| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:19 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: I know I'm just objecting to some of his appeals to emotion and framing that are irrelevant to his actual argument xD. Yeah, I am cutting through the bullshit and getting to the core of the issue. Its all about men and that the world is unfair towards them because he thinks its unfair. I've seen this all before. | ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:20 Plansix wrote: Yeah, I am cutting through the bullshit and getting to the core of the issue. Its all about men and that the world is unfair towards them because he thinks its unfair. I've seen this all before. BRO YOU'VE OPENED YOUR MIND No, I actually acknowledge that there are many places where men are systemically favored over women. Unfortunately for you, that is not an argument against fixing areas where women are systemically favored over men. | ||
|
phil.ipp
Austria1067 Posts
Jormundr, tell us about your relationship to your parents. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:24 Jormundr wrote: BRO YOU'VE OPENED YOUR MIND No, I actually acknowledge that there are many places where men are systemically favored over women. Unfortunately for you, that is not an argument against fixing areas where women are systemically favored over men. Except you have not proven that this is one of them in any way. And your solution isn't a solution, just a way for men to avoid any responsibility and dump it off on the women or taxpayers. Its the "I want a get of out of child support law because I don't like it." | ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
| ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
and schools taught guys not to stick their dicks in crazy. | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:20 Plansix wrote: Yeah, I am cutting through the bullshit and getting to the core of the issue. Its all about men and that the world is unfair towards them because he thinks its unfair. I've seen this all before. We've been over this in the "women in gaming" thread Plansix. The areas of society where men are given preferential treatment over women vastly outweigh the areas where the reverse is true, but does that mean the issues aren't worth examining? This is maybe one of the only legitimate arguments for "Men's Rights," whatever that means. The whole custody/child support racket is largely in favor of the mother when they should be making an objective decision based on both parties' abilities to support their child. There is also little harm in allowing the man to opt out after conception since the woman is permitted to do so. Yes, signing a contract is a hell of a lot easier than undergoing an abortion, that should be obvious. But if we're going to use the contraception argument, maybe people shouldn't be having unprotected sex with individuals they do not trust or who they know do not want children? In the event that he lied to her in order to not use a condom and then opts out of the pregnancy, well he's kind of a dick and she can still terminate the pregnancy or put the baby up for adoption if she doesn't want to raise it alone. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:31 Jormundr wrote: All I see is the reason why modern feminism has started to lose traction. Because people think being a feminist (the kind that used to be for equal rights) is about being staunchly pro-women, regardless of whether or not what is proposed will result in more equality of opportunity. It's become more dogmatic than reasonable, which is why several of the people in here pop in with a buzzfeed line and feel validated. It's already 'decided', there's no need to actually think about it, and if it isn't all that great then so what? It's good for women and people approve of it so lets just keep doing it. you keep talking about it being good for women when, for the 10th time, it's about the kid... which can end up a woman as well but that's kind of a 50/50 chance | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:28 Plansix wrote: Except you have not proven that this is one of them in any way. And your solution isn't a solution, just a way for men to avoid any responsibility and dump it off on the women or taxpayers. Its the "I want a get of out of child support law because I don't like it." What is there to prove? After conception, the woman is capable of opting out of being a parent while the man is not. That is an inequality. Not all inequalities can be addressed, but why not at least try? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:35 ZasZ. wrote: What is there to prove? After conception, the woman is capable of opting out of being a parent while the man is not. That is an inequality. Not all inequalities can be addressed, but why not at least try? No its not. If they decide to have the child, they are responsible. If not, they are responsible for that too. The decision to have an abortion is a serious one and no one but a few folks in this thread takes it lightly. | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:34 Toadesstern wrote: you keep talking about it being good for women when, for the 10th time, it's about the kid... which can end up a woman as well but that's kind of a 50/50 chance The money is child support, i.e. paid to the custodian for support of the child. But many people do raise children without child support, and if a woman goes forward with a pregnancy knowing she can't support the child alone then that would be on her at that point. EDIT: Plansix, you used "they" several times in your post. Obviously this whole thing is a moot point if both parties agree on whether or not to have the child. The area which we are discussing is when one party does want the child and the other does not. Obviously a breakdown in communication prior to having unprotected sex, but people do end up in this situation. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:33 Plansix wrote: We made it guys, he was moved on the discussing feminism. We are in the full "men's rights zone". I literally couldn't see this coming a mile off. yes, because being dismissive it totally conducive to discussion. It's been shown time and time again, the fathers usually get the short end of the stick when it comes to anything regarding child custody, or child support. It's a bit much to suggest that men shouldn't pay child support at all, but have you seen how ridiculous some of these child support payments can come up to? I have an acquaintance from high school who got his gf pregnant during high school, they broke up, etc etc. Recently went to court in regards to child custody. He wanted shared custody of his daughter, so his daughter could grow up knowing her mother. He was in position to take full custody since he already got a house, engaged, stable income, however because he wanted joint custody, he is now required by court to pay for child support to his daughter's mother, despite having her for half the time... Personally I thought he was a dumbass, should have just gotten full custody and taken the kid to see her mother every once in a while, but that's just an anecdote I have regarding courts favoring females pretty heavily. also my friends brother has joint custody of his 2 kids, still required to pay ridiculous amount of child support to the mother, despite joint custody. still blows my mind, how the father is still required to pay child support despite joint custody. | ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:28 Plansix wrote: Except you have not proven that this is one of them in any way. And your solution isn't a solution, just a way for men to avoid any responsibility and dump it off on the women or taxpayers. Its the "I want a get of out of child support law because I don't like it." No, I just fail to see what responsibility (other than having to pay the full cost of an abortion if not paid for by the state) you have to a woman who wants a kid when you don't want one. If she wants it and he doesn't he can send her the money for an abortion and that's great. If he wants it but she doesn't she can tell him to fuck off and abort it anyway and that's great. If they both want it then they should probably make legal distinctions on who pays for what and who gets what if they ever separate. It's a pretty fair system compared to the one we have. Also On April 02 2015 05:27 phil.ipp wrote: na to really get to the bottom of this Jormundr, tell us about your relationship to your parents. User was warned for this post I'm an adopted second child of two married parents. Take your 16, sqrt it, add 1 and multiply it by itself and you have my age. I don't have any kids. P.S. + Show Spoiler + I don't sleep with women. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:17 dAPhREAk wrote: the problem here is that it completely ignores the child's rights. the mother makes a stupid decision, but the child suffers. people dont understand (or ignore) the fact that child support is not about the parents' rights, its about the child's rights. also, going down the rabbit hole a bit, shouldnt the contract be signed before sex, not after? and, shouldnt i as a taxpayer, be allowed to refuse my consent to this contract since I will be the one paying for this child most likely? The contract would definitely need to be signed prior to sex, or an "after the fact" potentially pregnant woman is going to be viewed as in an unequal bargaining position relative to the agreement. Courts routinely abrogate contracts drawn up in such a way. And I never thought I'd see the day when dAPHREAk would be discussing the rights of the child! It is interesting that the rights of the child itself are usually a peripheral concern in these debates. And yes, in saying that I am certainly implying that the religious right's "the child has a right to be alive" theory is merely a placeholder for a "moral" citizen's right to feel upset that someone else did something particularly unappealing to them. This is because conservatives tend to mirror their extreme concern for the life of a fetus with a profound disregard for the rights of that fetus once it gets born. Were you born to fucking idiot drug addict parents and, as a result, never able to effectively learn how to integrate into society? Too bad, we made sure that your mother couldn't access an affordable abortion and that your local school got sucked dry of talent through a voucher program. Were you born to insanely religious parents who decided to home school you in accordance with the Southwestern Assemblies of God take on math, science, history, and the arts? Too fucking bad, we don't want to regulate home schooling because big government is a scary thing, way scarier than your propensity to turn into exactly the kind of voter we can depend on! You get the point  | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23929 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:33 Plansix wrote: We made it guys, he was moved on the discussing feminism. We are in the full "men's rights zone". I literally couldn't see this coming a mile off. I see it as more of a responsibility issue than a rights issue. Men and women should be equally responsible for providing for a child. The way the system is set up the man is forced to take far more responsibility for providing. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:38 ZasZ. wrote: The money is child support, i.e. paid to the custodian for support of the child. But many people do raise children without child support, and if a woman goes forward with a pregnancy knowing she can't support the child alone then that would be on her at that point. EDIT: Plansix, you used "they" several times in your post. Obviously this whole thing is a moot point if both parties agree on whether or not to have the child. The area which we are discussing is when one party does want the child and the other does not. Obviously a breakdown in communication prior to having unprotected sex, but people do end up in this situation. Don't have sex if you are totally unwilling to raise children. Problem solved. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:42 Plansix wrote: Don't have sex if you are totally unwilling to raise children. Problem solved. .........you realize this is literally the argument Millitron was using a couple pages ago, right? | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28791 Posts
Anyway, Jormundr, to me it kinda sounds more like you have an issue with custodial laws? Wouldn't it make the most sense to fix those? I can understand your sentiment because I do recognize that this area is one where males are discriminated against. I think it's terrible that fatherhood isn't cherished at even the remotely same level as motherhood, but it seems hard for me to see how men can opt out from parental responsibilities and that not resulting in children suffering from it.. From just thinking about it now, I just don't think a contract is even remotely viable. I understand that you want to supplement it with a revamping of social security (so that child support isn't necessary at all?), in which case the children wouldn't necessarily suffer economically, but couldn't this also be a way of just, enabling men to be irresponsible jackasses to a higher degree than they currently do? What about practical reasons - what if the girl had unprotected sex with several guys in the possible time frame? State subsidized fetus-DNA tests to find who has to be contacted with the opt in or out contract? What if she doesn't get hold of him until there's like 1 week until the pregnancy limit expires, do you really see this kind of bureaucracy just moving swiftly about every time? It's like, no matter how detailed or specific such a contract-enabling law would have to be, I can picture scenarios where someone is fucked over in much the same way that guy who has to pay child support for the bastard child he never wanted is.. Except I think it also leads to more single moms parenting. One of the major problems I have (more so from Militron, but I'm sensing some of the same from you) is the equivocating of abortions with 'not caring'. For many women, abortions are very traumatizing, for nearly all, they are very painful, and it's not something girls just lightly experience cuz why the hell not. The suffering endured from having an abortion does not compare to the suffering endured from having to wear a condom. Frankly, in the event where a girl genuinely doesn't care if she has an abortion, I'm very happy to grant her one, because I don't want her to be a parent. | ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
On April 02 2015 05:38 Plansix wrote: No its not. If they decide to have the child, they are responsible. If not, they are responsible for that too. The decision to have an abortion is a serious one and no one but a few folks in this thread takes it lightly. Abortion is only as serious as the media has made it out to be. A first trimester abortion is pretty benign. The biggest problem with abortions right now (in the US) is their cost and lack of availability, and the lack of education about them. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
GSL
Cure vs TriGGeR
ByuN vs Bunny
KCM Race Survival
Big Gabe
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Escore
OSC
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
