I just found out I have to start paying child support for a kid I just found out I had with an ex gf...
I had no idea this girl was even pregnant and was never consulted about whether I wanted the child or not...
what should I expect in terms of financial expenses? I don't want custody and we were never married.
I'm able to afford my rent and car payment as it is...
I feel like my life is over and don't have any family to help support me.
>>16438374
Get a job. (Might sound immature but that's basically how I would put it)
Find something that motivates you and keep telling yourself, yes I can do it I'm a responsible dad who will take the responsibility for what happened.
If your having a tough time, try doing something to get your stress off. It could be literally anything.
Live without worries.
Good luck, OP
YOU NEED TO GET A PATERNITY TESTTTTAAAAAA
MIGHT NOT BE YOUR KIDDO DONT PAY BEFORE U IN THE KNOWING
>>16438374
Paternity test first
>>16438404
True that, don't be fooled by that whore.
>>16438403
>yes I can do it I'm a responsible dad who will take the responsibility for what happened.
Literally not his responsibility. OP's ex is a disgusting leech of a human being.
Other than that this post is about right OP. You aint gonna be beating shit in the courts even if you aren't the father. Welcome to Earth.
>>16438412
IS IT JUST ME OR DO YOU THINK THAT FOR A GUY TO HAVE TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT HE SHOULD HAVE HAD TO AGREE TO HAVE A CHILD OR HAVE UNPROTECTED, NO BIRTH CONTROL SEX? WE SHOULD JUST HAVE A WAIVER THING AND CARRY PAPERS AROUND LIKE "SIGN QUICK BEFORE WE FUCK IM NOT DOWN TO SUPPORT THIS KID IF YOUR BIRTH CONTROL FAILS" OK COOL WE FUKKING NOW BECAUSE SOMETIMES BITCHES LIE AND CONDOMS BREAK LIKE IT SHOULD BE THE DUDES CHOICE IF HE IS INVOLVED OR NOT
>>16438432
IM A FEMALE IF IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE IN HOW YOU PERCEIVE MY POST
>>16438432
Oh yes definitely. However nobody with any power gives a fuck about men and boys or their rights and well being, especially when they can pretend women are on the line. There's a whole lot of money in pretending women are victims that need to be protected from men.
>>16438432
>>16438451
Both the male and the female should have equal say in pro choice options.
If you knock a slut up and decide anywhere between the 1st and 9th week of pregnancy you don't want a kid with her, you should be able to sign off on all financial obligations to it.
As long as you make it clear you don't want the child within that time its not really your fault that its born.
>>16438374
Paternity test
Also what country are you in, that affects things
>>16438374
Did you sign the birth certificate?
A yes is a death knell for your money
HEY OP, IS THIS A NEW CASE OR AN ALREADY SETTLED CASE?
BECAUSE THAT MAKES A REALLY BIG DIFFERENCE, I JUST THOUGHT I WOULD LIKE TO LET YOU KNOW.
CAPS LOCK BECAUSE IF THERE IS ANY HOPE AT ALL OF CONTESTING PATERNITY, THEN THAT HOPE IS RAPIDLY EXPIRING AND YOU NEED TO GET OFF YOUR ASS.
>>16438485
I would do one better: abolish child support entirely. Can't afford the baby? Relinquish custody. Don't want to create this situation for yourself? Uninstall Tinder.
>>16438693 here
If you are from the US, here is a child support money calculator, apparently the amount varies by state and depends on how much money you make
http://www.alllaw.com/calculators/childsupport
But like I said, it's different in other countries. For example I have a friend who is a single parent, and the dad pays something like 100€/month and sometimes not even that, because he's quite young and alternates between shitty supermarket jobs and being unemployed while wondering what he should go study in university, while my friend has a solid, well-paying job. But that's in the nordic countries, I hear that alimony/child support can be more unfair in the states
>>16438374
>I just found out I have to start paying child support for a kid I just found out I had with an ex gf...
hahaha, sucks to be you man. Should have used protection
>what should I expect in terms of financial expenses?
18 years of hell, enjoy, hope the 3 minutes of fun were worth it.
>I feel like my life is over
it is.
>>16438432
>>16438437
Your caps lock is on, bitch
>>16438714
Societies want kids and a lot of countries are struggling with falling birth rates though, so it's very unlikely they'd do that as it'd increase abortions and make people postpone having children until it's too late a great deal
>>16438714
that would create a whole lot of abandon babies. Who's going to take care of them?
And if your answer is "well they shouldnt have them", of course they shouldnt have them. Whatre you? 16?
Dna test
>>16438721
>Societies want kids and a lot of countries are struggling with falling birth rates though, so it's very unlikely they'd do that as it'd increase abortions and make people postpone having children until it's too late a great deal
Birthrates are plummeting because marriage is a death trap. Nobody had a problem with birthrates back when divorce meant you walk out the door and get a new husband if you want a man's wallet.
>>16438432
It takes two to tango.
Don't fuck if you aren't willing to handle the consequenses.
>>16438740
and wanting a new wife meant, nothing.
You could use any young woman who thought you'd actually leave your wife.
I'm glad i'm in the now, than in the then.
>>16438712
OP here, I didn't sign the birth certificate. I didn't know she even had the kid until yesterday.
>>16438712
This is a new case and nothing has been settled, I plan to have a paternity test before I pay a single penny for this thing.
>>16438716
I tried using this... it looks like if I make 25,000 a year I would have to pay like 525 dollars a month... I simply can't afford that. I might be using the calculator wrong though.
>>16438741
This is a great system if paternity tests are a prerequisite for entering a child support judgment. In practice, men are arrested because they were ruled a legal father without their knowing.
Family law courts aren't even held to the same standards of serving notice as other courts. They can spring it on you by surprise then go straight to arrears and collection. Whether you even had sex with the woman or not is unimportant.
The war will be over whenever the keksupport is over.
>>16438740
>back when divorce meant you walk out the door and get a new husband if you want a man's wallet.
I think birth control also sucked during those days, which is probably the bigger reason?
>>16438748
So that'd be what, a whole quarter of your income? Can that be right? What the fuck, USA
>>16438741
What if the condom breaks or the bitch lies about being on birth control?
The issue isn't whether someone should of or shouldn't of had sex, it's whether pro choice options should be fair for both sexes.
>>16438741
So the girl is the only one to decide whether she keeps the child or not, but the man has to deal with the consequences?
Yeah, no, go fuck yourself with a dragon dildo.
>>16438745
My point was that, if you don't feel like paying child support, don't go and cum inside vaginas until you're actually ready to take care of the result.
>>16438432
>WE SHOULD JUST HAVE A WAIVER THING AND CARRY PAPERS AROUND LIKE "SIGN QUICK BEFORE WE FUCK IM NOT DOWN TO SUPPORT THIS KID IF YOUR BIRTH CONTROL FAILS"
Well, there's nothing stopping you from doing this now. I don't know how it would hold up down the road, but you could still just do this already. Yet no one does. I hear about guys that get girls knocked up all the time and only just then learn that the girl is pro life while the guy wants an abortion. That's something that really should have been discussed before sex even occurred, but I'm shocked at how rarely it even comes up between couples in sexual relationships. I don't advocate forcing men to pay child support, but I just gotta say it's a little irresponsible of guys (and girls too) to not even talk about the possibility of pregnancy and what actions to take BEFORE having sex.
>>16438748
>OP here, I didn't sign the birth certificate. I didn't know she even had the kid until yesterday.
GREAT NEWS, MOTHERFUCKER.
This must mean the window to contest paternity is still open. Get a fucking lawyer, even if you have to sell your organs to do so. Get a FAMILY LAW lawyer, not lawsuits not criminal not bankruptcy. These are all different courts and lawyers tend to be scumbags. A lawsuit lawyer will happily take your money, then the babymomma will happily take your money.
> I plan to have a paternity test before I pay a single penny for this thing.
Don't 'plan.' Slap a wad of cash down on a FAMILY LAW attorney's desk, and tell him to file all necessary motions to protect your rights. Family law cannot be stressed enough. Family law is a fancy name for the kekold debt slave industry.
>I tried using this... it looks like if I make 25,000 a year I would have to pay like 525 dollars a month... I simply can't afford that. I might be using the calculator wrong though.
Your mistake is thinking the family law court goes off what you DO make - that's not how it works. They will run some bureuacratic worksheet on you, and decide how much you CAN make. Do not expect the judge to be anything but an ignorant asshole; anything better than that is a blessing.
