Dead Beat Dad - Completely Unfair Label?

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Originally posted by kaylaluv
Forced vasectomies for all boys before age of puberty. In order to have the vasectomy reversed, you must sign a legal agreement that you WILL be responsible for any offspring you produce from that point on. End of problem.

Why stop there?

Forced tubal ligations for all women after their first menstration, right? I mean, if we are going to slaughter human rights, let's do it equally across the board.

Tubal ligations are surgeries - much more risk involved. Vasectomies are in-office procedures and hold very, very little risk.

Invasive surgery is invasive surgery. You can't pick and choose.

if men could have this done you would see them going to the clinics in droves.

Seriously when the man pill comes out... a great many men who want to lead a " bachelor" life and lead a more responsible life towards their offspring will opt for it.

And even a reversed vasectomy, would be a hit. But it has to be their choice

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
So basically, you would punish the child that YOU MADE, to prove a point?


Wow, people really are selfish these days....

What is the punishment? Have you experienced a forced relationship with a parent that doesn't want you? Is that a better or worse relationship than simple not having that parent in your life?

Have you excperienced single parent families living in poverty because a deadbeat parent is shucking their responsibility?


The lengths that people will go to do justify shucking their responsibility.

reply to post by kaylaluv


You do know that men do not develop masculinity and other traits if their testes is not attached during puberty right?

God, how retarded.

Eunuch

who are castrated before puberty are not sexual.

I don't believe financial support should be demanded for two reasons:

1) Women are now capable of finding work that offer the financial support they need. By the ability to sue the man for money, they are simply encouraged to continue with an unplanned pregnancy because they now have the man's finances to fall back on. Had she no man to fall back on, she'd behave more responsibly.

and

2) The legal demand of payment by a father relegates each father to the position of financial donor. The law does not require the presence of the father in the child's life, and that promulgates an environment in which the child learns that men are for money, nothing more.

Alimony is from a time where women weren't even allowed to apply to certain colleges. It should go the way of the union: history.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
So basically, you would punish the child that YOU MADE, to prove a point?


Wow, people really are selfish these days....

What is the punishment? Have you experienced a forced relationship with a parent that doesn't want you? Is that a better or worse relationship than simple not having that parent in your life?

Have you excperienced single parent families living in poverty because a deadbeat parent is shucking their responsibility?


The lengths that people will go to do justify shucking their responsibility.

I grew up with a biological father that wouldn't pay his child support, not that his support would have raised us out of poverty, and a step father that did not want anything to do with me other than use me as a punching bag.

What was your question again?

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
For the third time, I agree that there is a debate to be had on men's rights. That doesnt change the fact, that whether you want to or not, YOU created a child and it is YOUR responsibility to take care of it.

emphasis mine

There you have the crux of it. It always come down to singular responsibility of the male. Once again, it's a 50/50 process it should have 50/50 consequences. That's not to say that because one person makes $100K the other party has to as well. It just means there needs to be some semblance of equity in the support of the child. It shouldn't be disproportionately on one party.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Absolutely. Parents do take out their " anger" and resentment out on the child.
This happens and the child is innocent in all of it. Poor things, people are too wrapped up in themselves to realise that they need to think of others .. needs.

And as I said they are making this excuse.. but my deadbeat mum... eventually took some control back and decided to give me directly " child support" this worked out better for me and for her. And as a result for my dad too, he had less " pressures".

reply to post by kaylaluv

It's reversible - it's not permanent.

And? You are still removing sovereignty over ones own body. Its no different than a pro-choice conversation. The statement is extremely hypocritical, and is an absolute position of misandry.

Those teenage boys will be quite grateful they can have all the sex they want with no threat of an unwanted baby-mama.

Thats just disgusting, and if this conversation was about FORCING women to get a tubal ligation (which is absolutely reversible), or forced abortion, or anything of that nature, you would be screaming about how evil it was.

Truly, truly disappointing.

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

I grew up with a biological father that wouldn't pay his child support, not that his support would have raised us out of poverty, and a step father that did not want anything to do with me other than use me as a punching bag. What was your question again?

And yet you go to lengths to defend these DEADBEATS. Interesting.

