advocate any laws for the government to be in the business of making babies or stopping babies or aborting babies - I just want more EDUCATION. Women should be aware of what having a baby entails, and having a baby shoudn't be made such a big deal of.

Dammit, it looks like I got into the argument anyway. Sigh.

[Beadalin]

The child in the OP is at least 13 or 14, and his mother is 34 or 35.

Which makes the mother somewhere around 20 when she got pregnant.

I know that a 20-year-old is a legal adult, but Christ, I was still in many ways a stupid kid at that age. Through a series of events I don't want to get into here, I've recently learned that I am STILL paying the price of having gotten involved with an asshole when I was 19 (I am now 33). My particular burden to bear isn't a kid, but I can see how it could have been. And I can see NOW what a fucking loser that guy was, but at the time, I couldn't. I didn't have the experience to have good judgment about relationships at that age.

Do you have sympathy for yourself at that age? Do you look back at yourself and think, "Yeah, I totally had all my shit together," or do you recognize that maybe you were still learning a lot about people and the world -- not to mention yourself -- then?

I agree that there are indeed people who see and even recognize red flags and barrel straight on anyway. But when those people are quite young adults, I allow that they may not have a clear enough sense of what they're doing. Sometimes they learn the hard way.

[Beadalin]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Joe Meager

I you can't afford to raise babies, then you shouldn't be making them.

And yet here in the real world, people's circumstances change. I may lose my job. I may get a much better paying one. Ditto that for my husband.

People may truly believe that having someone to love and love them unconditionally will make their life bearable.

And/or they believe that having a baby will create a permanent link to someone they would otherwise lose completely.

And/or their birth control failed and they can't handle an abortion. Or they decide to give up the baby to adoption but change their minds when the time comes.

Or any combination of factors that lead, down the road, to a single mother having the gall to complain every so often that their kid isn't getting supported.

You may not understand or condone any of those reasons, but I guarantee you, they're real and deeply felt by lots of people. And again I have to come back to this particular case, where the mother was 20 when she got pregnant. Frankly, I've known lots and lots of 20-year-olds who engage in magical thinking -- i.e., "It will all work out." It's not well-reasoned or even well-founded, but it FEELS true at that age. This mother is now older and possibly wiser (and maybe not wiser) but she's not out of line to want child support or to bitch about not getting it.

[WhyNot]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Relief

Just so we're all talking about the same thing, I think the OP was using "pair bond" to mean "mate for life" just as you are, but that is only one kind of pair bonding. Serial monogamy is another kind of pair bonding. Getting married and divorced and hounding 5 baby daddies for child support, well, that's another kind of pair bonding. From the wikipedia quote, here's a variety of types of pair bonding:

Yes, yes I know. I just didn't have the patience to point out errors in terminology when I knew what she meant. But thanks for having more presence of mind than I did.

And, FTR, I haven't even attempted to get child support in over 10 years, because A) the process was detrimental to my child and B) I knew when I chose to have the child that I was responsible for him should my partner get hit by a bus or otherwise remove himself from our lives. Mostly A. But that doesn't absolve him from being a shithead for not making payments voluntarily and it doesn't make me feel any better when someone on a message board tells me I'm not allowed to feel victimized by him - or to make a wry observation about the inadequacy of a $10 child support check - because I was stupid. Of course I'm supporting my kid. Doesn't mean life wouldn't be a hell of a lot more pleasant if I wasn't the only one of us doing so.

[Green Cymbeline]

Originally Posted by DianaG

But I'll eat my stylish-yet-affordable boots if nyctea scandiaca has never fucked a man she wouldn't necessarily want to marry and raise children with.

Unfortunately, yes, in my younger, college years, I have been with a few losers. But I did so knowing that I would be willing to do the responsible thing if I became pregnant, which I have indeed done (abortion). It's not fun, and it's not something to be proud of, but it's just a hard choice that some women have to make, and I am grateful that I have that choice.

Sex isn't just fun and games. Creating a new human being shouldn't be something that "just happens" because you got drunk and fucked someone. If you're willing to open your legs and let a guy ejaculate inside you, then you have to take responsibility for whatever comes of it, whether it be a pregnancy, an STD, or emotional entanglements. If you chose to go through with having the child, why are you surprised when your drunken lay turns out to be a deadbeat loser, and then you proceed to play the poor pitiful victim?

[DianaG]

You know, I'm as pro-choice as they come. I've had two abortions myself. And as mentioned, I'm not big with the bitching and moaning.

But if you think that actually makes you a better person than someone who chose to have a child and occasionally bitches about getting financially screwed...? That's just fucked up.

[Beadalin]

It's not fun, and it's not something to be proud of, but it's just a hard choice that some women have to make, and I am grateful that I have that choice.

I am gobsmacked that your own experience somehow made you more callous toward others facing the same choice, rather than less.

[WhyNot]

Originally Posted by Beadalin

I am gobsmacked that your own experience somehow made you more callous toward others facing the same choice, rather than less.