The system is not on your side. But a competent lawyer will be if you can get one.
>>16438756
No contraceptive is 100% effective, not even if you're using more than one. You should know this if you're relying on contraceptive. Pregnancy is always a consequence of sex unless one of you is infertile.
And in the end, the kid's already been born. There's not much OP can do about it.
>>16438760
Well, It's her body after all.
You still had the choice of not having sex with her, but aparently it wasn't on the radar.
>>16438760
I think he point is that if you werent smart enough to wrap it, you deal with the consequences.
if you're saying "w-well, she's the one who wants to keep it!" Then realize that if you didnt want to give her the optino, you shouldve fuckin worn a condom. Bitch only has like a 6 percent chance of failure if you do the condom correctly.
Couldve asked her, her cycle, and if she was away from ovulation.
If you say "w-well that kills the mood!" then you arent prepared to have meaningless sex. Get a partner who you trust to fuck whenever you want with the same abortion values.
useless fuck.
>>16438724
>that would create a whole lot of abandon babies. Who's going to take care of them?
I have a modest proposal for that.
>>16438778
>>16438778
I can tell you what already happened.
In England, for a time there was a law where a pregnant/newmother unwed woman could point her finger at the man of her choice (no paternity tests back then) and he would be forced to marry her. Sure as shootin' this law was abused into the core of the fucking planet, and the resulting backlash created a new environment where mothers had pretty much no recourse.
Unable to find a husband and unable to pay for the baby themselves, the mothers would 'entrust' the baby to a scam day care service which charged far too little and did not expect the mother to come back and collect her child. Long story short, there were apartments full of infant skeletons. That was the Planned Parenthood of the era, and the workhouses Charles Dickens wrote about were a vast improvement over that.
Should we go back to the fingerpointing law? Sure, if you want to repeat history.
>>16438770
>unless one of you is infertile
Nope. People that have been pronounced infertile do occasionally end up having kids. Vasectomies very rarely but sometimes don't work too. There are very few ways to have heterosexual sex and 100% guarantee beyond a doubt pregnancy will not occur. Though of course 99.9999% certainty is good enough for most.
>>16438776
You are still missing the point...
A woman can decide to have an abortion, use birth control or not have sex with the man...
The man only has a right to only 2 of those options. That means its not equal or fair...
Men should not be forced to take care of a child they don't want as long as they make the decision while an abortion option is still available.
get it now retard?
>>16438798
True, but it ignores Occam's Razor: maybe another dude fathered the baby.
I would have zero problem whatsoever with child support, if the courts which decide child support were held to the same standards as other courts.
>>16438776
>condoms are the answer
Not if it turns out the bitch was crazy and poking holes in them. By the time the child is born, it doesn't matter if there were steps taken to prevent pregnancy. The court doesn't care if used a condom. The baby is there and it needs to be dealt with.
>>16438806
Biology wont let me have a baby so I can decide for myself if I want a baby or not!
Of course you will never get that option. She's a female, she has the babies. That what shit or good about being a women. You have physical control whether to have a baby. But it is easier to have/not have a kid as far as society goes for me.
yes, the grass is greener, we all understand. quit complaining.
>>16438821
This is why we contest paternity. Sadly, we live in an environment where you're not always allowed to do so - whether you are or aren't the bio father isn't taken into consideration.
Want to know how the mob handles babymommas? Inject them with heroin, call the cops on them while they're high, and effectively adopt the baby.
>>16438829
for men*
>>16438806
It's not "equal" but neither is breeding in general; it's the woman who has to bear and birth the child with great pain while the man comes and that's it. Sure it's a bit unfortunate but the decision must be fully the woman's since it'd be horrendous to force anyone to abort or keep a child against their will, and since it is their offspring it's reasonable that they should participate in the maintenance somehow.
However, it's true that there should be at least some way to waive your rights to see the kid and then pay some sort of lowered support if you announce early enough that you want nothing to do with the kid
>>16438374
HAHAHAHAHA YOU STUPID FUCKING FAGGOT.
I hope both you and your kid starve to death you idiot.
>>16438846
Why wouldnt OP just talk to the lady?
>>16438839
For a lot of men, it has nothing to do with the kid itself. It has everything to do with the woman being a liar and a thief.
OP, you yourself cannot make sure a paternity test happens before final judgment is entered. You don't need a lawyer of the mother doesn't have a problem with testing, but lying thieves generally don't agree to have their accusations tested. An attorney of family law *might* be able to arrange this.
>>16438851
Talking works if you are not being threatened with prejudgment to haunt you for the rest of your life.
For everything else, there's lawyers.
>>16438856
I mean, if she's filing this, why wouldnt he just ask to visit, and meet the kid?
I mean, if it really it is his kid, he might want to meet him?
if its a white as white kid, and OP is Puerto rican or some shit, he would obviously not be the dad.
I mean, if she's wanting child support, and you offer to visit, because you didnt even know he was born, and make a good relationship with her and have good rapport, she's more likely to be lenient.
You might talk to her about how you're not as well off as you'd like to be, but you'll be happy to help out, and about seeing the child and having time with her/him.
But obviously, you should get a paternity test.
>>16438870
>if its a white as white kid, and OP is Puerto rican or some shit, he would obviously not be the dad.
Nah, genetics can fuck that shit up sometimes and give you results you wouldn't expect. He's obviously not the dad if the paternity test fails. Going by resemblance can give you good clues but it's not reliable.
>>16438852
OP here,
Can she really just charge me with child support without proving im the father?
I never even lived with this woman... we aren't even friends on facebook for fucks sake... we knew each other for a month... that's it.
Doesn't she have to prove paternity to make me pay?
>>16438900
I know, but it helps. its more if he looks exactly like OP, then its kinda certain.
I look like I'm Indian,while my brother is cuban-looking
>>16438946
Well, despite it not being evidence, it's kind of "proof" for her to just say she wasn't sleeping with anyone else, and she slept with you during the time of conception. It goes entirely on her word but there's no way to contest it, except a paternity test or if maybe someone else stepped up and said they were sleeping with her, but no one would actually do that here.
>>16438839
The woman is still choosing to birth and go through that pain. She doesn't have to. There are also drugs and stuff they give her to make it less painful.
The man has no choice in whether or not he will have to take care of it after its born which is just stupid.
Why should one gender have more rights than another?
That's the definition of inequality or sexism.
>>16438974
So what does she do? Just walk into a court room with a lawyer and ask the judge to file a child support order against me based on her word?
How long after I receive notice that I owe child support do I have to contest it?
>>16438989
Dunno, I'm not a law person. You should really consult a lawyer with these questions if you want good, useful, solid answers. Apparently one in family law according to >>16438768
>>16438978
Believe me, if women could chose not to have the baby, they would.
>>16439024
ever heard of abortion?
>>16439024
you are an idiot, stop shitting up the thread
>>16438989
Not even that.
She names you as the father, and a limited window of time begins ticking. If the named man does not PROPERLY contest paternity WITHIN the window, then he is the legal father. The government has its own vested interest in nailing you for the kek bills if you fail to contest.
>I'll go in without a lawyer
You'll regret it the rest of your life
>>16439030
That's choosing that the baby doesn't get born, not that they're not the ones to have it.
>>16438989
>How long after I receive notice that I owe child support do I have to contest it?
About negative two months.
In other words, you're supposed to contest it right fucking now and not wait for a judge to tell you that you're in arrears. Be cause then you will take it in the rear.
>>16439030
if women ccould chose not to be the ones to get pregnant, they would.
>>16439032
While its true that women have more of an option whether to have a kid, its okay. Thats just fine. Because they are the ones who actually have kids. They have to spend a year holding it, they get that option.
You have the option to socially still work if you have kid, to have almost the same options you had when you were single.
Yeah, while it would be kickass to get to have a kid, then leave him with my husband to get do presentations like I use to, I understand I have more choice on when we have kids, and how many.
>>16438774
As pro choice people say, "AUGH SEX SHOULDN'T BE A PUNISHMENT"
>>16439044
no one is arguing that men should have the right to have a child...
We are saying that they should have the same right to choose that the baby doesn't get born as the woman. They shouldn't be able to force a woman to get an abortion, but they should be able to sign an agreement not to have to take care of it once its born.
This is literally my worst fear. I've personally abstained from sex with each of my two long-term girlfriends over the last 3 years just because once you have sex and it goes wrong you lose all your rights to the decisions about how to manage the pregnancy and the rest of your life is at the mercy of the whims of the girl you slept with. What a nightmare.
