Three Times the Lady, Once Times the Whore
Myself and every other man on Earth have been saying it for years: alimony is fucked — and it’s extremely sexist.
But wait, what about this?
Did you know you’re liable for child support if you knock some slut up who lies about being on the pill and then doesn’t want to have an abortion because of some ridiculous shit like she suddenly has “principles” or because her mother didn’t abort her? Well you are liable for that cash cow and it’s the biggest croc of shit and injustice that could ever be imagined.
First of all, honey, you don’t do everything your mother does because you don’t swallow. And secondly, where were all these magic, money-sucking principles while you were on your back enjoying the greatest hour and a half of your life? Perhaps you were praying to a different, more easy-going God at that point — or maybe God was half as drunk as you and not paying attention. I doubt it.
Thanks to American Superman Matt Dubay, the black hole of injustice feminist blowhards and the dumbest women on Earth call “taking responsibility” will soon be put straight — as straight as a shotgun or a bunch of cowboys or every single picture frame that any man has ever hung anywhere. Men are master hangers, whereas women are merely masters at hanging onto a free ride.
A lawsuit, rightly dubbed, “Roe vs. Wade for Men”, has been filed by Mr. Dubay and the Nation Center for Men, which seeks the obvious:
Women and Child Support: Fuck You!
Whatever you think about abortion, in America it’s not illegal when it’s not illegal and that’s the bottom line — or the Man Line because that’s the line we men walk at all times. You know what else isn’t illegal in America (at least at the moment)? Eating a Snickers bar. If someone offers you a Snickers bar and you don’t want it, and then they turn out to win like a plasma TV or some jet skis in the wrapper, you’re not entitled to shit! Abortions are exactly the same.
Roe v. Wade for Men claims that since men have absolutely no choice in deciding whether a fetus is unconceived (aborted) or given up for adoption after birth, they have no legal responsibility to pay for the goddamn thing.
Is this Law for the Retarded: 101? Of fucking course that’s true. Look, here’s how the court proceedings will go:
“Have you motherfuckers ever heard of No Taxation Without Representation!?”
No, I’m joking. You can’t say motherfuckers in court.
“Your honor, guess what. If you go rent a car and opt not to tell them you’re blind, you can’t go wrecking around town like a carom and then drop a damage bill off at the car rental place with their newly renovated Renault Peugeot that now has two missing wheels and new fucking Delorean doors. It’s not their problem. It’s yours. Case closed.”
The Honorary Man of the Month for March is Matt Dubay’s lying slut of an ex-girlfriend — we’ll call her Slutarella; who is about to be thrown under the proverbial bus of her fucking lifetime in the name of men’s rights. Not equality for men man-mind you, but men’s rights. Men seeking equality is like Robert De Niro auditioning for a Star Wars film.
It’s beneath him.
Related Articles:
March 13th, 2006 at 8:21 am - IP Man-Hash: 340da95569b9b
You’re fucked. For point 1, women will still have the option of abortion, but the man can have a say in the matter this way. She still has her options, but now he has some of his, and you just don’t seem to grasp that.
And for your number 2, it’s fairly simple. If you don’t want to have a child with that person, or really care anything about them, don’t sleep with them. I don’t see how that’s that big of an issue with you. If you aren’t ready for a child, then don’t sleep around. Also, if abortion isn’t an option in that case, then neither is the ability to get out of child support, shit head. Do you even grasp the idea? Because I don’t think you’re really getting it.
March 13th, 2006 at 8:28 am - IP Man-Hash: 340da95569b9b
You said something like “unintended pregnancy, should’ve worn a condom dickhead” Now apply that to a woman going to get an abortion. She doesn’t want a child, yet she had unprotected sex anyway. Kind of irresponsible. Actually, that’s pretty irresponsible. Ok, so she fucked up, so she gets an abortion. Now a man in the same boat, (where abortion is legal, just so you don’t get too confused) doens’t want his life irreparably damaged for the next 18 years. So, he declines fatherhood, just as the woman can decline motherhood. Simple, right?
