User Tag List

First 2575115123124125126127135 Last

Results 1,241 to 1,250 of 1614

  1. #1241
    Senior Member ceecee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    8,344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    A friend of mine was granted full custody of the children. Money wasn't a problem. A man can easily get full custody when a mother is so self-involved she is pronounced unfit by a judge.
    My husband did. It wasn't that their mother wanted custody of them as much as she wanted to keep up the appearance of being mom. This was a pattern that showed in nearly all she did. When the rubber met the road, she didn't fight it. It wasn't even a money issue. When she realized she could blame the courts for giving the kids to their dad, instead of blaming her own poor parenting, she just transferred the blame. Problem solved.
    I like to rock n' roll all night and *part* of every day. I usually have errands... I can only rock from like 1-3.

  2. #1242
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    There probably is a history of failed attempts
    If you find them, let me know.

  3. #1243
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,693

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    Historicslly men never had to pay for child support either Today men are still expected to pay for child support and support their child. Women and feminists want to be independant and have the right to their kids and their bodies but still expect the government to enfore laws which enable them to do so at the expense of men.
    So historically, when nearly all women stayed home to keep house and care for children, their (presumably working) husbands did not pay for the upkeep of the children? Expecting men to support children financially is nothing new. They are simply expected to continue to do their share in the event of divorce. You are right in that, with more women in the workforce earning income, the financial burden on men is reduced. Assuming roughly equal salaries, both should contribute equally to financial support of children.

    Not sure what any of these financial issues have to do with women's right to their own bodies, unless you are assuming that women are somehow for sale in modern society.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    A friend of mine was granted full custody of the children. Money wasn't a problem. A man can easily get full custody when a mother is so self-involved she is pronounced unfit by a judge.
    Exactly. Same for mothers when the father is unfit/abusive. The presumption that the mother should have primary custody barring unfitness, however, is fortunately going away. Most divorced couples I know have joint custody of children, since both parents work and share child rearing.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  4. #1244
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Not sure what any of these financial issues have to do with women's right to their own bodies
    It's one of the major areas of the MRM: Somehow instead of the right to chose whether you are a parent or not, the "pro-choice" camp decided it is about a choice what about what a women gets to do with her body (But happen to only apply it to reproduction and not drugs or FDA regulations or euthanasia), and the choice on whether to be a parent or not is only a nice positive consequence. As a result, society is quite comfortable with forced fatherhood, financially or otherwise, the phenomena which probably explains a good portion of the "Deadbeat dads".

  5. #1245
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,693

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    It's one of the major areas of the MRM: Somehow instead of the right to chose whether you are a parent or not, the "pro-choice" camp decided it is about a choice what about what a women gets to do with her body (But happen to only apply it to reproduction and not drugs or FDA regulations or euthanasia), and the choice on whether to be a parent or not is only a nice positive consequence. As a result, society is quite comfortable with forced fatherhood, financially or otherwise, the phenomena which probably explains a good portion of the "Deadbeat dads".
    The pro-choice camp is specifically about reproduction because, unlike the other issues you mention*, the process of reproduction affects men and women quite differently. Men's bodies are involved in reproduction only during the act of sex. Assuming conception occurs, women's bodies are involved for the next 9 months. Since a man cannot be pregnant or give birth, "enforced fatherhood" involves the same kind of daily care and financial support of a child that mothers can also provide. Both mother and father can get out of these obligations by putting the child up for adoption, or if one-sided, relinquishing parental rights in favor of the other parent. Until a man can take over the jobs of pregancy and childbirth, however, this particular aspect of controlling one's body applies only to women.


    *Issues which have other "camps" promoting one solution or other
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  6. #1246
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Both mother and father can get out of these obligations by putting the child up for adoption, or if one-sided, relinquishing parental rights in favor of the other parent.
    Incorrect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    The pro-choice camp is specifically about reproduction because, unlike the other issues you mention*, the process of reproduction affects men and women quite differently.
    That was pretty much the point, but it seems you are missing the implication.

    They* are not inherently in favor of body rights in regards to any issue other then reproduction right, a.k.a the right to choose whether you want to become a parent or not, but they frame the issue of reproduction right as a right over your body precisely because it enables the discussion to center on the implied reproduction right on one gender only without extending it to include the rights over ones own reproduction to the other. It's a cop out that's neither here nor there.


    *I technically fall under "They" in this case, since I am in favor of legal abortions, but I am talking about the main narrative & rethorics used in that conflict, which I largely disagree with and view as awkward and intellectually lazy political spinning from both sides.

  7. #1247
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    So historically, when nearly all women stayed home to keep house and care for children, their (presumably working) husbands did not pay for the upkeep of the children? Expecting men to support children financially is nothing new. They are simply expected to continue to do their share in the event of divorce. You are right in that, with more women in the workforce earning income, the financial burden on men is reduced. Assuming roughly equal salaries, both should contribute equally to financial support of children.