>>16439140
Well, yeah.
But I still agree that if women could choose not to be the ones to get pregnant, they would.
>>16439152
Yeah. It's really not good to have sex with someone you can't trust.
>>16439162
Rather than that, it's that you can't trust anyone. I know that if I had a conversation with my girlfriend right now she'd agree that she didn't want a baby and that if it went wrong she'd abort. But once the pregnancy begins all these hormones start to flow. Suddenly it's not a baby but "my baby" and maybe her feelings have changed or maybe the pro-life propaganda got to her or maybe she feels pressured by her parents but either way the decision is hers to make and whether my life goes to hell or not is completely out of my hands.
Tell me, if sex was not the reward how much would you have to be paid to roll the dice with an outcome like that hanging in the balance?
>>16439190
I dont want to have kids either, but I don't think I could abort if I accidently got pregnant.
You honestly feel that if your girlfriend had the baby that when the baby girl/boy was born you wouldnt love it?
>>16439190
Yeah, people can change their minds or be influenced by outside forces. But that's part of what having faith in someone is about, trusting them despite those possibilities.
It's also possible from a female perspective that the guy they're with could just rape them out of nowhere but generally they have to just trust that won't happen.
>>16439197
This kind of worry really isn't about that. It's about fearing unwanted, unsought responsibility.
>>16439197
Abortion isn't killing a kid, it's killing something that might become a kid. You have the wrong perception of abortion.
>>16439197
Make sure you talk to guys you're with about your full feelings because sometimes saying "i don't want to have a baby right now" can make them assume things and not realize there's that big "but" there.
>>16439221
In the new "less-crunchy" abortion methods, is it still not a baby even if it has a beating heart and breathing lungs outside the womb?
>>16439231
Yes.
>>16439152
bro
I wouldn't mind raising a baby, even as godfather rather than biological father. What I have a problem with is the modern fad of marrying a man, cheating on him, divorcing him, and keeping his income for the next 18 years. It prevents the ex-husband from having a real family who loves him instead of just gaming the courts to steal his future.
>>16438485
How about don't have sex if you can't deal with the end result of it. You don't need to have it to survive.
>>16439140
If this was the case, guess who'd then in turn would have to support the child? the government?
I guess you wouldn't mind having your taxes raised because other people can't make good reproductive decisions, but I'd rather other men financing their own problems than me.
Besides, that system could be misused by couples who want to cheat the system for some extra cash.
Not to mention the people who just wouldn't give a fuck about protection anymore because it doesn't have any negative consequences to them personally.
At least with child support, people are gonna be a little more careful with reproductive protection on their own accord.
>>16439244
read the thread faggot, then post
>>16439221
I didnt ask you about my opinion.
I was just curious about that anon's view of it.
>>16438374
Expect to feel the fifteen inch horse cock of the law balls deep in your asswheat
>>16439225
yeah, we have already.
We had a pregnancy scare once(which looking back on it, no it wasnt, we were just 17 and didnt know anything)
But he knows I couldnt do it. Iv'e thought about it, and I dont judge people for doing it, if they feel as though this option is how life should go, then alll the power to them.
But he knows I just couldnt.
>>16439244
if you are in any way attractive it is extremely hard not to have sex. its a natural a thing to do as breathing, eating, sleeping...
>>16439216
Well most responsibility is wanted and unsought.
Only a handful of them are personally picked.
I was specifically asking if this situation happened, would you not love the kid? Most moms will feel love, but I havent asked many dads/soon to be dads.
>>16439197
I'd have to learn to love it wouldn't I? But the fact that I had no choice in the matter and that they would be a huge mental and financial drain on me and that I would have to put my own wants and needs on the sideline so that I can focus on raising a child that I never asked for... Would make things difficult to say the least.
Completely agree with >>16439216 and >>16439225.
>>16439266
pregnancy scare? did she have a false positive on a pregnancy test or what happened?
>>16439280
I mean, you act like the mother also doesnt have those feelings.
My mom(teenager mom unfortunately) said that sometimes she would be doing her college essays and we would be crying and she would get so frustrated and and just want to let my brother cry.
My grandma would come in and grab my brother, and when he would see my mom he would smile, and she'd stop being mad and hold him.
I understand how someone, especially young, could get frustrated, but I dont see how it could be "difficult" to love your child. just frustrating to love them.
Or is that what you meant?
>>16439269
But you don't need it to live, like breathing, eating and sleeping. It's still a choice.
>>16439283
No, I missed a day on my period, and I was freaking out so we went to the drug store and bought a test.
Like, I miss my period up to a month and don't freak out now. Hell, I went 8 months without one once.
But I also learned a couple years ago that my family has a long history of abnormal period consistency. On both sides.
>>16439297
sexual gratification is a need for psychological stability. I'm absolutely sure of that.
Unless you are part of the 1% of the population that is asexual or so fuck ugly they don't have an option. Even the ugly ones find some outlet for sexual gratification, rape, beastiality, ect....
>>16439244
That's exactly what I'm doing.
But it fucking sucks that I have a gorgeous girlfriend who I could be having sex with day and night but I have to abstain from sex so if I want to avoid screwing up my entire life.
>>16439266
Good to hear this.
>>16439272
Actually most responsibility is chosen. Owning a car, starting a business, starting a job, enrolling in university... these are all decisions you make or don't depending on whether you want to live up to the responsibility. Most people do not go into sex for the purpose of childbirth, but pleasure and affection.
>>16439305
its not needed for basic living is what I think he's getting at.
First its the basics, food/water/homeostasis, then finiancial(or goods) stability, housing stability, then comes relationships, the feeling that you're well liked(because being well like use to mean survival), that you have emotional support(usually motherly and fatherly first), this stage would also include sexual competence, meaning that the greatest step of all of your peers accepting you is that someone was willing to procreate with you(for all intents and purposes).
>>16439290
Obviously there are benefits that you get when you have a child, but for me at least the negatives highly outweigh those.
I have a friend who had his condom break and had a baby with his girlfriend at 20. He had to immediately find a stable full-time job and these days he looks half-dead all the time. I'm sure I don't have to tell you the hell parents go through raising their children, whether it's physical or mental exhaustion from the constant demands and lack of sleep, but it's no easy task. I know he loves his kid but if I'll bet you anything if I told him he could turn back the clock he'd do it in a second.
>>16439221
>be me
>w8 infront of gynecologist
>kick pregnant women in the belly
>blood everywhere
>she screams about how I killed her baby
>tell her that I merely killed something that might become a baby and that she has the wrong perception
>>16439330
I dont think he would. I've asked my mom this, and she said she would go the point after I was born and get a bat and hit my dad in the fucking face.
She'd quit community college, get us to the 6th grade, and then go back to college.
I imagine your friend would go back the second he had his kid, then do other shit differently.
My mom told me the worst part about having a kid is not realizing all the stupid mistakes you couldve easily avoided. not actually raising a kid.
>>16439356
>abortion is the same as physical assault
What.
>>16439356
Whoa anon, lets not go that far.
I mean, i agree that a fetuses importance is with the mom, but if he was able to kick a woman in the stomach, and it kill the baby, that baby was probably pretty much developed.
>>16439361
>>16439362
This was an analogy (obviously).my point is that when the woman is sad that the fetus died, it is always the baby. could you imagine any court going soft on a guy who caused an abortion because "it is not a baby"?
just imagine that your gf (or a hookup or whatever) tells you that she is pregnant and you are super happy and are really looking forward to having a kid and then she is like: "ofcourse, I am going to abort it, I can not have it ruin my bikini body".
Can you imagine being that guy? I just want to point out that an abortion can be a pretty major thing for a guy.
It takes two to have sex and imho the woman should be forced to take some responsibility. Not in the financial sense or something, but imho the man should be able to force the woman to give birth (unless med. counterindications) if he takes care of it.
I know this view makes me a nazi.
>>16439405
>unless med. counterindications
it's always extremely painful and somewhat damaging to be pregnant and give birth. every time: extreme pain and permanent damage.
I would get a paternity test and then push for joint custody. Don't imply you will make it easy for her to have that shared custody either. Even if you don't want it, she might reconsider if it's too much effort for her. Then I'd wind down the gravy train so any payment would be minimal. Although I believe there's usually quite a hefty flat rate.
In which case, sorry dude. You just got charged $40,000 to cum in a vagina. You knew the risks. Not fair? Don't have sex with someone you wouldn't want a baby with.