Well, apparently everyone who doesn't choose like her and who chooses not to play the silent martyr afterwards is stupid.

She made a choice. I made a stupid choice. Got it.

[Idle Thoughts]

Hmmm....makes me want to make sure I pick and choose a good status from now on so my Facebook friend nyctea scandiaca won't ever pit me over it.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by nyctea scandiaca

A related or maybe unrelated pondering...

Is evolution dead for the human race? In nature, you see countless examples of the male of the species putting on some sort of display of his worthiness in order to convince the female to mate with him. This is to demonstrate his superior genetic stock and in many cases his ability and willingness to provide for the offspring. Witness the many bird species whose males are brightly colored or marked and carry out elaborate mating displays in order to get a mate. Hopefully the female choses wisely because she needs the male to participate in the chicks' upbringing. It's beautiful to see how dedicated some of these male birds are to sharing parenting duties with the females.

Also true is that in other animal species, the male simply mates and then disappears, and the female does all the work in raising the offspring. But that's only in species who do not pair-bond. Aren't humans supposed to pair-bond? Or is this evolutionary trait dying off with the advent of modern society?

Whether fortunately or otherwise, no, it doesn't work that way.

Being the kind of imbecile who copulates with a loser who will never give her or the children he creates a second thought is a perfectly viable strategy from evolution's "point of view", if it induces her to have more children who reach viability than she otherwise would have done. Much the opposite, in fact - the responsible couple who only has two children that they can support themselves is at an evolutionary disadvantage compared with the woman who has three and lives on welfare all her life. Evolution "doesn't care" if you are happy or responsible - it cares only about market share.

To the extent that the choice of loser vs. family man is genetically influenced, those genes will be selected for. To the extent that it is culturally influenced, that cultural set will be selected for.

We no longer live in a hunter-gatherer society, and it is perfectly possible to raise a large family without a partner to assist. You don't live very well, but that doesn't make any difference, in the completely impersonal logic of evolution - as long as your children don't actually starve to death before they reproduce, the welfare queen is at an advantage over the rest of us (cereris paribus).

Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? That is a question raised by humans - the terms have no meaning applied to evolution.

Originally Posted by DianaG

Hmm... here's a thought. Sometimes, I have sex with people based on my desire for sex. I am not choosing a suitable father and life-partner every time I have sex.

Since (as you have discovered) birth control is not 100% reliable, yes you are. Whether you like it or not.

Regards,
Shodan

[Guinastasia]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Joe Meager

I you can't afford to raise babies, then you shouldn't be making them. I also thoroughly support long-term birth control options (Norplant? is there a long-term yet reversable option for men?) for all people, men and women, on welfare.

Go fuck yourself, you fucking prick.


I knew a girl in high school who was kind of a burn out, dated a loser, and got pregnant. THEN she turned HER life around, grew up, became a good mom, and a pretty mature person. The two of us became friends in college. Sadly, the kid's father was still a deadbeat loser.

According to the OP, she has no right to complain. People never change. They're supposed to suffer and be berated for something they did at FIFTEEN for the rest of their lives.

[DianaG]

Originally Posted by Shodan

Since (as you have discovered) birth control is not 100% reliable, yes you are. Whether you like it or not.

Actually, all that means is that I may get pregnant. And then I have several options as to what to do about that. Whether you like it or not.

[Manda JO]

Originally Posted by Anaamika

Some people, like JulieFoolie, do indeed end up in a position they could not have forseen.

But we all know people who charge ahead, knocking over red flags left and right as they get into relationships, ignoring all of their friends and all well-meaning advice. They think they can change him - then they get pregnant, and suddenly he runs, and even though he showed every sign of being a terrible prospective father, suddenly they are SHOCKED, SHOCKED, I tell you, and he turns into the most horrible person. And they get hit over the head by every red flag on the way back out.

Yes, accidents happen, mistakes happen, but too often I see people deliberately putting their foot in the bear trap and then crying when it closes. And not just young people, either. There's something in the idea of "true love" that seems to make people crazy. I wish we'd do a little less romanticizing of relationships as a people, and try and teach a little more self-respect and value to both men and women.

Of course we all know people like that. I work with a woman whose life has been one of perpetual misery for the entire seven years we've worked together, and in her mind not one thing she's done has been in any way ,shape, or form her fault--she just has terrible luck. I grind my teeth every day. Had the OP bitched about one particular person, with details about how that particular person is a whining puppy with no self-awareness of their own complicity in their drama, I don't think people would be upset--I think people would be lining up to tell their own stories. But generalizing it to everyone who has a less-than-stellar former partner is incredibly insulting and hurtful.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by DianaG

Actually, all that means is that I may get pregnant. And then I have several options as to what to do abou that. Whether you like it or not.

Absolutely. And if you don't avail yourself of those, then you have more children than you would otherwise have done. And therefore the strategy of reproducing with a loser is going to be selected for, and the strategy of not reproducing with a loser is going to be selected against.

Regards,
Shodan