March 13th, 2006 at 1:36 pm - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
When I said, you’ve just made that illegal I was referring to Joeshmoes hypothetical example where he would have abortion eradicated. I was not implying or saying that it was actually illegal in your country.
wolfe, I did not say declining financial responsibility for something you contributed to creating should never be an option. Dick editted my post after I made it, to include that in the quote. Not my words. Now, are you questioning my moral position and whether it is consistent or not?
Ripper, no I’m getting it all right. Sex isn’t just for procreative purposes either you know. It can actually be quite enjoyable. You might find that out one sunny day. Women also fall pregnant for a variety of reasons, of which, not being on the Pill or the man refusing to wear a condom, or surreptiously removing it during sex, are bar a few. Other reasons include, she may be allergic to the pill, she may be raped, she may require one if complications would be be known to result if she went full term and delivered, she may have had an adulterous affair and know that her spouse is not the father of the child. Etc, etc. Simply, if a baby isn’t wanted, it is cruel to have it.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:39 pm - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
Yet he still left the birth control responsibility solely to her. What a dickhead.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:44 pm - IP Man-Hash: f3ae1ac46a2e3
How many seatbelts do you need, Female?
-Dick
March 13th, 2006 at 1:49 pm - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
what? that’s a little too cryptic, you might want to tone it down a bit.
March 13th, 2006 at 1:53 pm - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
Ahem. It seems I did say that. And I meant it too.
March 13th, 2006 at 2:02 pm - IP Man-Hash: 340da95569b9b
Yeah, really. He leaves the birth control up to her and she fucks it up, what a surprise.
Anyway, “she may require one if complications would be be known to result if she went full term and delivered”, you do know that an abortion in that case is always there, right? That’s not even debated.
“she may have had an adulterous affair ” Well, that wasn’t very smart of her, was it?
“Simply, if a baby isn’t wanted, it is cruel to have it.” Yes, killing it is so much more humane. I know, let’s go out and kill all the homeless while we’re at it. Nobody really wants them, it’ll be cruel to let them live out thier days like that. I might just carry on down to the nursing home too, obviously thier families don’t care or want them anymore. May as well just kill them off too. Think of the money we’ll save on health care.
March 13th, 2006 at 2:28 pm - IP Man-Hash: 33fcf4d0fa775
Well, in that case, I’ll just start shoving birth control pills down the throats of all the women I see from now on, then you can’t bitch about men not doing their part. Arigatou.
March 13th, 2006 at 3:37 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Ahem. It seems I did say that. And I meant it too.
I think the Gloria_Steinem_Bot software needs a tuneup. Or someone is really messing with Female. I’m not sure which.
-wolfe
March 13th, 2006 at 3:59 pm - IP Man-Hash: 33fcf4d0fa775
Looks like the software is working just fine to me ;)
March 13th, 2006 at 6:39 pm - IP Man-Hash: 63502e043b83b
So far Fem’s main response to this is that if men don’t want to pay child support, they shouldn’t have sex in the first place. That’s a fairly logical point. However, Fem doesn’t seem to understand that it works both ways. If a woman doesn’t want to raise a child by herself, she shouldn’t have sex! You’re acting like it’s the man’s fault, but the woman has to agree to it! Not every case of a man paying child support involves rape!! So then how many women are there that decide to have sex, get pregnant, and then have 1 of 2 things happen:
1. They get an abortion, thus eliminating their responsibility for something they helped create. Isn’t that exactly what you said people shouldn’t do, fem?
2. They don’t get an abortion, and instead force the man to pay for the child.
Have you ever heard of walking in someone else’s shoes, Fem? Lets imagine if things were reversed, shall we? Say you had sex with someone who wanted to do it. Only, in this scenario, they get pregnant instead of you. They decide to have the kid, whether you want them to or not. Then, they force you to pay for it, while giving you little to no rights in regards to visiting or raising the child. How would you feel? Please, think about this and answer truthfully.