>>16439455
like that is not known
>>16439315
>basic living
It's hard to hold someone to the flame because they did something that comes as natural as having sex. To say they should unnecessarily suffer for it is ridiculous when there are easy solutions to the problem that benefit everyone.
The issue is: Should men be forced to take care of unwanted children in a time when abortion is legal and safely available. I think the answer is no.
If abortion was illegal for everyone then that's a different society and history has shown us that people cannot be stopped from having abortions so that's obviously not the solution.
>>16439358
OK maybe you're right. People change as they experience different things. But that means that your mum now and my friend now are different people than they were due to the enlightening experience of child raising. It's possible that if I knocked up my girlfriend that 3 years later I would tell you that I have no regrets and that I'm happy.
But that isn't the life I choose for myself being the person I am now. I have goals I want to achieve and the financial limitations and lack of freedom would disallow me from achieving them. What you're talking about is acceptance and adaptation to the new status quo, something that humans are good at. But it's absolutely not something I'd choose for myself.
And that's to say nothing about the potential depression and conflict it could cause down the road. If you look at OP's situation it seems more likely that he'll be on bad terms with the mother and that his experience of child-raising will largely be deducting a chunk of his income from his salary for the next two decades.
>>16439358
your mom benefits from an unjust system that caters to sluts having as many babies as possible. She sounds like a typical welfare queen.
>>16439405
I totally disagree with you. If you are going to have a child, both parties should agree to it, and have the right to object to it, male or female.
How can you have a healthy relationship and provide a good upbringing when one party was essentially blackmailed into it?
What's more, if you plan to raise the child on your own why should you expect the person who objected to the whole thing pay substantial amounts of money to cater to your whims?
>>16439483
Agreed.
What do you think of a change to the system where if the woman wants to raise the child and the father does not, then she is free to make her decision but if she chooses to keep the child then she isn't given financial support?
I mean honestly, you should already know the facts about the cost of raising a child. You should really take the financial effects into consideration rather than having a child and then crying that you can't afford to raise it on your own. It's comparable to getting a car and then complaining that you can't afford to pay for the insurance.
>>16439517
>What's more, if you plan to raise the child on your own why should you expect the person who objected to the whole thing pay substantial amounts of money to cater to your whims?
like men have to do now?
your points both apply to the male situation now.
>>16438721
>Societies want kids
of some races
>and a lot of countries are struggling with falling birth rates
totally solvable with relaxed immigration rules.
>>16439530
Yes, and it's bad. But your suggestion to lower the female situation to the same level of stupidity helps noone.
>>16439550
Seems like anon has missed your point about the fact that noone should be forced to have a pregnancy because of the trauma involved.
>>16438451
this
>>16438374
>I had no idea this girl was even pregnant and was never consulted about whether I wanted the child or not...
Should have thought about putting a rubber on if you wanted to avoid long term financial deprivation.
>>16439528
>You should really take the financial effects into consideration rather than having a child and then crying that you can't afford to raise it on your own
You should tell that to the thousands upon thousands of people in poverty with several children and more on the way. I'm sure they'll come to their senses and stop collecting all that free tax money they're getting to spend on shit they don't need.
>>16439620
So you're agreeing with me?
Those people have no incentive to change, however there is an incentive for basically everyone else to change the law regarding it.
>>16439609
Condoms aren't as effective as you'd think.
>18 or more pregnancies per 100 women in a year
>>16439254
>>If this was the case, guess who'd then in turn would have to support the child?
The mother you stupid fuck. It's called personal responsibility, women are people and are responsible for their own actions and choices, including the choice to go through with having a baby.
>>16439197
In your post there's an assumption love for a child is automatic, but that's not so. Love for a child by its father develops during its gestation through living interaction with the mother and being a part of the whole process. To present a man with a child he doesn't know about and expect him to love it is thinking men are like women, whose love develops while carrying the child and who are programmed to be nurturing and motherly.
A man's response will be more based on his upbringing and social conditioning, followed by his self centred views of life unfolding differently to his expectations.
So he may learn to love it. He may love it due to his social conditioning or he may never love it or want any contact at all.
>>16439734
I know that very much.
I was asking for a specifics person view, you idiots.
>>16439497
>my mom
>having welfare
bitch pls. Did it with three jobs and college.
(well I guess also my grandparents. Thanks grandma.)
>>16439705
That would mean more children growing up in poverty, turning to crime and in the end cost society way more than making sole men take responsibility for their own actions.
child support is not for the woman. It's to make sure the child grow up with a certain standard of living. The child shouldn't have to suffer just because the woman didn't plan for finances, that's why they make the other parent pay.
You put your dick in a woman.She got pregnant. YOU deal with it.
I don't want to pay for your idiocy.
>>16439976
This is true, and I think it's important to have children avoid a poverty-stricken upbringing.
The problem is that it also creates a crutch for women who decide they want to have their child, whereas they may otherwise decide against it.
>I don't want to pay for your idiocy.
Obviously putting more stress on the welfare budget is a bad thing, but the fact is that OP's financial future is being ruined with his only wrong being that he chose the wrong girl for his one-night-stand. The punishment hardly fits the "crime".
Does that not concern you at all?
>>16439976
>child support is not for the woman. It's to make sure the child grow up with a certain standard of living. The child shouldn't have to suffer just because the woman didn't plan for finances
Then if the woman cant take care of her kid child services takes it away and the woman receives a massive fine she must pay for up to years and years later to pay for the state taking care of her child. Basically... child support. And if she fails to pay child support she goes to jail, same way guys do now. Women will now be encouraged to actually plan their pregnancies, as opposed to being encouraged to trap random innocent men.
>You put your dick in a woman.She got pregnant. YOU deal with it.
>you played tennis with a woman. she got $50,000 loan. you deal with it
In the modern context where birth control is so ridiculously easily available and recreational sex is so common having sex with someone does not logically lead to the woman being pregnant. Pregnancy is what happens when a woman wants it to happen, when she purposefully avoids all birth control methods to carry a baby for months and then take care of it for years after. Spending a small while having recreational fun with a woman does not obligate you to lifelong commitment, and you're fucking insane if you think so.
If women have the RIGHT to have full control of whether they have a child then they should have FULL RESPONSIBILITY over said child. The current state of affairs where a woman can successfully randomly pick a man off facebook and have the state force him to pay child support for a kid he didn't have with a women he's never met is a fucking travesty. Women are adults and should be able to handle the responsibility of having a child, and if they arent then they should deal with the consequences of their own actions, not force others to.
as for OP Get a lawyer asap and get a paternity test. Try and aim for the minimal payment, i think in australia its something like $5 a month?
Basically it should go like this.
If a woman gets pregnant she should have 9 weeks to fully disclose it to the father and the father should sign a document if they want the child or not. If the woman does not do this then the father should not be held responsible at all and the father should be automatically relinquished of all paternity right to the child.
Reading all of this makes me kinda glad i'm a virgin.
I don't have to deal with all this bullshit so many people go through nowadays.
>>16440087
>The punishment hardly fits the "crime".
Hey, I agree it's not "fair", but growing up in poverty because your mother is stupid and father didn't want to take responsibility is even less fair.
>>16440113
>Then if the woman cant take care of her kid child services takes it away and the woman receives a massive fine she must pay for up to years and years later to pay for the state taking care of her child.
I wouldn't particularly mind this. I just don't think it will be cheaper for society in the long run.
In a better world, all women and men would be sterilized until they went up and got it undone when they actually wanted a child.
>being encouraged to trap random innocent men.
what are you even talking about?
>you played tennis with a woman. she got $50,000 loan. you deal with it
explain a situation were this could actually happen, and where you weren't aware that this could be a consequence.
>having sex with someone does not logically lead to the woman being pregnant.
And yet it happens. Hey, it sucks, but we have to deal with the child that then actually exists.
And I would personally rather be it the guy who was involved in creating the child than pin part of my income on it.
Don't you see how it's even more unfair for someone who didn't even cum in the woman to have to pay for your irresponsibility?
Is it okay to have a guy whose paternity test doesn't match the child pay? Absolutely not! And I will gladly help change such an injustice. but I don't see how any guy today in the western world can be unaware that sex sometimes, even with protection, results in pregnancy, and that the outcome of a pregnancy ultimately is determined by the one carrying it.
ITT people excusing OP and shitty guys for being irresponsible fuckheads.