Stockholm syndrome comes to mind....

reply to post by jtma508

There you have the crux of it. It always come down to singular responsibility of the male. Once again, it's a 50/50 process it should have 50/50 consequences. That's not to say that because one person makes $100K the other party has to as well. It just means there needs to be some semblance of equity in the support of the child. It shouldn't be disproportionately on one party.

Where did I say anything of the sort? Both parents have a responsibility to take care of their child. That doesnt change the FACT that, as a father, they are still YOUR responsibility. Or, as a mother, they are YOUR responsibility.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

You do know that men do not develop masculinity and other traits if their testes is not attached during puberty right?

God, how retarded.

Eunuch

who are castrated before puberty are not sexual.

Is vasectomy the same as castration?


No. Vasectomy and castration are not the same. Vasectomy is the cutting of the vas deferens while Castration is the surgical removal of the testes. Castration is done only on animals. When the testes are removed, it results in loss of masculinity because of the absence of male hormones (testosterone). Testosterone is produced in the testes. Vasectomy does not involve removal of the man’s testes.

dev1.doh.gov.ph...

Who's the retarded one now?

There definitely are dead beat dads out there .. but not all are .. and this label has been unfairly branded on ALL men who can not afford to pay the ridiculous amounts of money ordered ..

They need to put BOTH parents of child support .. with the same current Nazi consequences to both if payment is not received .. only then will women realize how bad this system actually is ..
It's always easy to collect tax-free money ..and many other benefits with it .. I'm sure that label will disappear very fast ..

Anyone who does honest research on how the so called 'child support' system is literally the number 1 killer in America right now .. not drugs, guns, alcohol, accidents, or even war ..!
It will not even spare a war veteran who protects the nation bravely in multiple tours of duty, survives all sorts of life threatening injuries ...just to come home and get locked up for this stupidity ...because a woman was 'unhappy' with him ..

Yes, there are also that do provide more financially for the child and these women are being used. It isnt rocket science...

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Go back and read what you wrote. I quoted it and simply cap'd the salient pronouns.

reply to post by junglimogli


Then perhaps the USA system needs to become more like the British system.

Single parents in the UK are vastly in the minority.

But the non resident parent has pay a percentage usually, and its not high at all. Its would be felt like a " tax" on the mans wages.

Most minimum wage earners can afford 3 children from 3 different mothers with this.

But luckily, its only total idiots who do this and therefore .. its not widespread.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

I grew up with a biological father that wouldn't pay his child support, not that his support would have raised us out of poverty, and a step father that did not want anything to do with me other than use me as a punching bag. What was your question again?

And yet you go to lengths to defend these DEADBEATS. Interesting.

Stockholm syndrome comes to mind....

Women want equal protection under the law. I'm okay with that. In fact, I'm a feminist that actively supports female reproductive sovereignty.

However, with that sovereignty, and the right to make the choice to carry a pregnancy, should come the SOLE responsibility for what carrying a pregnancy to full term should mean to her. If a woman is not in the position to care for a child, it shouldnt be my problem, unless I choose it to be.

If I give a friend money, and that person buys a car.. am I legally responsible to pay for half of the gas? Taxes? Insurance? What if that car is used in a robbery?

The way around that is to allow a " fund" for all children that if a man doesnt want to pay child support directly the mother, a bank account can be set up ONLY for that child for when they are 18yrs of age.

But on condition the man or woman who ever is deadbeat HAS TO pay each week/month or what ever.

Although, a dead beat parent - WANTS to be this way. It isnt as if they are trying to be there for their offspring.

Men who try to seek ways of seeing their children, custody, trying to pay, or paying even without getting results are not deadbeats.

Originally posted by jtma508
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Go back and read what you wrote. I quoted it and simply cap'd the salient pronouns.

I get that, but you are reading something into what I said because you did not take in the full context. I never said a thing about it only being a mans responsibility. I responded to the specific topic of deadbeat dads.

reply to post by kaylaluv


Ah oops, many feminist always yell "castrate! castrate!" i seem to merge the terms.


As a man i would not suggest anyone to do that or make any of my male children do that....i want to be 100% man like the nature intended, even if the physical side effects are minimal, i'm sure my mental side effect would be higher.

Depression, low self-confidence is another matter.

Even the reverse vasectomy has many problems associated with it. I rather stay away from both Litigation and vasectomy.