Also, since we’re talking about role reversals here, lets think about how a man would act if he was the one who was pregnant. First of all, he probably wouldn’t have an abortion, since he would consider that a cowardly way out. Second, he certainly wouldn’t force you to pay child support, as this would go against every principle of self-decency he had, just like how men don’t force women to pay for their own meals, let alone their’s too. Third, even if you offered to pay child support (which many men would do, even if they weren’t forced to) there’s a good chance he wouldn’t accept it. It just doesn’t seem right to a man to expect others to pay for him, and we think it makes us look bad if we can’t pay for ourselves.
So think about this, and hopefully this will give you a new perspective.
March 14th, 2006 at 12:47 am - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
Hello George, are you the George from before or a new one? We are not at odds here. If the woman does not want to fall pregnant, fine, she should be on the pill and/or ensure her partner wears a condom. If he doesn’t, then she shouldn’t have sex with him. My point is that this nob wants to allow men to renege on financial responsibility after the fact that they already gave up their responsibility to have safe sex and prevent a pregnancy. They made their bed, they need to bite the bullet and accept the outcome of their actions. Otherwise, you are simply perpetuating their irresponsibility. If they know they can get away without being forced to account for their actions, then the law will simply be enabling them to procreate multiple children and spread disease. You cannot and should not put all the responsibility on the female. This man is trying to pass the buck. What a cop out.
March 14th, 2006 at 1:05 am - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
To answer your question directly
I would wear it and pay…after a DNA test. I would realise that if it was my child, then I would be in for a life long relationship with the mother, whether I wanted to or not. Ttherefore I wouldn’t start that relationship off by being acrimonious. Men who refuse to accept responsibility at the onset and who give the woman grief are exactly why she then reacts by trying to prevent him accessing her and the child. If he was a nice guy about it, why would she have a problem trying to block communication with him/the child?
It isn’t necessarily that she doesn’t want him seeing the child, she might be thinking that he won’t treat the child too well if he hasn’t to date treated her with any respect, and who can blame her for thinking that and wanting to protect the child? If he’s been aggressive towards her and tried to prevent her from going through with the pregnancy, or if she’s had to drag his sorry ass through the courts in order to make him take responsibility, then it’s likely she tries to restrict communication with him to a bare minimum and wouldn’t be too interested in coming to a working arrangement with him regarding his access visits. This may not be the case in all situations, but it would be in the majority.
*snort* what? Well that’s a fucking broad statement isn’t it. Are you tuned into all man brains around the planet? You might want to retract that.
Cowardice has nothing to do with it. There’s a few other things to consider here, which clearly you haven’t, which means you haven’t actually thought about what it would be like to be the one who falls pregnant. How typical, a man who lies.
Here are some things you’ll need to think about when technology allows you to fall pregnant and you decide you don’t want the responsiblity of it, but might spend 3 seconds thinking about it.
whether you can support it.
whether you can support it.
whether you can support it.
whether you can support it.
whether you can support it.
whether you can support it.
whether you can support it.
You are ridiculous. Felix makes more sense than you do.
March 14th, 2006 at 2:37 am - IP Man-Hash: eadd56da2c7c9
And then she said that she didn’t say that. And I guess she meant that too.
If she was a man, I’d come down all jihad on her ass.
But she’s not, so it’s kind of expected.
-Big Al
March 15th, 2006 at 6:10 pm - IP Man-Hash: 5785f05728620
Fem said:
I would wear it and pay…after a DNA test. I would realise that if it was my child, then I would be in for a life long relationship with the mother, whether I wanted to or not. Ttherefore I wouldn’t start that relationship off by being acrimonious.
-Uh huh, sure female, so did I so did I and all I got was this cool t-shirt unfortunately you haven’t experienced the blatant sexism of the family courts nor the chains of child support and the injustice that it represents, I seriously doubt that you could understand the horror of having someone take away your child since you don’t have any. You are speaking from a biased and ignorant POV. Do you even understand what you are saying? You don’t even have any children to base any of your views on experience.