>>16440113
>they should deal with the consequences of their own actions
But they already do by either carrying the pregnancy to term or having an abortion. Getting an abortion isn't fun either.
>>16439976
>children growing up in poverty, turning to crime and in the end cost society
This already happens with accidental pregnancies that aren't aborted. I'd rather have more women avoid pregnancy because they'll be solely responsible for the consequences than think there's a government on babydaddy they can just fall back on, and then still fuck it up because that's not enough.
>>16440363
>I wouldn't particularly mind this. I just don't think it will be cheaper for society in the long run.
I disagree. Women being made to take responsibility for their actions would definitely be better and cheaper for society in the long run.
>what are you even talking about?
In the current system women have financial incentive to entrap men with pregnancy, and with how they can worm out of paternity tests its not even necessary for them to have had sex with the men in question.
>explain a situation were this could actually happen...
Come on that was clearly using a demonstrative comparison to exaggerate. The specifics don't actually matter, I was basically saying "you do x recreation with a woman, she decides to commit to something financially draining and because of the previous recreation you are arbitrarily obligated to take responsibility for someone else's actions."
>And yet it happens. Hey, it sucks, but we have to deal with the child that then actually exists.
No the one responsible has to deal with the child. If women were being lambasted for having children that were beyond their means when they could have easily not then the issue would sort itself out. Women wouldn't have children beyond their means if it meant they would get appropriately shat on and had to deal with the consequences. Your "solution" only deals with the symptoms not the problem, not to mention the injustices it enacts upon the innocent.
>but I don't see how any guy today in the western world can be unaware that sex sometimes, even with protection, results in pregnancy, and that the outcome of a pregnancy ultimately is determined by the one carrying it.
>and that the outcome of a pregnancy ultimately is determined by the one carrying it.
Which is why the responsibility should fall solely on the individual carrying it.
>>16440411
>immoral white knight shifting the consequences of womens actions onto innocent men
You're a monster.
>>16440363
>cheaper for society in the long run
This doesn't justify the fact that the guy is being unfairly punished for something he has little control over. I actually think >>16440113 has is on the right track. Women have the majority of the control over the pregnancy so they should be financially responsible for the repercussions. Shit, they could even place the baby up for adoption if they can't afford to care for it. This isn't even near an option for you if you're a guy.
>being encouraged to trap random innocent men
Pretty sure he's talking about the trend of women who get pregnant off some guy they can't remember the name of and then blame paternity on some random guy who can't prove otherwise to the courts. Not really well versed in these cases but I think that's the gist of it.
>you played tennis with a woman. she got $50,000 loan. you deal with it
The analogue is that you agree to have sex with the women for fun, similar to how you'd enjoy sport together, and then she decides to have a child based off it, which is expected to cost upwards of $50,000 over 18 years, and then you have to foot the bill because you agreed to have sex for pleasure with her.
Not a great analogy I know but it does help show the ridiculousness of the situation.
>>16439269
I've been abstaining for years despite being in a relationship and I have to say that's just not true. Maybe some people have high sex drives that make it more difficult to abstain, but it's always an option.
Hello, I've got absolutely no experience, expertise, or advice for the thread!
Instead, I'm going to post about how Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is absolute fucking shit-tripe and anything derived from it is second-hand shit.
>>16439305
But sexual gratification isn't sex. Even in a sexual relationship you can avoid vaginal intercourse with masturbation, or alternative forms of sex.
>>16440436
What's the reason for your abstinence?
And how does your partner feel about it?
>>16440419
>This already happens with accidental pregnancies that aren't aborted.
yes. let's not make it worse.
biologically one man can create way more offspring in a given period of time than one woman.
Therefore having the men take part in being responsible in reproductive health will be way more effective than just letting the women handle it.
1. get it paternity tested, by yourself only
2. hire a lawyer, because she didn't notify you there might be something to work with though I doubt it
3. never improve your career ever. Any dollar you earn extra will essentially go towards her
>>16440460
Except men have no control over whether a pregnancy occurs? They can give their opinion, but the decision is 100% in the control of the woman.
>>16440460
>biologically one man can create way more offspring in a given period of time than one woman.
>Therefore having the men take part in being responsible in reproductive health will be way more effective than just letting the women handle it.
This does not logically make sense when women have complete control over whether they have the child or not. A guy can fuck 10000 women without a condom and not have a single child since they all decided to use contraception and other birth control methods. You need to seriously think your reasoning over, your blind assertions that women shouldn't be fully responsible for their actions but random men they had sex with should be is legitimately dangerous.
>>16440421
>I disagree. Women being made to take responsibility for their actions would definitely be better and cheaper for society in the long run.
I disagree. explain why it would be cheaper.
> they can worm out of paternity tests its not even necessary for them to have had sex with the men in question.
I agree that this is not okay.
>that was clearly using a demonstrative comparison to exaggerate.
it was really bad, then.
a better example would be,
>you played tennis with a woman. you end up breaking something with a foul ball. you have to pay a fine for breaking it. you deal with it.
This can possibly happen when you play tennis and aren't careful. Are you going to argue that you shouldn't have to pay just because you didn't mean to break it? Who's going to pay for your mistake, then?
>No the one responsible has to deal with the child.
exactly. the responsible ones are the father and the mother.
>Women wouldn't have children beyond their means if it meant they would get appropriately shat on and had to deal with the consequences.
This has proven to be false through history.
>injustices it enacts upon the innocent.
The innocent is the child, not the man.
>Which is why the responsibility should fall solely on the individual carrying it.
but isn't that "unfair" too, like you're claiming it to be for men now?
>>16440449
I haven't been here long. Is there a rule against discussion on this board?
>>16440456
Avoiding pregnancy but also working out emotional baggage.
My partner is cool with it. I check up with them about it sometimes and they're like "Yeah, I'd like having sex with you if you were down for it, but if you're not I still love being with you and don't mind."
I realize not everyone has a partner as indulging as mine , but my point still stands that abstinence is an option that needs to be weighed with one's priorities and personal situation.
>>16440473
>>16440488
Men have as much control over whether a pregnancy occurs as women. They can use protection or get an vasectomy. Or abstain from intercourse.
What men don't have control over is whether the pregnancy is carried to term. The woman fully has to deal with that and take responsibility, whether she chooses to carry it to term or terminate it.
Remember that both these choices require an action that may not be pleasant.
>>16440460
>let's not make it worse.
I don't think the current system in place is really making it any better than proposed the alternative. I think making women solely responsible would improve the situation, not worsen it.
>>16440503
>>Women wouldn't have children beyond their means if it meant they would get appropriately shat on and had to deal with the consequences.
>This has proven to be false through history.
While it did still occur, I believe it happened with less frequency and it is becoming an increasing problem now.
>>16440518
>Men have as much control over whether a pregnancy occurs as women. They can use protection or get an vasectomy. Or abstain from intercourse.
what about relationships? You are right, and I insist on wearing condoms in relationships always, but it inevitably sends a signal of distrust. Millions of guys fall for it, and it's a lose-lose situation either way
Insist on wearing condoms with LTR
>He doesn't trust you, he's probably cheating on you, he has STDs
Don't wear a condom and get preg trapped
>It's his responsibility as well! He could've worn a condom!
I wear condom and plan on either getting Vasalgel when it finally comes, or getting a vasectomy, but I don't think men really have that much of a choice. Well they have one, but it's really a lesser of two evils thing.
>>16440503
>I disagree. explain why it would be cheaper.
Individuals who are free of the consequences of their actions do a lot of stupid and ultimately costly shit (eg. having children they cant personally afford). By forcing them to deal with the consequences of their actions they will learn how to deal with responsibilities.
>not going to argue the comparison since you seemed to purposefully misinterpret it and it's less important. see >>16440422 for help understanding what i meant
>Are you going to argue that you shouldn't have to pay just because you didn't mean to break it? Who's going to pay for your mistake, then?
The mistake is having the child, the choice to have a child is solely on the shoulders of a woman under most country's laws. Recreational sex leading to accidental pregnancy happens sometimes yes. I agree then that men should have to contribute towards the price of the birth control methods required to abort the pregnancy.
>exactly. the responsible ones are the father and the mother.
The "father" is not responsible, he has no say in whether the child is carries to term.
>This has proven to be false through history.
Prove it, though if you're going to cite examples where birth control isn't readily available then you're going to be told you're an idiot for thinking that is relevant. The reality of dumb peasant sluts thousands of years ago is different to the reality of modern women who have a basic education and understand the science behind pregnancy.
>The innocent is the child, not the man.
They both are ya idiot. Just because one person is being harmed doesn't mean it's at all okay to purposefully harm another.
>but isn't that "unfair" too, like you're claiming it to be for men now?
It is not at all unfair to claim that individuals should be treated like adults and be responsible for their own actions and decisions. in this case we're talking about the decision to carry a pregnancy to term. I can't think of anything more fair than that.
>>16440518
First of all, women have far more contraceptive methods than men do. Why are you insinuating that the burden of contraception falls on the man rather than both parties? Abstaining from intercourse? How is that something that only applies to the guy?!
>Men have as much control over whether a pregnancy occurs as women
Secondly, this is somewhat true, but preventive protection is not 100% reliable. Are you going to point the finger at the guy whose condom broke, or the guy whose girlfriend got pregnant even though she was using the pill?
Pregnancy prevention does not end at conception as you appear to believe, and this is where the inequality arises.
You know what is 100%? The ability to abort.
>>16440542
>condoms send a signal of distrust
I have never looked at it that way before. It's more like an extra precaution for if birth control fails, which it does sometimes. It's a perfectly understandable thing to do, and it can even be claimed by someone that they may prefer it for comfort over going bareback (which I doubt anyone actually does, but it's still a line that might work).
>>16440559
I'm pretty sure you've misread what the guy was saying. Here I condensed it:
>Men have as much control over whether a pregnancy occurs as women.
>What men don't have control over is whether the pregnancy is carried to term. The woman fully has to deal with that and take responsibility, whether she chooses to carry it to term or terminate it.
>>16440562
I think girls also have an aversion to condoms.
I never slept with my first girlfriend because she wanted her first time to be without a condom and was awfully unreliable with her birth control.
>>16440569
I'm pretty sure I demonstrated my understanding of what they meant.
>Secondly, this is somewhat true
And once again,
>Pregnancy prevention does not end at conception as you appear to believe
The inequality is not in the inability to control contraception, but the inability to have control over a pregnancy being carried to term.
>>16440572
I'm a girl but I still don't get it. It's your dick so it should be your choice whether you want to wear one. As half of the people involved having sex you deserve a say how it's going to be done and if she's not cool with your choice to wear a condom you can just withhold sex.
>>16440422
>This doesn't justify the fact that the guy is being unfairly punished for something he has little control over.
Stop looking at it as a punishment, and look at it as a issue of finances.
We have a child, and someone has to pay for it. The ones who should pay for it is either: the mother, the father, the government.
If the mother OR father solely pays, the child will suffer from poor standard of living and will likely end up being a drain to society, so that's a bad option.
If the government solely pays, the taxes will have to be raised to accommodate the suddenly large number of children that need to be provided for. A number that'll probably rise when men and women will suffer absolutely no repercussions for having children. So this is also bad.
Now, then the father OR mother together with the government could pay for the child, which would result in a medium rise in taxes and possible more cases of counterfeit of relationship statuses by couples to gain more benefits. This option is understandable in cases where there is no other options, but is unfair to the people who didn't even participate in the intercourse and creation of the child. I would personally want to avoid this option, because I don't want to pay for YOUR sexscapedes.
Then we have the option of having the mother AND the father pay, which will enclose the financial responsibility to the closely involved, and would encourage taking responsibility for contraception in both women AND father.
I honestly don't care much about the father or mother in these cases, but the child needs to be provided for, and I rather that go to someone who had hand in their creation than me.
>>16440585
Yeah, like I said that's exactly what I did.
I think for her she wanted her first time to be special.
>>16440548
>By forcing them to deal with the consequences of their actions they will learn how to deal with responsibilities
Can't that statement also apply to men paying child support? People can argue all day online about it being unfair, but at some point you have to realize this is how laws currently function. If guys can't learn that these are the consequences they face even when it's talked about so much, why do you think women would do any better?
>>16440585
>>16440572
From personal experience girls tend to have more aversion to condoms than guys do even. I've heard various reasons for it
>It feels better without
>I feel like you don't trust me
>I feel like a slut if you wear a condom
that last one was gold because I literally met her that same day
>>16440618
this. Men, if you fucked, you have to face the potential consequences. And at least you don't have to go through with abortions. Maybe op should have worn a fucking condom and made sure or checked if she was on some type of birth control. lmao
>>16440603
>We have a child, and someone has to pay for it. The ones who should pay for it is either: the mother, the father, the government.
correct
>If the mother OR father solely pays, the child will suffer from poor standard of living and will likely end up being a drain to society, so that's a bad option.
that's not true. If the person who also has custody pays, this would be true. In reality the person who DOESN'T have custody ends up paying, who usually makes enough. And the person to get custody is the mother in >90% of cases. The government will do whatever it can to avoid paying for it. The only time when this happens is when the father (eg Jamal) himself is on welfare
>>16440626
These all sound like really bitchy arguments to have against safe sex. What is wrong with these women?
>>16440603
Except many of our society's punishments are financial, enforced in the form of fines. Even imprisonment can be looked at as a financial punishment, as a year in prison is a year you are unable to make wages.
I'm looking at your list of options and seeing your reasoning. It's solid. But there's an option that you haven't considered - if the father is completely against the child and the mother still chooses to have the child, she is solely responsible for the child. I know that your chief concern is that the mother can't pay for the kid, so how about we have the government assist her, not as a handout, but as a low-interest loan that will eventually be paid back. It can be thought of as a long-term investment.
In this system we have:
The child having a financially stable upbringing
The mother taking full responsibility for a choice which was solely hers, and possibly even managing her money more reasonably knowing that she has to pay it back
The father who was clearly against having the child not being ridiculously punished for an upbringing he wanted no part of
The government using tax dollars for a good cause with an expectation of an eventual return
Your thoughts?
lol. Abstinence wins again. Should have pursued wizard powers instead of whores, op
>>16440581
Ah, so you were just objecting to the first part of his post. The end of your other post made it seem like you hadn't read the rest of what he said. the:
>Pregnancy prevention does not end at conception as you appear to believe, and this is where the inequality arises.
>You know what is 100%? The ability to abort.
Lines specifically. You are saying "this is where the inequality arises." and it comes off more as if you are explaining this to him even though that's literally what his post was illustrating, less like you are agreeing.
>>16440603
>We have a child, and someone has to pay for it. The ones who should pay for it is either: the mother, the father, the government.
>If the mother OR father solely pays, the child will suffer from poor standard of living and will likely end up being a drain to society
Only if a woman has decided to go to term with a pregnancy while not being financially able to care for it. If women don't do this then the problem disappears, and you don't have to remedy shit. You seem to be desperately trying to solve a problem that shouldn't exist by any means necessary, even to the detriment of innocent men who did not have any say in the birth of the child. The solution is to try to stop these things before they become a problem, and the solution DEFINITELY isn't throwing random people under the bus just because they got their dick wet one time.
>I honestly don't care much about the father or mother in these cases, but the child needs to be provided for, and I rather that go to someone who had hand in their creation than me.
This whole line is disgusting. Literally immoral trash, trying to sound righteous with a weak half hearted "think of the children" while not lifting a finger, or even seriously thinking about the issue in a way that solves the root of the problem.
>>16440637
>whores
op it at fault too for being a whore
>>16440635
How many single mothers have you met? I don't doubt many of them are decent people who fell upon hard times, but you cannot honestly expect that Shanaynay will pay back her loan just because Tyrone pumped and dumped.
>>16440634
>arguments
>women
didn't you read "feel" in like every line?
>>16440618
>>16440627
The problem is NOT that they fucked, but that they brought a child into the world, a decision that ultimately rests 100% on the woman and not the man.
>>16440627
>at least you don't have to go through with abortions
If I had the option of going through with an abortion I would 200% take that option. Having control over my own fate? Fuck that right? lmao
>>16440559
It falls on both men and women, you dolt.
I'm not gonna point my finger at neither those guys, but there was a risk of pregnancy, and the involved should finance it, not me.
>>16440618
>If guys can't learn that these are the consequences they face even when it's talked about so much, why do you think women would do any better?
Men are learning from this, why do you think marriage rates are in the toilet and men are becoming more and more distrustful of women? It's a serious problem, Having men be distrustful of women harms society as a whole. A prime example of this is men refusing to act as mentors towards women in the workplace due to fears that sexual harassment claims could be made against them and they'd lose their careers.
This isn't fucking right, women are getting special treatment and arent having to deal with the consequences of their actions, and as a result men are becoming increasingly suspicious and resentful towards them.