    Not sure what any of these financial issues have to do with women's right to their own bodies, unless you are assuming that women are somehow for sale in modern society.
    The difference is that in the past men had a choice to stay with a women and support her and her child and he was rewarded for that. Today women don't have any real incentive to stay with a man they can easily have a child with him leave him and force him to pay for child support. There is a difference between having the freedom of choice to support a women and her child out of genuine love than being forced by the government to pay for her and her child. These issues have to do with the women's right to their bodies because there is a double standard in the legal system. Women want all the rights with the ability to have an abortion or have a child if they chose to, and they all the rights to acquire custody of the child but still expect the man to abide by whatever decision they make. If you want to have the right to your own body then you can't expect and forcefully make a man abide by your decisions pay for child support or a agree with your decision to have an abortion it's an infringement of human rights and a double standard.

  8. #1248
    not to be trusted miss fortune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Enneagram
    827 sp/so
    Posts
    19,988

    Default

    lol... this seems like a good time to bring up the man's list of "safe ways to have sex and look out for your money"

    - if she doesn't demand that you use a condom, don't stick it in... there may be diseases or children in your future!

    - if she keeps talking about having babies and you don't want any (or you don't want any with her) don't have sex with her

    - if you're going to whore around, consider getting a vasectomy and following up with the doctor to make sure that it took... then you can rest assured that you won't end up on maury

    and for her

    - don't trust him if he says that he's safe and won't knock you up... use a condom AND another form of birth control

    - babies will fuck up your body... do you like your body? look out for it and don't have babies

    - if he's not willing to marry you without you being knocked up, he probably doesn't care to support your children either... there's better ways to get a man that won't ruin your life. find someone who actually respects you for who you are, not what your uterus can do.
    “Oh, we're always alright. You remember that. We happen to other people.” -Terry Pratchett

  9. #1249
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,693

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    That was pretty much the point, but it seems you are missing the implication.

    They* are not inherently in favor of body rights in regards to any issue other then reproduction right, a.k.a the right to choose whether you want to become a parent or not, but they frame the issue of reproduction right as a right over your body precisely because it enables the discussion to center on the implied reproduction right on one gender only without extending it to include the rights over ones own reproduction to the other. It's a cop out that's neither here nor there.


    *I technically fall under "They" in this case, since I am in favor of legal abortions, but I am talking about the main narrative & rethorics used in that conflict, which I largely disagree with and view as awkward and intellectually lazy political spinning from both sides.
    It is you who are missing the point here, namely that only women undergo pregnancy, childbirth, and abortion. This is a very specific issue, related to but distinct from the broader issues of parental responsibility. You might as well criticise medical groups that promote pap smears for women because they are not tackling the issue of cancer screening or preventive checkups as they apply more broadly to the entire population.

    The choice of whether you want to become a parent happens, for both men and women, at the moment they have sex. Either they want, or at least are willing possibly to become a parent, or they take measures to prevent it. Assuming both choose not to conceive, any conception that follows is unintentional, a result of error or faulty birth control. This error lands disproportionately on women due simply to human biology. Legally, both mother and father have obligations to the child. Only the mother, however, is impacted in her physical body. Whether she chooses to bear the child and keep it, bear it and put it up for adoption, or have an abortion, her body is involved, and only she can decide what is best.

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    The difference is that in the past men had a choice to stay with a women and support her and her child and he was rewarded for that. Today women don't have any real incentive to stay with a man they can easily have a child with him leave him and force him to pay for child support. There is a difference between having the freedom of choice to support a women and her child out of genuine love than being forced by the government to pay for her and her child. These issues have to do with the women's right to their bodies because there is a double standard in the legal system. Women want all the rights with the ability to have an abortion or have a child if they chose to, and they all the rights to acquire custody of the child but still expect the man to abide by whatever decision they make. If you want to have the right to your own body then you can't expect and forcefully make a man abide by your decisions pay for child support or a agree with your decision to have an abortion it's an infringement of human rights and a double standard.
    That obligation to pay child support comes with rights to a relationship with the child, barring abuse on the part of the father or other mitigating circumstance. Some women won't even tell the man that they are expecting, simply because they don't want him in their life or the life of their child, even at the cost of the financial support. The odds of a woman wanting a man to stay with her and help raise the child go up significantly if they already have an established relationship.

    To echo what @whatever outlined quite nicely above: if a man doesn't have that kind of a relationship with a woman, pehaps he shouldn't be having sex with her. Or at least he should be VERY confident in his/their birth control measures.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  10. #1250
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    That obligation to pay child support comes with rights to a relationship with the child, barring abuse on the part of the father or other mitigating circumstance.
    No, when a man has a child with a women he is forced by law to pay for child support or he ends up in jail and heavily penalized and when he does pay for child support he only gets custody 10% of the time. If you call this rights I don't know what rights are sounds more like slavery to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Some women won't even tell the man that they are expecting, simply because they don't want him in their life or the life of their child, even at the cost of the financial support. The odds of a woman wanting a man to stay with her and help raise the child go up significantly if they already have an established relationship.
    It's not about a women wanting a man to stay with her or not it's about forced policies by the law, it really doesn't matter if a women wants the man in her life or not in the end he is going to be the one who gets screwed by the courts system regardless.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    To echo what @whatever outlined quite nicely above: if a man doesn't have that kind of a relationship with a woman, pehaps he shouldn't be having sex with her. Or at least he should be VERY confident in his/their birth control measures.
    Yes he should and if she doesn't want that type of relationship like you mentioned above then she should shouldn't be having sex either you know it goes both ways.

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts