If someone posted about female victims the way you are posting about male victims, they would be strung up. Disgusting.
absolutely !!
I’d like to put an end to this line of faulty reasoning right here. Fatherhood is not punishment. The victim can sue the rapist for financial damages if he feels like it. The idea that fatherhood is even mentioned in the same category of criminal punishment is absolutely absurd.
Fatherhood shouldn’t be punishment. But I’d imagine if a woman raped you and forced you into it, it would feel like it. Which is why I think the laws should be changed to accommodate for that.
People who have been raped should have the option to terminate parental rights without any hassle or prejudice, which would preclude the victims from paying support. Rapists should never be allowed custody, and should have to pay support if the victimized parent chooses to keep the child. If the victimized parent terminates their parental rights, the baby should be placed for adoption regardless of the rapist’s feelings on the matter.
There. A policy which is gender neutral, fair, and doesn’t involve mucking about with anyone’s genitals without their consent*. It isn’t cruel or unusual, and it doesn’t hurt the child. I say we all start to fight to make this the law. The current laws on rape are pretty messed up in a variety of ways, and it hurts men and women. They need to be fixed. But allowing male victims of female rape to have special rights over the female rapists’ reproductive organs is a step backwards, and it opens up all kinds of potential abuses. (google “reproductive coercion” if you want an idea of the kind of shit some people do)
*other than the initial rape, which is awful. But “eye-for-an-eye” has never been the policy, and it shouldn’t start to be now
Oh, yeah, allowing a rapist to raise your kid while you pay for it sounds just fucking delightful. Why would anyone have an issue with that?
You are beyond belief, you know that? Just… beyond belief.
- that was LITERALLY the first result from googling “male rape victims paying child support”. There were plenty more. It is rare, but this DOES happen. And yes, male rapists sometimes get visitation even if the kids is a result of rape. The laws are a fucking mess for everyone.
I wasn’t raped, twice, so I know what it feels like to raise two children. Sure, it can be a burden and a royal pain at times. It can be emotionally and physically draining. Despite all that it does not compare to being imprisoned or executed, and I lost none of my rights. Considering fatherhood to be punishment should not be the basis for making decisions about abortion law.
I did, 5th paragraph. Here, I’ll highlight it for you
I can even do one better, I’ll google it for you as well.
Section IV, fourth paragraph is where you want to go
To those who can’t bothered through the article, here was a nice summery. A man went to a party, passed out drunk, his brother put him to a bed, and he woke up with his pants missing. His brother’s testimony collaborated with his story.
The testimony of a friend of the female host also collaborated with his story. She testified that her friend (the rapist) bragged about having sex with a unconscious man, and it saved her a trip to the sperm bank.
The father had to pay for child support. The justification being that rape is a criminal matter, while child support is civil, ergo, a unrelated matter.
I’m not quite sure what you mean, allow me to elaborate. I used Esther M. v. Mary L. as a contrast to the previous case. Here, a female rape victim was not required to provide child support nor child care, because her child was the result of rape. No justification was given. It is from the same article link above, section 4, a couple of paragraph down.
I quite agree you with your point that child support is not a legal punishment, but I felt that delving too much into it might be too far a stray from the topic itself… a short one can’t be that bad :o
In short, I think the current child support laws (1) lend too much loopholes for fraud and rape (2) encourage conception of children who are the product of fraud and rape, (3) detrimental to the welfare of said children.
Of course, that’s based on the assumption that criminals don’t make the best parents. To illustrate, I think that children who are born for the sole purpose of, say, scoring more crystal meth for mommy and her boyfriends, would not have the best of upbringing.
Of course, there is this argument that “no matter how horrible their upbringing is, at least they are born”, but that’s another can of worm all together.
Perhaps you meant that you WERE, and not WEREN’T, raped, I thought so given the context, but it was a bit confusing the first few times that I read it.
I’m glad to hear that you do not regret raising two children who are the result of your rapes. But, whether I’m glad or not, and more importantly, whether you are glad or not, should not invalidate other rape victim’s right to decide on whether they wish to raise their child post rape.
Furthermore, your story is quite different from many cases that some folks (myself included) had listed earlier in the thread. You have have custodial right, and you get to raise your children.
A more relevant scenario would be… imagine that you didn’t get to keep the children resulting from your rape (whether by choice or by law), but you are still require to pay for child support to the person who raped you.
Moreover, I think it’s a bit of a stretch, to equate
“(1) forking out large chunk money to a criminal who did me harm, and (2) whether any of the money would be spent on the welfare of my child or not is entirely at the rapist’s discretion, (3) I could not/would not be part of said child’s life, either by law or by choice”
to
“parenthood”, is a bit of a stretch.
What I mean by “doesn’t fit the pattern” is, you provided four scenarios, two with case citations and the other two, the statutory rape ones, I don’t have any quibble with your conclusions on, so don’t feel the need to ask a specific cite.
Female statutorily rapes male: noncustodial parent pays child support (uncited, but no quibble, as I’ve read of such cases in the past.)
Male statutorily rapes female: noncustodial parent pays child support (again, uncited, but I don’t doubt it.)
Female “legitimately” rapes male: noncustodial parent pays child support (which you cited.)
Male “legitimately” rapes female: noncustodial parent doesn’t pay child support. (insert record scratch sound effect here.)
That’s what I mean by “doesn’t fit the pattern”. I haven’t read the whole case because I can’t find it anywhere, so I’m not sure what happened there, but it’s the only one in which the noncustodial parent, raped or not, isn’t ordered to pay child support.
