andymurph64, what decade do you live in?

Your post in this thread sounds like something out of the Victorian era. Getting a girl knocked up shouldn’t ruin a promising young man’s life, is that what you’re saying?


So because it’s difficult, he shouldn’t even try?


This 18yo guy has a moral responsibility to help the 18yo girl’s life be less ruined than it would be if he just took off and gave her no financial assistance at all. Not to mention a responsibility to the kid, financially and emotionally.

Right; we can’t let these little bitches ruin our son’s lives. Especially the ones who are told “Put out or I’ll hurt you.” Thieving sluts.


Which impacts would be made by someone else’s son. You mean to tell me that if your teenage daughter got pregnant, you wouldn’t wonder who gave him so much freedom and taught him so little responsibility? You’d agree with him that his life shouldn’t be impacted by paying to support your grandchild?


Well, good for him.

I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt that if your son got someone pregnant, you wouldn’t object to his trying to support the child and mother. But you seem to be way too okay with this “too bad, so sad” attitude.

Truthfully, I had to wait until my hands stopped shaking in order to post this. I am sick and tired of the attitude that males cannot, and should not be expected to, control their sexual urges, that what happens, happens, be it rape, teenage pregnancy, infidelity, whatever, and women simply have to batten down the hatches.

If a man, of any age, takes action that results in a pregnancy, that is not a mistake that he can walk away from. Teenage guys need to be taught about sexual responsibility. Which includes abstinence. They need to be monitored by their parents just as much as girls do, not sent blithely on their way to screw around to their heart’s content, with the failsafe that “He’ll only have to pay until he’s 18.”

So the teen mom is “stuck” with the baby, or at least the trauma and financial burden of abortion or adopting out. She still didn’t get herself pregnant. It happened because someone couldn’t keep it in his pants, or at least use a condom. Regardless of what the law says, if he walks away from the results of that lapse, he is a scumbag.

(No, I am not calling you a scumbag.)

Careful, that seems to suggest that she has no responsibilty for her situation.

Did we read the same thread?

To my eye, it looked like andymurph was expressing REGRET that young women often pay a higher price for falling pregnant than the young man equally responsible for said pregancy. He didn’t appear – to me, at least – to be saying young men SHOULDN’T share responsibility.

Then again, I’m not filled with self-righteous rage, so what do I know?

Not only is the OP reading way much into what andy wrote but, based on my observations, he’s right.

Just saw this.

Jervoise and JuanitaTech have it correct.

I am stating fact as I see it. I have known many people to which this has happened. It is the way it is.

Also, I do feel regret at the way it is. It is completely wrong. The ‘boy’ should share and be held to equal responsibility. However, they rarely are. This also applies to parents of these ‘parents’. The parents of the girl (if they care) are on the hook for much $$$ and time. The parents of the boy are scott free.

Many times I post ‘dry’ and do not express emotion at the wrongness of it. However, I’ve been through much in my life and suffered many, many issues of unfairness that I do not even think in those terms much anymore. If I did I would probably go mad.

All right. It just didn’t come off quite that way, when you said “as it should be, IMO.”


Well, since I still have my soapbox out, allow me to say this.

If the parents of a daughter have to be constantly mindful of the possibility of her getting pregnant, the parents of a son should be equally mindful of the possibility of his contributing to a pregnancy. (Okay, spooje?) If your (hypothetical you!) son has a sexual experience that results in pregnancy, well, that’s someone else’s daughter it’s happening to.

Also, serious question now. Where do you live, that boys always get off scot free? I’ve known guys, I’ve worked alongside guys, who were supporting their child, whether or not they were married to the mother. I had a co-worker once who would use his lunch hour every payday to cash his check so he could make his CS payment. When I went to “secretarial” school, one of my classmates was 18 and married, and his pregnant wife joined us at lunchtime more than once. Not every teen dad is a deadbeat.


Okay; I’ll chalk up my misinterpretation to that. I’m sorry, but it really did sound like you linked the ease with which a male can shirk responsibility, to a relative lack of need to teach sons sexual responsibility.

Actually, part of the reason your post upset me is that it was a response to another poster who testified that “daughters get the book thrown at them” if they put a toe out of line. You were so quick and smooth to come back with “But girls can get pregnant”, it just seemed like you were saying, “Lock your daughter in a tower, to keep her safe from boys like your son.”

I know life can’t be 100% fair. But there are a lot of situations in which boys get off easy, and they don’t all have to do with sex, or driving/car ownership, as in the linked thread. Girls have to do dishes, for instance, while boys can leave their plate in the living room and forget about it. Girls have to dress up and SAAN and serve the tea for company; boys can get away with slouching through the room and mumbling “h’lo”, because it’s not worth the trouble to teach them manners. Perhaps in your household, daughter has a strict curfew for the purpose of keeping her chaste. But in many families, it’s simply a lack of respect for females.


I’ve suffered unfairness too. In high school, I wasn’t allowed to get a license, let alone a car, because my sister got pregnant. I wasn’t allowed to get a job, because that’s where she met her baby’s father. I wasn’t allowed to go to the skating rink, because I might talk to a boy, and he might ask me out, and he might not even be white and Christian! (At least Niece’s dad was both those things!) I really don’t think treating me like a whore, based on nothing I myself had done, was the best policy.

The way I read it was that what andymurph64 was agreeing with is that a parent’s legal obligations end when the child turns 18, not with the fact the boys are often held less accountable.

Rilch hon, I didn’t read through the thread that you linked to in the OP, but from what I can tell you’ve got a lot of issues regarding gender expectations and the way you feel the world is set up. If I’ve misread this I apologize sincerely.

Girls don’t have to do dishes, and they don’t have to dress up, or anything else listed in your example above. If you honestly think that we’re pigeonholed into only those roles, then I’m very sorry. If a woman chooses to do those things then great. But there is no eternal rulebook that says guys can’t do dishes. If you don’t like doing dishes but never speak up and tell your guy that you want him to help you out now and again, then you really can’t complain.

What I saw of Andymurph’s post was that (s)he was expressing more or less a cool sort of cynicism about the way things are, a detatched view. I think this view was spot-on, as well.

Yes, it sucks because women do have a lot more to lose when it comes to teen pregnancy. That’s not to say that it’s right, or fair, but life is not fair. I think that’s the underlying point.

Yes, I agree that the parents of the boy (need different term – parents of underage father?) legal obligations should end when the boy turns 18.

The must end sometime and 18 is when the boy is legally an adult. I disagree with the attitude that parents of adult children should legally be held liable for their adult children’s obligations. So, if a boy gets a girl pregnant when the boy is 17 years 3 months, then I would favor forcing the parents of the boy to pay support for their grandchild. When the boy/father turns 18, their legal obligation should end.

Their moral obligation is another story. An 18 year old boy/father will seldom be in a position to support himself let alone anyone else. I’m not saying he shouldn’t try but to expect him to support himself and the child is in nearly all cases unrealistic. This means the burden falls on the girl/mother and her family. At least from what I’ve seen. Also, from what I’ve seen, the boy/father’s parents are seldom willing to REALLY help. They might throw $100 here and there and puff out their chests about it but it is a pitiful amount to support a child.
Next, I am a big ‘fan’ of economics. I believe that much of human behavior can be explained by economics. This means that I believe and what I’ve experienced is that since parents of boys experience much less economic risk of letting their boys run free that they will be more inclined to let them do so. Parents of girls run a large economic risk (unless they are willing to kick her and her child out at 18) that they will tend to keep tighter rein on their daughters. Unfair? Yes. Reality? Yes.

Also, not every teen dad is a deadbeat, but many are. Even if they don’t want to be, viable paying jobs are rare for 18 year olds. Even if they don’t want to be, it would be hard to support themselves and pay child support. Marriage? I would like to see that! Makes me wonder why I don’t. IME, marriage doesn’t seem to come up for underage pregnant girls.

Sounds like you were kept under very close wraps as a child because of your older sister. Don’t be too hard on your parents. Yes what they did sucked and hurt you but they wanted to protect themselves economically and also protect your quality of life. Having kids while you were underage would have limited your options and lowered your quality of life (most likely). They didn’t want that.

Also, don’t think that they were thinking the threat was larger than it really is. I don’t know the stats but IME a significant % of girls get pregnant as teens. I also keep hearing a stat that about half of single mothers on welfare are under 21. It wouldn’t surprise me to hear that 1 out 10 or even 1 out of 8 girls gets pregnant as a teen. Since it already happened once to your parents, I can understand the way they reacted. Agree, no but understand.


I can’t resist…

To bring it back to the original thread…

Looking at Rilchiam’s posts and seeing how bitter she is today about this issue…

16 year old boys (and girls :wink: ) NEED a car! :wink:

Duh! :wink:


Well, my parents did put a lot of pressure on me to be Perfect Daughter. I didn’t have brothers, so I don’t know if they would have expected less of a son, but it was like that across the board for the daughters in my extended family, and I did notice my male cousins exhibiting more insolence, more self-centeredness, and less responsibility. One aunt in particular was in the habit of rolling her eyes at her youngest son’s moodiness and saying, “Oh, what am I gonna do with him!” (Nothing, as far as I can see. And he’s still a waiter/actor, with almost no credentials on the right-hand side.) I also know women who were pushed around by their brothers, and definitely less favored by their parents.

I don’t have issues with Mr. Rilch. He does do an equal share of the housework. In fact, he does the dusting simply because he knows I hate it! But just because I have it okay now doesn’t mean I’m going to turn a blind eye to iniquity in other families.

Yeah, but there are other options. One’s very expensive, but carries much more certainty that the child will not be raised in poverty. The other is a dirty word to some people, but it’s a one-time cost that shouldn’t send either family to the poorhouse.


But again I say, it’s not just a matter of which family has to pay. If you let your son “run free”, and he gets someone else’s daughter pregnant, well, don’t you think her parents feel the same way you would if it was your daughter? Why would you let your son take the risk of ruining someone else’s life?