>>16440644
There could be a reasonable expectation of loan repayment after the child has turned 18, after which the woman is punished similarly to how men are when they don't pay their child support payments. If you think this sounds unfair, you need to look at the treatment men are receiving.
>>16440654
Because carrying the baby rests 100% on the woman. That is how biology works.
And yes, as a man you can say you'd easily abort. Because you never have to actually face it from a woman's perspective. You don't have hormones telling you this is your child and you need to protect it. Read up about how traumatizing it is for some people who thought they were going to be okay with it.
>>16440671
> reasonable expectation of loan repayment
You mean the same reasonable expectations of repayment that came with home loans in 2008?
I'm not looking at what is fair or not. I am talking about what is practical and what is likely. Loans will not be repayed by a large number of women. Women will not but punished for their bullshit because that's how bullshit our system is. If you want to implement something like your proposal, a lot of work needs to happen to change the status quo before your idea would even be considered.
>>16440635
Eh, this is fine, I guess.
I mean, if it will actually end up being paid back.
The US is already pretty weird with loans.
>>16440658
Sigh. Look, prevention falls on both men and women, no doubt about it. Prevention does not have 100% success rate.
But after pregnancy, only the woman can choose to abort. Abortion IS 100%. If we could somehow swap the figures, then we could reasonably point at the man and say this is your fault as much as hers. But men cannot 100% prevent pregnancy, and women can, and despite this men are the ones forced to bear the financial burden.
It's easy to say "Those involved deal with it" but in the end, only one of those members has the absolute ability to make the decision.
>>16440690
So your solution is to suck it up and stop trying to improve the status quo? Even when you can clearly see inequality in the current system? Can't say I'm a big fan of your advice.
>>16440658
>hurr durr I'm ignoring the actual problem because it's easier to just shit on men I dont care about when it doesnt effect me
The issue is women having kids they cant afford, not that there are kids magically appearing that need to be taken care of. Women should be motivated to NOT do that stupid shit, not have the government enable them through fucking over random men uninvolved with the decision to carry to term.
>>16440687
I'm not going to argue that having an abortion isn't easy.
But I'm also not going to argue that child birth isn't easy and that raising a child for 18 years isn't easy, because we both know that these are also traumatizing experiences.
It is precisely because I understand that having an abortion is difficult that I will never say that you should force someone to have an abortion. But self-destructing two people's lives for fear of that trauma isn't something I can agree with either. If you want to have a baby and the guy doesn't, he shouldn't get dragged down into the child-raising experience with you because of hormones.
>>16440697
I can tell you think you are intelligent, but you are clearly not because I did not offer any advice.
>>16440638
>If women don't do this then the problem disappears, and you don't have to remedy shit.
Yes. What is the solution then?
I agree that the problem shouldn't exists, but it does and what can we do about it?
and could you please stop referring to the men as 'innocent'? They had sex, they knew the risk. The only ones who are really innocent are the children.
>while not lifting a finger
But I am, you see, I fully realize the consequences of sex, and will take responsibility for them thereafter.
The best part? I won't make YOU pay for it!
>>16440731
You can dance around with wordplay all your like, but at the end of the day you believe that the current system should be maintained due to it's financial feasibility.
I'll agree that my ideas may not work in their current form, and it's possible that no idea I come up with will solve the problem. I'm no politician. But someone else may, and if I agreed with their proposal I'd support them in it.
What I can't agree with is your stance that we should accept the world as it is just because it's too hard to try and change it.
A lot of work may need to happen, but it should.
>>16440694
>men are the ones forced to bear the financial burden.
What makes you think that the women don't bear the financial burden?
>>16440707
How do we motivate women to not do that stupid shit without it negatively effecting already existing children?
>>16440761
Sorry, that was unclear on my part.
It's not that women don't bear financial burden, but that they choose to do so while in some cases, men do not and yet they are legally obliged to do so.
>>16440755
That is not, has never been, and likely never will be my stance. You are attempting to construct a strawman because you want an argument. I pointed out the flaw in your idea, and that was that. If anything, I suggest that changes need to be made to the fundamental system instead of just going in guns-a-blazing. You would rather build a house on a pile of sand with no foundation. No need to take it personally.
>>16440737
>>Yes. What is the solution then?
Making women responsible for the consequences of their decisions.
>and could you please stop referring to the men as 'innocent'? They had sex, they knew the risk.
Recreational sex =/= procreation. They did not consent to having a child, they had no say in the birth of the child. Stop pretending to be retarded.
>>But I am, you see, I fully realize the consequences of sex, and will take responsibility for them thereafter.
>The best part? I won't make YOU pay for it!
Yeah, not having to pay a few cents more tax every year is totally more important than innocent people having their lives ruined and being put into jail because of laws that are out of touch with reality.
>>16440761
>>What makes you think that the women don't bear the financial burden?
Of course some do you fucking retard don't try to deflect.
The issue is the fact that the state mandates that some men bear the financial burden and will throw them into jail if they fail to pay up. in these cases it is quite likely that the woman vindictive enough to ruin a man will also fuck up the child. There's a reason children from single mother homes are much more likely to end up in prison.
>>16440768
Yes some of the children currently benefiting from the injust system will be hurt by the injust system ceasing to be. But if your argument is that the system should stay in place because some people will be hurt in the short term so fuck all men forever if they want proper reproductive rights then I'm sorry, but fuck those kids. Atleast around 50% of them will grow up without the worry of having a woman's pregnancy pinned on them, and the other 50% will be more likely to learn some responsibility.
>>16440771
Alright, I misunderstood you and it wasn't my intention to construct any strawman.
You may be right that more fundamental changes are necessary, though the fact that the child will need some kind of support to have a good upbringing limits the options. You say my idea is flawed due to the limitations of loan repayment, and you're right, it's less economically effective than having the unwilling fathers pay the way. But this system is destroying lives. Surely we would be better served by working on an effective loan repayment scheme rather than continuing with the way things are.
>>16440737
>What is the solution then?
He explained it already, if women are financially responsible for their own actions then they will choose not to bring a child they cannot care for into the world, thereby avoiding the problem altogether.
>>16440770
I see. Well, I agree that it is unfair that a guy don't get to choose whether a pregnancy, after it has occurred, is fully carried to term or terminated, and that he has to finance it.
Obviously we can't force women to either abort or carry a pregnancy to term as it overrides their bodily autonomy. so that's not the solution.
But I still think, that it's even MORE unfair to make someone, who had absolutely nothing to do with the creation of the child, finance it's upbringing.
That's why I'll let it fall on the guy who shares half it's DNA, until we find a better solution.
>>16440808
If you offer uneducated and selfish people loans simply because they have a child, they will see it as free money and continue having children.
Instead of loans, a state sponsored work program would be a better idea. The mother works a job and the child is provided reasonable basic care at the state's expense. The state can impose any mandate on mother and child in regards to how the child is raised (dietary restrictions, physician visitation, hours devoted to schooling and education, etc), but she can opt out of the program at any time.
>>16440799
You honestly sound like an asshole who just doesn't want to take responsibility for his own actions, but expects women to do.
>fuck those kids.
yeah, as I thought.
>>16440814
>they will choose not to bring a child they cannot care for into the world,
Just like how people who will suffer major consequences for bringing a child into the world right now are super responsible about it, right?
I don't think it will happen.
>>16440864
You're right, this won't work on everyone. But it will deter some, whereas the current system deters none.
>>16440841
>I should be able to ignore injustices towards men because think of the children
>proposal that helps everyone out in the long run
>b-but the CURRENT chilluns might suffer
>needs of many against needs of few, fuck those kids, benefitting from an injust system is not a right
>You honestly sound like an asshole who just doesn't want to take responsibility for his own actions, but expects women to do.
Anon, you really need to think about your stance. just trying to do good isn't enough, you have to actually think about how and who is effected. Keeping the current system will help those kids in the short term but then they'll grow up and be on the wrong end of it as adults.
Don't try to just shrug off an argument with an ad-hominem because you didn't like the tone of what someone was saying. Its makes you look like a retard. And I know you're not retarded anon. You can be better than this.
>>16440841
The majority of his argument was very coherent, and I'm disappointed you didn't address it.
I don't agree with "fuck those kids" though. It's possible we could maintain the previous system for these preexisting cases, or work a reasonable alternative temporary measure into the system. That's hardly a reason to dismiss all his valid points though.