If that were a widespread pattern - that women who were raped and are noncustodial parents are routinely excused from child support, while men who were raped and are noncustodial parents are not, then I’d agree we have an institutional problem with unequal protection under the law. But again, I can’t find that case, and it seems to be the same case referenced in the same language on many website - but none with more details than “a mother was relieved of her child support obligation because she was raped,” or “a female was excused from having to pay child support due to nonconsensual sex.)” or the more titillating, “ruled that a woman who was raped by her brother…” So I don’t know what the legal arguments were, the concurs, the dissents, was it appealed, what court did this… I don’t know if it’s a recurrent theme in law, but I suspect by the way it’s being used on websites that it’s an aberration, and that’s probably a good thing.
Were you able to find any other cases in which a noncustodial parent was excused from child support because she was raped? I think you need to find more than one to accuse the justice *system *of being “sexist” in this matter.
I was not raped, as I clearly stated. I have no idea what you are trying to say either. Children are not punishment. The idea that that children are punishment is the basis of anti-abortion laws to start with, that women should be punished for having sex. This concept is archaic, and wrong, and should be removed from the debate in all it’s forms.
Also, learn to read and comprehend.
All surgery is painful, let’s get that out of the way first. Now, let’s ask if all surgery on unconsenting patients are cruel. I think not, there are plenty of examples where, usually for the good of the patient, doctors would perform medical procedures on patients. Hell, we rescue people who try to commit suicide even if they’re on death row! How stupid is that? And abortion, while surgical in nature, doesn’t necessarily require any cutting or anything like that, so as far as medical procedures go, its on the lower end of the pain spectrum. Plus, its not like we’d do it when they’re awake, they can be fully sedated. Pain, therefore, is a red herring in this issue
Unwanted fatherhood most definitely is punishment. Also, fatherhood can also act as punishment if the father is reminded of his trauma for 18 years without a way to remove himself from that. Its great that some people would like children no matter how they were conceived. Not everyone is like that and that should be perfectly fine. I would totally consider fatherhood a punishment. I don’t like kids, don’t get along with them, don’t want them. If someone had my kid without my consent, I would be a terrible father, and resent both the kid and the mother for the rest of my life
What are you talking about! Ah yes female victims are never disparaged (tongue in cheek)
Jesus, stop with the personal attacks. You seem to think simplistically, only in black and white. Some of us see nuances. I checked with a friend who is a lawyer, and it varies from state to state. Since you feel so,passionate about it, tell us what you have done other than insult people on message boards.
[quote=“chris3g, post:167, topic:661755”]
I did, 5th paragraph. Here, I’ll highlight it for you
I can even do one better, I’ll google it for you as well.
Section IV, fourth paragraph is where you want to go
To those who can’t bothered through the article, here was a nice summery. A man went to a party, passed out drunk, his brother put him to a bed, and he woke up with his pants missing. His brother’s testimony collaborated with his story.
The testimony of a friend of the female host also collaborated with his story. She testified that her friend (the rapist) bragged about having sex with a unconscious man, and it saved her a trip to the sperm bank.
The father had to pay for child support. The justification being that rape is a criminal matter, while child support is civil, ergo, a unrelated matter.
The story you sent is about a man who didnt want a child. It was fraud not rape. I taughtd sex Ed for years in New York City and boys should be just as careful as girls. Girls get pregnant and have to suffer the consequences for not being careful and so do males.
That is immaterial. The women choose to have the children. The men did not have that option.
You, Prejteach2 are disparaging male victims in this thread. No one is talking about female victims, except for you, because apparently you think as long as women are being raped it’s ok if men are too. See, I think all rape is wrong. I guess that means I see things in “black and white”. You know what? I’m ok with that.
I think all rape is wrong. I’m an absolutest in that way. I own it.
As for “what I’ve done”? Well, I haven’t disparaged and dismissed rape victims. That’s a start, and it’s something you can’t say. Beyond that, I see no reason to defend myself against someone who isn’t even ready to admit all rape is wrong.
If a woman was passed out drunk and a man had sex with her it would be rape. Why is it only “fraud” if a woman does it to a man? Why are you so quick to dismiss male victims? Seriously, what is wrong with you?
And, you “taughtd” sex ed? You are trying to claim that you-- a person who is incapable of spelling, punctuation, or quoting on a message board-- taught in a school? To human children??
God help us.
But since this surgery would not be for the good of the patient, it would not only be illegal, it would also violate the physician’s code of ethics to perform it. Your proposition is completely unallowable under both American law and professional medical guidelines.
Great Job!
[quote=“Prejteach2, post:174, topic:661755”]
Dear Prejteach.
Please go away.
Yours always,
colander
The article I “sent” contains many, not one, many stories. The fraud case was in section I.
Which is why I specified “Section IV, fourth paragraph is where you want to go” in my reply to you.
And that’s also why I provide the case number (S.F. v. ex rel. T.M., 695 So.2d 1186) in my original post, BEFORE you asked me to cite it.
I do agree whole-heartedly with you that boys should be just as careful as girls concerning pregnency.
My apologies, I thought you were presenting a relevant personal story to the topic at hand, and the first line in my reply to should reflected that I thought you made a typo.
Sorry, I did read and tried to understand your post, several time in fact, but I was under the faulty assumption that it was relevant. Your lengthy anecdotal story was irrelevant to the topic at hand. (You raised children that you wanted and consented to have, the victim did not on both counts).