Men who refuse to accept responsibility at the onset and who give the woman grief are exactly why she then reacts by trying to prevent him accessing her and the child. If he was a nice guy about it, why would she have a problem trying to block communication with him/the child?
-Hmm sounds nice however I call bullshit. You speak as though all women
are gracious creatures that actually listen to what the father has to say. Here is the reality, many women are after their “entitlements” by giving men a choice in reproduction, they would lose those and the power that comes with raising children and bankrupting men. There are many cases where men have been blocked from seeing their children simply on the word of a decietful whore. Simply another case of your ignorance is all this is.
It isn’t necessarily that she doesn’t want him seeing the child, she might be thinking that he won’t treat the child too well if he hasn’t to date treated her with any respect, and who can blame her for thinking that and wanting to protect the child?
-Did you ever think that she doesn’t deserve any respect? Or that she hasn’t earned any from the man because she had a one night stand? Or that shes just a spiteful person and wants to hurt someone due to her own shortcomings? As to her “thinking” I suspect many of them “think” about one thing and one thing only “money”. They don’t care WHO the father of the child is, thats why they fuck everyone. They simply want their entitlements once again.
If he’s been aggressive towards her and tried to prevent her from going through with the pregnancy, or if she’s had to drag his sorry ass through the courts in order to make him take responsibility, then it’s likely she tries to restrict communication with him to a bare minimum and wouldn’t be too interested in coming to a working arrangement with him regarding his access visits.
-Hypocrite, as opposed to FORCING him to be a father through lies and manipulation? FORCING him to be a debt slave through lies and manipulation? Fuck all you have to do is take a pill once a day and you wouldn’t have to worry about it, but women somehow manage to fuck that up as well. I imagine when there is a pill or patch for men all of this bullshit will come to a complete halt. Our power as men will be reasserted once again which is why it has taken so long for it to come out in the first place. What a crock of shit, as to making him take responsibility, hmm I wonder, there are too many variables here, however there are plenty of cases where the man wasn’t even told he had a child for years, but for some reason thats his fault ect ect however if a woman doesn’t want to take responsibility, then all she has to do is give the baby up for adoption, or have an abortion however men have no option whatsoever if that happens. Thats your idea of “equality”? You certainly sound like a feminist to me. Which is what that bullshit is about ME, ME, ME. T
This may not be the case in all situations, but it would be in the majority.
-Why do I bother….
*snort* what? Well that’s a fucking broad statement isn’t it. Are you tuned into all man brains around the planet? You might want to retract that.
Cowardice has nothing to do with it. There’s a few other things to consider here, which clearly you haven’t, which means you haven’t actually thought about what it would be like to be the one who falls pregnant. How typical, a man who lies.
-As opposed to a woman that lies, and ruins two peoples lives in the process. Women are opposed to this for several reasons, I will note two POWER and CONTROL, women have evolved to be the way they are through lies and the manipulation of men. Its in their nature, for if they told the truth things would be a lot easier.
Here are some things you’ll need to think about when technology allows you to fall pregnant and you decide you don’t want the responsiblity of it, but might spend 3 seconds thinking about it.
whether you can support it.
-I would say the same of women however they have a whole system of support so they don’t have to worry about the responsibility of supporting a child, they can just lie, lay on their backs, and collect their “entitlements” while the man is just sent a bill for the birth and “raising” of the child. Usually that means 18 years of boxed dinners, and watching them watch TV. Forget teaching them about responsibility, or honor or any of these things, lets have the TV teach them about life.
[blockquote removed]
You are ridiculous. Felix makes more sense than you do.
-You make sense Fem, in a biased, hypocritical, misandrist sort of way.
March 15th, 2006 at 7:34 pm - IP Man-Hash: 54df7a602b916
——————————————————————————–
Tide Turns In the Gender Wars
March 13, 2006
Vox Populi
By Christine D. Korenthal
I disagree with my husband (SoCalPundit.com’s Kevin Korenthal) rarely on social issues, but this is one of those few cases where I do. I think that this case is a good thing and I hope it sparks some change in this country.