>>16440885
>>16440890
If he wants to be taken seriously he should stop calling people retards for having different opinions than him.
I don't disagree with everything he says, but his tone makes him come off as irrational and unnecessarily aggressive.
>>16440902
True, insults don't tend to improve arguments. I'm glad that you can agree with at least some of the points despite that.
>>16440823
Hmm... so in the work program, the child themselves would be working in order to repay the state that paid for their upbringing?
This idea actually has a lot of merit in my eyes.
>>16440821
While it's unfair to make someone who has nothing to do with the child finance it's upbringing in a small way, I think it's even more unfair to destroy someone's financial wellbeing based on something as vague as shared DNA.
What do you think of >>16440823's proposal in terms of a "better solution"?
>>16440823
>>16440911
Oh wait, I may have misunderstood.
Would the state be paying in exchange for imposing health requirements on the child?
Perhaps this could come to fruition if you reason that this is money the state would avoid spending on healthcare and such.
>>16440923
The child working for the state can be included as part of the program. The mother also needs to work because she needs to feed herself as well.
The state can impose whatever reasonable regulations (and what is or is not reasonable can be hashed out later; right now this is just a broad strokes general idea) because it is footing the bill. In the example of health care, it is not fair for tax payers to fund healthcare for a child who dines on garbage foods and does not exercise. In education (if the program goes into college years), the state determines the child's major because it is a waste of tax payer money if he or she goes into women's studies or stage production rather than something like engineering or chemistry.
The mother has the right to opt out of the program at any time, but must concede benefits.
Again, this is just a general idea and can be fleshed out more by other people. There are certainly others more qualified than myself to set out the details.
>>16440913
>>16440939
I didn't even notice it scrolling down, ha.
I actually like that preposition, I've heard they done something like that somewhere in Africa I think, with pretty good success( if you ignore the part about turning men in for 'rape'. jeesh. but our program obviously wouldn't have that agenda. ).
But, yeah, I think it could be a pretty good way to have as few people unfairly financially involved as possible, while still having obvious "consequence" to mindless childrearing.
(mind you, consequences doesn't necessarily mean bad, as they are more like neutral happenings in this scenario. )
I'd love to see people complain about it being slavery and how they're losing 'muh rights' to buy candy and chips.
>>16440939
This actually seems like a great idea, and obviously there would be a lot of discussion about what's important and what should be regulated and so on, but at least people would be agreeing to work towards a better solution.
I think the biggest strength of the plan is that they are able to opt out at their own expense.
Some may argue that if the mother has "no choice" to opt out due to financial constraints, but if the regulations are reasonable then this shouldn't be a huge issue.
>>16438766
This. And If you don't wanna talk about it,put on a condom,and dispose of the contents yourself. Or,get a vasectomy and never worry about it again.
>>16440242
What about those weird women who don't find out they are pregnant until their baby starts to come out? Will that be held against them?
>>16441001
It doesn't happen because it reeks of distrust. If anyone tried pulling that they wouldn't have to worry because they would not be getting any sex that night.
>get a vasectomy
Easily done, not so easily reversed. Just because someone doesn't want to knock someone up in their 20s doesn't mean they won't want to settle down and have a child with their wife in their 30s.
If there was a form of birth control as convenient as the IUD for women you can bet your ass I'd get it.
>>16441001
Also, as for "put on a condom" see >>16439674.
>>16441052
Why isn't there more male birth control? Honestly,if men could get implants,IUDs,or just take pills to not get women pregnant,then it'd balance things out.
>>16441052
Femanon here. I insist on talking about options available if accidental pregnancy occurs before I have sex with any guy and I'd be delighted if a guy I was thinking of having sex with turned out to be that responsible and have that much forethought as to have a sex contract cover it. It'd help assure me that if I got into a longterm relationship with that guy I wouldn't have any babymommas come knocking on the door like in OP's situation.
>>16441094
I agree, it would help a lot.
I guess it's because there are more things you can manipulate in the woman's body seeing as all of the fertilization occurs there.
>>16441094
Well, they keep saying that it's "right around the corner" but I don't think it's actually in production yet.
>>16441094
I assume it's because the male reproductive system just isn't as compatible with it. The way the pill and I think also plan B work is that it causes the production of hormones that kind of trick a woman's system into thinking she's already pregnant, and of course the body doesn't want to conceive during pregnancy. There's no male equivalent for that though, and unlike the female ovulation window and menstruation cycle which only occurs once for each month, men's production cycle is much shorter and more constant.
>>16441094
>>16441119
They're working on it. The problem is that for women, there are multiple ways to prevent pregnancy, but the easiest method is just to prevent ovulation, or prevent the fertilized egg from implanting.
For a dude you have to kill every single one of millions and millions of sperm. So even if you can do that 99.98% accurately there are still thousands of sperm surviving. Everything they come up with has the same problem. Those swimmers are determined, and numerous. Even when a guy has a vasectomy that shit will GROW BACK. It's just a lot easier from the female end.
>>16441103
That's great to hear.
I'd feel more at ease if I could have a discussion like that before sex.
However there is still a world of difference between how someone feels before being pregnant and afterwards that gives me a lot of insecurity.
>>16441142
>that shit will GROW BACK
For real? I always thought of them as sort of the final solution.
>>16439244
That same argument applies to abortion.
If you can't handle the results of sex, don't have sex. Abortion is immoral.
>>16439674
A condom is like 98% efficient. That 18% is just how often they don't work under regular use by moronic people, poor non-white people, and it's not just one use - it's for a woman over an entire year. It will be like 200 fucks in a year.
That is assuming she is easily able to conceive, that you have enough shooters and that it is the right time of month. And is she's on the pill? No chance.
This is part of the issue. Today you can have sex and if you use contraception correctly no pregnancy will happen. So if she got pregnant you fucked up or she deceived you.
>>16441265
2% is still a hefty amount. Do you know what the chances of winning the national lottery are? A hell of a lot lower than 2%. And yet millions of people sign up to face a go. It's ridiculous. But if I had a 2% chance to win, I'd sign up for a ticket every week. And with odds like that, I'd eventually win. Except in the case of pregnancy, I'd lose.
The other factors do give a little piece of mind. But the outcome is so bad (in my eyes) that I'd rather not roll the dice.
>>16441283
A lottery works on random chance. It's not the same with a condom. You're not rolling the dice every time you fuck her. She can't even get pregnant most of the time. It's not that after 100 fucks statistically she will get pregnant.
But condoms shouldn't be your lone means of contraception. If she is on the pill and you use a condom then you really have nothing to worry about. Even if she's not as long as you pay attention to her ovulation dates and use a condom you will be fine.
Why are you so scared of getting a person pregnant anyway? Are you fucking women you hate?
>>16438404
thisthisthisthisthisthisthisthisthisthisthisthis
>>16441304
Your logic seems to ring true. If it was a combination then I would probably be more comfortable with it.
Unfortunately most birth control besides the condom tend to mess with the girl's hormones and can result in depression. It's my girlfriend that I'd be boning, but unfortunately she suffers from quite a bad case of depression and I wouldn't want that to take a turn for the worse.
So no, it's not that I'd be fucking women I hate, but the financial and mental strains, as well as the immense amount of responsibility that child raising brings with it is something I'd like to avoid like my life depends on it... because, well, my life as I know it does depend on it.
>>16440514
She is having sex with someone else m8
>>16440719
Not to mention men have hormones too that led to wanting to have sex with the stupid cunt in the first place...
If we are saying people can't be held responsible for their actions due to hormones then no one should even be considered responsible for sex taking place at all...
>>16440821
No one is in support of the welfare system.
No one is advocating that anyone other than the woman who CHOSE to birth the child should be forced to pay for it...
No one in this thread wants to give irresponsible people support... in fact everyone is saying there should be more incentive for them not to have these children in the first place.
>>16441670
I never said anyone was not responsible for their hormones. In fact I think you should take them into consideration when making decisions.
I just said that they can affect people's judgement in ways they maybe don't expect, and that making a decision based off of them is irresponsible and sometimes self-destructive. This applies to both men and women.
>>16441609
There is such a thing as non-penetrative sex, m8.
>>16441609
I really wouldn't mind if they were, but I've checked and they're not.
>>16442476
>no sex
>and he is a snooping control freak
you sound like a real catch
>>16442895
>attempts to foster insecurity
>throws insults when he resolves said insecurity
You're even worse.
>>16442895
>snooping control freak
How? I checked by asking them, not spying on them.
