I take this response to mean that you don’t have the coherant argument you seemed to want from others.
It might have wanted to read a couple of more posts before you accused a responsible working dad of bald faced female chauvinism. What a joke.
Not even close. Are you proposing forced abortions or the father’s legal right to tell his children to fuck off?
And the child’s rights trump both parents. What’s your point? Are you seriously suggesting that a man should be able to walk away from the responsibility of supporting his children? Are you suggesting that someone else should be responsible for 100% of that child’s support?
Men have rights. They have the right to be parents in every sense of the word. They have the right to NOT be parents, too. Condoms and vasectomy are available.
No, the child’s rights do not trump the mother’s rights. Pay attention, please. She can opt out of an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy, she can put the kid up for adoption, or she can simply abandon it within a certain timeframe. After that, the kid’s rights trump both parents. Yes, you’re a deadbeat if you don’t live up to your responsibilities as a parent at that point.
I’m all for condoms and vasectomies. But that simply isn’t the same as a woman’s right to opt out of parenthood after a “oops, I sure was drunk last night.” Why are men held more responsible than women? Isn’t that a bit chauvinistic? Misogynistic?
I frequently hear women say “the pill isn’t 100% effective. Condoms aren’t 100% effective.” Even vasectomies are sometimes ineffective. Pregnancies do occur despite a couple’s best efforts. Are you advocating complete abstinence? What a Christian attitude. Women can opt out of parenthood. Men cannot. Women can have all the sex they want and still maintain control over their reproduction. But you expect men to abstain from sex entirely. You claim men have equal rights here?
Biology works a a certain way and we as a society have to decide how to deal with that. Do you also advocates mens right to have a womb, carry and deliver the child? If you can work that out then maybe you have some legitimate and realistic point to make.
Do you read this stuff after you write it? Women can have all the sex they want and only have to deal with the triviality of an abortion or carrying a child to term for nine months and altering their body, and then signing some adoption papers. Those lucky selfish bitches.
Once again you’re just pissing about and have no real workable solution do you?
Nobody realistically expects men to abstain form sex entirely or women either for that matter. What is called for is workable solutions based on the real world and how our biology actually works.
In that dept. it appears you have nothing to offer.
Biological realities provide women with slightly more choices of what to do if there is a pregnancy. Women and men have the same choices for preventing pregnancy.
The only absolute way to not have a pregnancy, whether you are a man or a woman, is to not have sex with someone who is fertile. That’s it. Woman can’t do more than men to prevent pregnancy…either thay can not have sex or they can use the most reliable forms of birth control available. Same for men. Both parties take a risk of pregnancy when they chose to have sex.
Men should know that biology…not women, not laws…have rooked them slightly when it comes to the actual choices after a pregnancy results and take this into consideration. Just as women have to know that biology has rooked them by making them risk their lives by being pregnant, and making them by default the ones who pay the highest price for bringing a kid into the world.
Society looks upon women who abandon children much more harshly than it does on men, and men do the same thing every fucking day. Just walk out and never pay again, never see the kid again.
Before there was support enforcment, people could just walk away from their kids and it was tough shit for the parent who was left behind. If there is a kid, there should be support from both parents, end of story.
edit: what cosmosdan said.
The “child” isn’t a child until after it’s born. If a child is given up for adoption, chances are the woman wanted to opt out before that but was physically, religiously, or legally unable to.
Because of the physical realities of the situation. If men got pregnant, they’d have the same options. The rules are different because the physical reality is different.
I’m saying that you weigh your willingness to accept responsibility within the physical and legal ground rules. I’m not now, nor have I ever claimed to be a christian. I am 100% in favor of abortion rights for women (and I would make them considerably more liberal than they currently are in most states). Reproductive rights will NEVER be equal until men can become pregnant. How could they be?
My ex opted out of his parental rights. No one forced him to.
And God willing, there never will be. What a stupid idea.
Artificial wombs are on the horizon, but tying my argument to that just makes you sound kinda retarded. Thanks for playing though.
Actually, if men could carry their kid for 9 months, they’d probably be expected to suck it up and quit complaining about it. Men would be bragging about how it’s no big deal and they plopped it out in record time.
You think men don’t agonize over giving up their opportunity to be a parent? Wow. You hate men, don’t you? It puts all your diatribes in perspective.
Look, I’ve known women back in college and in the military who got pregnant and had to make the tough choice. I’m not ready to be a parent right now. I want to stay in school, advance in my career. It sucks, but that’s how it has to be. I’ll make a better parent later when I’ve made something of myself.
You’d deny men the same tough choice. You’d have them drop out of college and work at Quickie-mart for the next 18 years so they can do the manly thing and make that $125/month CS payment, or go to prison. Meanwhile, a woman gets to stay in college, get that biomedical technology degree and be the person who invents a workable artificial womb which would truly grant reproductive equality to the sexes.
As far as a man’s responsibility is concerned, it’s a child the moment sperm hits egg and creates a blastocyst.