For far too long, women have had the upper hand in making all decisions regarding childbearing and childrearing. A woman can lie about being on birth control or, as in this case, about her ability to have children. She can tell the guy that he is on the hook when she becomes pregnant (either by deliberately misleading the guy or an honest oopsie) and then attempt to use their child as a ball and chain, a bargaining chip, or a cash cow. She can use the guy’s emotional attachment to the child in order to get back at him by refusing to allow him to be as involved as he would like. And the coup de grace is that the less the guy sees the kid, the more money the woman gets in child support. This ensures that the child will see less of Daddy so that Momma can rake in the dough, while laughing at Daddy’s emotional anguish. She has ALL of the power and he is at her mercy. Sound eerily familiar and one sided to anyone? I have seen this done many times and it makes me ill.
Women can abort whether their partner supports it or not. They can have their child whether the partner supports it or not. The guy just has to stand by helplessly and wait for the “verdict�. That is wrong. It takes two people to make a child and two people should make the decision to have it or not. Women also have the option of giving the baby up for adoption. If the father objects, he can take custody of the child but the likelyhood of receiving an order for child support from the mom is just about zip. He is pretty much on his own. If she can have the kid and “opt out� via giving up her rights and financial obligations post-birth, why can’t a guy do the same pre-birth, say, within 30 days of notification? Women can get off scott free, but not men. Sounds sexist to me.
If men and women are to be truly equal, as the feminists have screamed about for years, the same equality should apply to all aspects of life including procreation and childrearing. Completely equal means taking the good with the bad. Women go to college at higher rates than men in many states. Women work the same jobs as men and the “pay gap� is hardly notable and still shrinking. They want men to do half of the domestic tasks which, if they both work full time, is fair enough. If they have a child that is planned, they want the man to do half of the baby care and childrearing when junior comes into the world. But if an unplanned pregnancy occurs, even in a marriage, forget it buster. It is all her decision. If she has the child and the relationship ends, fork over the dough and pick up junior every third Thursday of the month for a couple of hours. If you want the kid and she doesn’t, she can have it aborted and you can’t say or do a thing to stop her, even if you are willing to take full custody and full responsibility for the child.
I have seen friends, good men, get swindled into fatherhood by women who later used their children to hurt them. I have seen courts give custody to women even in cases where the father was clearly the more involved parent, simply because the woman was a woman. I have even seen one guy through the devastation of his girlfriend’s abortion without his consent. A child that he wanted. I have seen what guys go through because women have the upper hand when it comes to children. Forty years ago, when most women stayed at home with the kids while men worked, when sex still meant something, when women had few methods of birth control, when “hooking up� was unheard of, our current laws might have made sense, but women have made “progress� and become equal. No, we passed equal. Now we get more protection under the law and more options on the table. I know, I know, women get the short end from guys sometimes, too, but I haven’t seen that nearly so often as I have seen men get smacked down by bitter exes using babies to do their bidding. It’s about time for men to get a leg up.
Posted in Vox Populi at 5:27 pm by Staff | Permalink |
This article was found on MND
March 15th, 2006 at 7:51 pm - IP Man-Hash: 4fcada9323419
Now see, Joe, Female had a complex argument based on bullshit and now you went and ruined it by bringing in logic. Well Done Sir.
March 16th, 2006 at 2:28 am - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
Logic is in the eye of the logician.
-Gloria_Steinam_botbot
March 17th, 2006 at 5:01 am - IP Man-Hash: 459185a859175
A question for Fem:
A couple agrees not to have children. They mutually decide on a birth control method. They also agree that if she gets pregnant she will have an abortion. She gets pregnant anyway (it happens). One of the parties changes their mind and wants to have the baby. The other says “No way. We agreed not to have children”.
Should one party be able to force motherhood/fatherhood and all its obligations on the other party against her/his wishes?