Let me ask you this, seriously, and I’m not spoiling for a fight. Suppose you let your son “run free”, and one night you got a call saying that he’d vandalized someone else’s garden. Really messed up their landscaping, that they spent years cultivating, and the way he left it, they would never be able to replant. Now, suppose that there were absolutely no legal or economic repercussions for you or him. Would you still question the wisdom of having given him so few restrictions? I mean, whether or not you have to pay, something to which someone else devoted years of care and work has been destroyed. Should you have kept a tighter rein on your son? Or is it the neighbor’s fault for not putting up an electric fence?


Well, I knew that, too. But part of what offended me was my mom’s assumption that I was incapable of understanding the flow chart of unprotected sex > swelling belly > baby > life of poverty. I didn’t need constant reminders. I was capable of saying no. I did say no, more that once, to some of those “nice Italian boys” they vetted for me*. This was partly a wish not to be used, but I also had seen what it was like for my sister, and I came to the conclusion all on my own that I didn’t want that to happen to me. I think I could have gotten a job and still held to that principle.

*I kind of lucked out, junior year, and met that one teenage guy in 10,000 who actually wanted to wait until marriage! But I wasn’t about to admit that to my mom. She would have laughed for days.

Bumping this in case andymurph only reads at work…


I looked at your last, longer post and do not see how I can respond without basically repeating what I’ve said before (which is something I do too much of as it is :wink: )

To address your specific example, if I had a son I allowed a good degree of freedom and he vandalized something then I would restrict his freedom.

However, to get back to pregnancy, a daughter getting pregnant is much different than disciplining a vandalizing boy. One is very expensive and disruptive, the other is shorter lived and carries a one time financail burden (or none if I use your example directly). Even the victim (the person vandalized) suffers but not like a pregnant-under age daughter would.

Oh, so there are degrees of selfishness in your worldview. That’s great.

So you’d punish your son after the fact. That’s also great. How about teaching him, in the first place, something about property rights and other people’s rights in general, and that it’s not all about him?

Since you claim that you can’t respond to my post without repeating yourself, I’m going to assume that you simply don’t care if someone else’s daughter gets pregnant. As long as your son’s freedom is not restricted, everything’s AOK. So let’s all lock our daughters in a tower so they won’t run afoul of spoiled little emperors who don’t have to be home at a certain time, and have never heard the word “no” and aren’t going to tolerate it from some girl.

And what kills me is, you don’t even seem to take into consideration the fact that a teen girl’s life does not necessarily revolve around boys. Does every teen boy devote every waking moment to finding some pussy? No, they play sports and work on their cars and play video games and just hang out with other guys. All those things can, and often are, done away from home, and take time.

But if a girl is away from home, there’s no way that she’s thrift-store hopping, participating in an RPG, or practicing with a band, or just hanging out with other girls. No, she’s just gonna find the nearest boy and fling herself into his arms. Secure, of course, in the knowledge that all males are knights in shining armor like her Daddy.

You seem to be confusing my personal beliefs with how I believe the world works. They are not the same. Not even close. It appears you are trying to convince me to be on your side. Believe it or not, I am.

However, no matter how fervently you believe something, it doesn’t really matter to others. You and I can wish all we like that what I said isn’t true but to someone in that situation…the world is what the world is.

Now, a person can choose to fight it, and that would be noble.

However, in this particular issue, I am not willing to devote all the time, heartache, money and energy trying to convince people that the world should be changed so that underage daughters getting pregnant will suffer no more consequences than the underage boy getting her pregnant It just is another in the long list of injustices of the world.

There are areas where I do fight what I think are injustices and am active. This particular issue isn’t special enough for me to try to change since I have limited time and energy and I am unwilling to give up current activities and substitute this one.

However, it seems special to you. Do you volunteer for groups and organizations to fight this? There must be some. If not, are you willing to invest the time, energy, money, emotional balance etc. to start one or rejuvenate one?

andy, I’m not sure you’re reading my posts for content. I am not talking about the disparity in male/female responsibility after a pregnancy has occurred. I am talking about what seems to be your choice of across-the-board restriction for girls in order to prevent teen pregnancy.

Boys and girls need sex education that goes further than “sperm meets the egg”. They both need to be taught responsibility. They both need to be taught that no means no. Seems to me that this whole “girls can’t go out because they might get pregnant” is a convenient way for parents to avoid communicating with their kids.

If you restrict your daughter’s activities because she might end up having sex, you’re also restricting her from a lot of other, positive, growth experiences. Why punish her because there are boys out there, some boys, who won’t take no for an answer? Help her build confidence in herself, and she’ll be much less likely to find herself cornered, and more able to say “no” and back it up. Do you really want a little maiden sitting at home with her ankles crossed, embroidering and waiting for Prince Charming to ride up on that white horse?

And in the meantime, don’t let your sons run wild doing whatever they want! You just don’t seem to see the connection here. Girls don’t get themselves pregnant. The threat is boys who are under no obligation to account for their whereabouts, or their actions in general.