It’s not a child to a woman, until it’s born, and she’s not really responsible for it until after her abandonment protection time period is up.
Heck, not only that but after it’s born, she can kill it and probably only get sentenced to “treatment.”
If men could get pregnant, as the old saying goes, abortion would be a sacrament by now.
But that’s simply a lie. The man’s repsonsibility, legally speaking, only begins when the child is born - in other words, when he actually has a child.
Which, interestingly enough, is pretty much the same for women.
Of course, that “moment” does not exist.
He can’t opt out at anytime. So, he doesn’t have to start paying until it’s born, but he was entered into a contract to pay if it is born, the moment it was conceived. As far as his obligations go, it’s a child until it’s not a child.
With women, it’s not a child until it is a child.
And here it is folks. The last feeble resort for those who have no real coherent argument but can’t admit it. Name calling rather than any meaningful response.
I’ve asked you repeatedly for any kind of workable real world solution. You’ve offered nothing because you’ve got nothing.
Again with some ridiculous baseless personal comment as as if it substitutes for a reasoned argument. It’s childish and transparent. I never suggested any such thing. You were the one that trivialized how easy a womans choices are. I know first hand how tough it is for men so you can drop that bullshit.
I love this tactic as well. Let’s offer some ridiculous exaggerated example.
You still haven’t offered anything. You keep saying men should have equal rights and apparently ignore the very real biological differences. What you’re being asked to do is think about these rights you support and offer some viable real world suggestion of exactly what you’re proposing. You haven’t done that have you. Is it because you can’t? Have you started to type something and you realize it doesn’t sound realistic so you reosrt to attacking others rather than just admitting it?
I’ll get you started.
OKay let’s say two bright college kids get drunk at a frat party and she gets pregnant with his baby.
What are the real world alternatives?
If she opts for abortion because she’s not ready to be a parent then they both continue on with their college education having made hard decision about the realities of life.
Do you think if the father wants to be a parent he should be able to legally force the girl to have the child? Is that equal rights?
Let’s say she decides to keep the child. Should the father have the right to force her to terminate the pregnancy if he’s not ready? If not then should she be solely responsible for the child’s support? Having made that decision should the child suffer and go without in order to ensure the father gets to continue on with his education and career hopes? Should the financial burden be passed on to other taxpayers?
Young single parents who are responsible for supporting a child have other options than Quickie Mart. Fairly often family will help with child care, housing, or other expenses so that they can still get their degree. They have to make sacrifices and their care free party on days might be curtailed but that’s reality not some oppressive burden. I imagine there are also federal and state programs available for young parents who still want to go to school. Stop the ridiculous exaggeration. People are suggesting that both men and women share in the responsibility of the child they created, even if it was an accident.
Regardless of all the rants about equal rights we need solutions that can work in the real world and be reasonably just to all parties involved.
All you’ve offered is insults and childish ranting. Got anything else?
Then tell us specifically how you propose he claim his right to opt out. What seems fair and reasonable to you concerning his rights and all concerned parties?
The woman makes the choice after conception because the baby grows in her body. That simple unavoidable biological fact tips the scales in her direction for those choices. It’s fair and reasonable based on biological reality. Thats why you haven’t been able to offer any kind of viable alternative.
If you have one spell it out. If you don’t stop wasting bandwidth with this junk.
Can you actually back up your argument with anything or can you just repeat it over and over and make snide remarks?
Wrong. It’s a child for both parties once it’s born. Both parties are responsible for the child. I don’t get why you can’t grasp that. The woman gets the option to abandon her rights to parenthood for a short time after the birth because she couldn’t do it earlier. On account of she was…you know…PREGNANT.
Just out of curiosity…are you behind on your child support payments?
I already said parents are responsible after the child is born and it’s past the abandonment protection period.
So, rationally, shouldn’t men get at least the same amount of time to decide to opt out of parenthood? Why does the time a woman’s PREGNANT mean she can’t decide, during that time, whether she wants to become a parent? Do women become brain-dead morons while pregnant? Odd. I’ve never observed that.
Women Dopers: Do you become brain-dead morons incapable of normal human thought while pregnant? Should we have pregnancy declared some sort of severe disability and have you hospitalized for your own good during pregnancy? Kalhoun seems to feel you’re incapable of making any decisions while you’re PREGNANT.
Nope.
Maybe she couldn’t for religious reasons.
Maybe she couldn’t for health reasons.
Maybe she wanted to keep the baby and then found out that the father didn’t want anything to do with it, and decided she couldn’t go it alone.
Maybe she lost her job but was too far along and couldn’t abort.
Maybe she considers abortion to be out of the question.
Maybe she chickened out.
Maybe she found out too late that the child would be born with physical or mental problems.
Oh…but those wouldn’t be “good” reasons as far as you’re concerned because you don’t want the baby and you want it to go away NOW! Tough shit. Then don’t play.
When he’s informed he’s fathered a child, he gets a reasonable amount of time to decide whether he’s ready to be a parent. Before the deadline, he can sign a form abdicating all parental rights and responsibilities.
