Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Study shows 50% of women would lie about the paternity of their child... Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stefl14)
    Idiotic generalisation. Just thought I'd point it out. Basically everyone who says this has no idea what banking entails and has just been indoctrinated by the media.
    Yes I know that really I was just pointing out that it's all very well calling someone scum but unless they're actually punished they're still laughing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    women r complicated
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Miss Ann Dairy)
    Why is it crazy that a man can just choose not to support a child he made at his own whim? Erm perhaps because that would cause even more poverty, and neither parent should be allowed to just not support their child, having all the weight of this person they created just fall on one half of the people responsible shoulders. Duh. :rolleyes: This would effect society greatly, causing a need of much more government help and promoting lack of responsibility for men. You can't say men have no reproductive rights, when the only right you want is to act like the born child doesn't even exist for whatever reason you chose, wtf is that? Women don't have that right either, if a man takes care of the baby once born he can ask for financial support too.
    but women can choose to just not support a child, that is the point. If a woman doesn't want to raise or support a child she doesn't have to, men do not get that choice. All of your arguments when gender switched could be (and in fact have been) used to argue against abortion, if womens autonomy overrides those arguments then what about male autonomy?



    Not everywhere, but yes here they can choose, but for some it isn't an option because of their beliefs.
    not everywhere is irrelevant, because we are not talking about those places. And as for beliefs, that is again her choice and so why should the man have to support it?


    Adoption requires both parents agreement.
    so women can cut men out of the childs life but still need his permission to get it adopted? interesting.


    Because of autonomy. Again, DUH.
    so men don't get autonomy?


    They don't have to support it emotionally. But if they make a child you can't understand why either parent should support it financially?
    you seem to be drastically missing the point. Women can choose to relieve themselves of the financial burden if they choose to (i.e. abort), men have that choice made for them.


    Fund that person that was born in to the world and society and they made.
    that she personally chose to keep against his wishes


    Those cases are so rare I have no idea what their relevance has. Again:
    14% of surveyed young mothers reported undergoing birth control sabotage.[9] A separate study found that 66% of teen mothers on public assistance who had recently experienced intimate partner violence disclosed birth control sabotage by a dating partner. When women did try to negotiate condom use with their abusive partners, 32% said they were verbally threatened, 21% reported physical abuse, and 14% said their partners threatened abandonment.[10]
    Gender and sexual power dynamics and coercion associated with sexual power dynamics are both linked to condom nonuse.[11] Studies also link condom nonuse to patriarchal attitudes and intimate partner violence.[12] Even women with high STI knowledge are more likely to use condoms inconsistently than women with low STI knowledge when there is a high level of fear for abuse.[10]
    The most common forms of birth control sabotage are when the partner refused to wear a condom and when the partner ejaculated before withdrawal, although it was the agreed-upon contraceptive method.[13]
    In Canada, a man was convicted of sexual assault for poking holes in his girlfriend's condoms. She expressed that she did not want to become pregnant, and when she did, he confessed to the birth control sabotage.[14]
    how on earth is that relevant? Yes men often sabotage contraception too, they are in the wrong too. Does that make it ok for women to do it? No? Then why bring it up?



    It isn't an obligation to her, you don't think any father should ever have any obligation regardless of the rarity of a woman tricky a man any way though.:rolleyes:
    ok this really bugs me. The argument that men should raise children they don't want hinges on the fact that "they knew the risks". If a woman sabotages or lies about contraception, the man does not know the risk. She is purposefully getting herself pregnant, and the man is making no such choice. Aside from the fact that it is sexual assault, if she is choosing to get pregnant without the mans consent she should be prepared to shoulder the financial burden herself. Else we are just rewarding them for financial and emotional blackmail (as well as sexual assault)

    And I do think men should have obligation in some circumstances. I just don't think women should have complete control over the next 18 years of a mans life.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Miss Ann Dairy)
    Because men never cheat right.:rolleyes:
    men cheat, but they can't trick a woman into raising a child that isn't her own.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stefl14)
    Whether or not men cheat is irrelevant.
    Not really given women are being called monsters for cheating when men do it, just men can't get pregnant.



    Men shouldn't have to pay for children that are not their own.
    They don't have to hence why paternity test are available.

    Also, there is no numerical definition of rare you moron.
    Pretty sure less than 5% would qualify as rare. But whatever.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ClickItBack)
    Do you then not feel that, if we are going by actual real world impacts (rather than touted egalitarian ideology) of modern day feminist activist groups (and as distinct from feminist groups of the past), that it is difficult for any egalitarian minded person to associate themselves with them?