He should have the right to choose not to be a parent during the same time period as a woman gets to make those choices.
A woman can’t get pregnant without a man’s sperm. That simple unavoidable biological fact tips the scales in his direction for these choices. See how this works?
Oh you keep saying I can’t offer this, can’t offer that. You just don’t read, or choose to ignore what I write.
If a woman opts out of parenthood, that’s her decision. If a man opts out of parenthood during the same timeframe, that should be his decision. If the woman wants to keep the kid, then I guess we’ve got a single parent thing going on here, don’t we? For heaven’s sake, single parenthood may not be the most ideal thing in the world but I was raised by a single mom who definitely made that choice. We were poor, but we weren’t on welfare.
You know what? If a woman chooses to abandon her kid but by some chance authorities find the father and let him know his kid has been abandoned, guess what? He maybe can keep his kid but the abandoning woman won’t be liable for child support. That’s how we work.
There are plenty of single women who visit sperm banks with the intention of becoming a single parent. Should they not? Does every parent really need a co-parent to pay their child’s bills? Why?
You talk about family support. Well, that’s something a person should take into consideration when deciding to become a single parent. There are tons of women who raise their kids with the help of family. It takes a village and all that. We’ve been doing it for millennia.
Back up my argument with what? If a woman came on here and said “women should have equal rights” would you keep repeating over and over, “do you have anything to back that up?” A call for equality shouldn’t need backing up, should it?
It’s somewhat irrelevant anyway. I didn’t come here to fight for mens’ rights so much as I wished to point out that the system is inherently unequal, and unfair and it’s silly to talk about it like it is somehow fair. Just accept that it’s unfair, then continue your rant about deadbeat [del]parents[/del] dads.
That sounds easy and just doesn’t it? What about the rights of the child that was born to be supported by the people who partnered in creating it. Who supports the child. Just the woman because she decided to keep it? What do you suppose would become of men’s moral compass if this became the law. Just screw anybody and everybody you want and if a child results you can just wash your hands of it and walk away. You can have ten kids out there and not support any of them because you have equal rights. How about the burden on society. I suppose we could as a culture draw a hard line and say, It’s your kid so it’s your problem. If your family won’t help that’s tough. No assistance for you.
We have to realistically place the responsibility of child care on someone. Our society and our legal system has decided that what seems just and reasonable is that in most cases the parents who contribute genetics. So far you haven’t shown me otherwise.
I see it’s not equal and this makes no sense. After conception it’s only the womans body who takes the medical risk and bears the physical burden. During that period there is no way to claim equal reproductive rights for men. Should they have equal rights to continue or terminate the pregnancy? How would that work?
The decision to have sex before conception is already equal. Either can choose to have sex or not and both can take steps to avoid pregnancy.
Once the baby is born it’s a person and someone has to bear the responsibility of it’s care. You seem to be suggesting that men should be free to just sign off on all responsibility for their choice to knowingly risk a pregnancy by having sex and say, “sorry girl, if you want it yu take care of it. Peace out.” I don’t see that has any chance of being a reasonable, just or responsible for our society. It strikes as placing an unequal portion of the responsibility of child rearing on the female and a free pass to young horny guys to behave recklessly.
I’m not ignoring anything. I asked you to think about the real life ramifications and the specifics of what you proposed. Was I asking too much. Finally in this post you’ve at least tried to offer a few details. Do you still see them as fair and workable?
So your Mom never got child support from your father? Do you mind if I ask why?
Yes women can survive without forced child support. Does it seem just to you for women and children to remain poor while men are free to just cast off any financial responsibility at will? Do you see that freedom of choice for men creating more or less of a burden for more women and society in general?
If I was going to suggest a change I’d say that if the bio dads income changes significantly it should be easier for courts to respond to this in a more reasonable time frame.
I’m honestly not familiar with
the laws concerning abandonment.
Nope. Should the child go without any extras and only have the very basic needs met while men get to go create a similar situation with someone else?
Women who go to a sperm bank to get pregnant have made a very conscious decision to try and get pregnant and are much more likely to have considered reasonable financial support. We’re talking about mothers who are abandoned by the father or who got pregnant accidentally. It isn’t a perfect system but I don’t find your proposal realistically workable
Thank God for that. I don’t think the village should pay while bio dad plays.
I’d ask for details the same as I’m asking you. Equal rights about what and how exactly does it work. Some things are more obvious than other but there are still details to discuss. In this case there are some very significant biological differences to consider so just an idealistic cry for reproductive equality requires more than a repetitive mantra
It sure is.
It’s true no system is perfect and problems occur. I don’t think it’s unfair for the reasons you’ve expressed
Over half? Mind if I ask, is that some sort of legal agreement with your child’s Mum? In the UK, if I stuck to my absolute obligations, I’d only have to hand over a bare 15%, less if my daughter stays with me overnight during the week. I’m working on the latter and her Mum has asked only for the bare minimum 15% from me to make it easier for me do this.