    And yes, I understand that modern day feminist groups fall on a spectrum and are highly diverse - but actions speak louder than words.
    I no longer call myself a feminist due to the amount of stupidity spouted out by certain groups, even though they aren't representative of the movement as a whole. I also object to it largely ignoring problems which affect men as opposed to women, when it's supposed to be working for gender equality. I do like Rock The Slut Vote, as that's informative as well as amusing. It also focuses on abortion laws and things in the US, rather than petty issues like why one should stop telling people if one has a boyfriend because it assumes that one is owned by him or it might offend lesbians or asexuals (I've read both of those arguments and more).

    With regards to the OP, it is abhorrent that anyone would do any of that, especially the lying about the pill. Cosmo actually ran a pretty good article last year about men's experiences relating to it, as well as women who had been left after X amount of years because they'd forced their partner to become a father. As for hiding an STI, isn't that illegal? I would assume that it would be, as it's not that difficult to prove, given that it would be on medical records.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Only hope my mother did not lie to us. I love my dada to bits. But it wouldn't make any difference. Some Women are cunning, don't how they could live with such a lie though
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucaf)
    but women can choose to just not support a child, that is the point.
    A born child? Nope. They are required to pay child support if the father was to take care of it.

    If a woman doesn't want to raise or support a child she doesn't have to
    She has to give financial support as would the father depending on who takes the child. In order to give the child up for adoption both need to be in agreement.

    men do not get that choice.
    Men should get the choice to just give no support to the child they created after it's been born?


    if womens autonomy overrides those arguments then what about male autonomy?
    What arguments?


    not everywhere is irrelevant,
    No the fact that women are still forced to carry children, denied abortions and have poor reproductive rights in this world is and never will be irrelevant.

    because we are not talking about those places.
    Who's we? If a guy can talk about france I can talk about those places, you don't decide what is available in this world for me to reference.

    And as for beliefs, that is again her choice and so why should the man have to support it?
    Because it is his child, that outside of the rare cases of trickery, he took the risk of creating when sleeping with a woman.
    It's his choice not to get a vasectomy, if he was that sure about not wanting kids.


    so women can cut men out of the childs life but still need his permission to get it adopted? interesting.
    They can't do that, most father who ask for custody of a child and given it by the courts. Most cases are settled out of courts. Jesus do you think family life and parenthood in this gender warzone? Get a grip, these are human beings, the focus is on the child not whatever nonsense narrative you're trying to manufacture.

    so men don't get autonomy?
    How do you not get autonomy?

    you seem to be drastically missing the point. Women can choose to relieve themselves of the financial burden if they choose to (i.e. abort),
    That has a time limit, once the child is born they cannot relieve themselves of the financial burden and can be made to support the child. Same goes for men, the only difference here the simple biology, which you can't seem to grasp. :rolleyes:


    men have that choice made for them.
    Men have the choice of the woman's choice of whether or not she will carry the baby in her body to term made for them? Yeah. cause it's not their body therefore not their choice, again, simple biology.


    that she personally chose to keep against his wishes
    That he personally chose to run the risk of impregnating here with, the baby wouldn't be their without him. Whether she chooses to carry the baby to term or not isn't his decision.


    how on earth is that relevant? Yes men often sabotage contraception too, they are in the wrong too.
    Because can you provide a shred of evidence that women do it more?




    Does that make it ok for women to do it? No? Then why bring it up?
    To point out men clearly do this thing as well, rather than just only mentioning women doing this. Does looking at things without bias offend you?

    ok this really bugs me. The argument that men should raise children they don't want hinges on the fact that "they knew the risks". If a woman sabotages or lies about contraception, the man does not know the risk.
    Hence why it said regardless of that.

    And I do think men should have obligation in some circumstances.
    Such as?


    I just don't think women should have complete control over the next 18 years of a mans life.
    Can you phrase things in a more hyperbolic agenda filled way? Women have no control, neither do the men, child support is decided by the courts and either parents can be required to pay.

    The fact you're trying so desperately to turn a child's life in to a man v woman debate says a lot about your views. You can't just think of the BORN child and how they would suffer in poverty if half of the parents could just decide at their own whim to be exempt from child support for no good reason other than men need more power short of forcing women in to abortions they need to make it so bad for them that's their only option or we even more children growing up relying on government funds because one half of the parent doesn't want to take ANY responsibility for this BORN child, your nonsense is practical nor is it moral. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lemonrod)
    A born child? Nope. They are required to pay child support if the father was to take care of it.
    it is pretty clear I meant abortion by that. If a woman doesn't want to support her baby, she doesn't have to have it.


    She has to give financial support as would the father depending on who takes the child. In order to give the child up for adoption both need to be in agreement.
    I was obviously aware of the first part, I concede the second part


    Men should get the choice to just give no support to the child they created after it's been born?
    actually I would say they should get the choice before it has been born, I will go into more detail later in the reply

    What arguments?
    a pretty common argument against abortion is that they took the risks when having sex, therefore they should accept the consequences. Obviously a womans right to control what she does with her body overrules that, but I would argue so does a mans right to do what he likes with his life and wallet.


    No the fact that women are still forced to carry children, denied abortions and have poor reproductive rights in this world is and never will be irrelevant.
    It is is irrelevant in an argument that isn't about women in some countries being denied abortions. It is a serious issue, it just isn't the one being discussed.


    Who's we? If a guy can talk about france I can talk about those places, you don't decide what is available in this world for me to reference.
    frances paternity testing law is pretty relevant to a thread about women tricking men over paternity, women being unable to abort in brazil is not.


    Because it is his child, that outside of the rare cases of trickery, he took the risk of creating when sleeping with a woman.
    It's his choice not to get a vasectomy, if he was that sure about not wanting kids.
    but once again, women do not have the same risk. If a woman decides she does not want a baby she can get rid of it, if a man decides he does not want the baby he has to support it regardless.


    [quote]They can't do that, most father who ask for custody of a child and given it by the courts. Most cases are settled out of courts. Jesus do you think family life and parenthood in this gender warzone? Get a grip, these are human beings, the focus is on the child not whatever nonsense narrative you're trying to manufacture. [quote] I will admit that was hyperbolic. And out of court settlements are kind of irrelevant to mens legal rights on the matter, whichh would obviously only apply in the less amicable cases settled in court.


    How do you not get autonomy?
    the whole"whether or not a man helps raise a child is out of his hands, whether or not a woman does is not out of hers" thing.


    That has a time limit, once the child is born they cannot relieve themselves of the financial burden and can be made to support the child. Same goes for men, the only difference here the simple biology, which you can't seem to grasp. :rolleyes:
    well what I would suggest is men are able to have a "legal abortion", where they forfeit all rights to the child and forgo all responsibility. It too would need a time limit, so they can't say they will help raise the child and then change their mind when it is too late for the woman to do anything bout it. I am not saying men should be able to walk away from their child at any time without consequence, I am just saying that they should (like women) have the ability to forgo that responsibility in the first place.



    Men have the choice of the woman's choice of whether or not she will carry the baby in her body to term made for them? Yeah. cause it's not their body therefore not their choice, again, simple biology.
    purposefully misinterpreting what I am saying



    That he personally chose to run the risk of impregnating here with, the baby wouldn't be their without him. Whether she chooses to carry the baby to term or not isn't his decision.
    whether she chooses to carry the baby or not is her decision, but whether he chooses to support it or not should be his.



    Because can you provide a shred of evidence that women do it more?
    never claimed they did. I think they probably do simply because it is easier to lie about the pill than to get away with poking holes in a condom, but it doesn't matter either way.



    To point out men clearly do this thing as well, rather than just only mentioning women doing this. Does looking at things without bias offend you?
    I know men do it too, and in fact I would consider it far worse if a man does it, but that is once again completely irrelevant to the current discussion about women tricking men over contraception and paternity.


    Hence why it said regardless of that.
    I think you misread what she said there, we are talking specifically about "that"


    Such as?
    obviously if he had sabotaged contraception, if he had said he would support her and then changed his mind, if he waited too long (there should be a time limit as I said before)



    Can you phrase things in a more hyperbolic agenda filled way? Women have no control, neither do the men, child support is decided by the courts and either parents can be required to pay.

    The fact you're trying so desperately to turn a child's life in to a man v woman debate says a lot about your views. You can't just think of the BORN child and how they would suffer in poverty if half of the parents could just decide at their own whim to be exempt from child support for no good reason other than men need more power short of forcing women in to abortions they need to make it so bad for them that's their only option or we even more children growing up relying on government funds because one half of the parent doesn't want to take ANY responsibility for this BORN child, your nonsense is practical nor is it moral. :rolleyes:
    You are purposefully misunderstanding my argument. I am talking about decisions before the child is born. I am not saying that men should be able to walk away from a child they already have, I am saying they should be able to walk away from a child they don't want if the woman decides to have it regardless of their wishes. If she wants to have the child even though she knows she can't support it, that is her decision, she shouldn't be able to force it on a man who wants no part of it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If anyone would like to contribute their views in a documentary on this matter, please contact me at the following email: sexismbusters at hotmail dot com
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Women are the cruelest and least trustworthy in society.

    They will dump the 'love of their life' in a second if they think they can get a better man. They will also cuckold their man without a singleissue.

    It's in their nature.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.