Law Professor Proposes “Preglimony”

by W.F. Price on July 9, 2012

In a bid to further expand wealth transfer from males to females, Shari Motro, a professor at the University of Richmond, suggests that men should now be forced to pay for pregnancy expenses.

Since the 1970s it has been possible to genetically link a father and his baby with increasing levels of accuracy. Then, a test using amniotic fluid let us test a baby’s DNA before birth, but the procedure increased the risk of miscarriage. Now a prenatal blood test has made the process far easier. Since a small amount of fetal DNA is present in a pregnant woman’s blood, the pregnancy can be genetically linked to her partner through a simple blood draw from the woman’s arm.

One of the potential ramifications is that men might be called upon to help support their pregnant lovers before birth, even if the pregnancy is ultimately terminated or ends in miscarriage. They might be asked to chip in for medical bills, birthing classes and maternity clothes, to help to cover the loss of income that often comes with pregnancy, or to contribute to the cost of an abortion.

Interestingly, she wants men to pay this even if women get an abortion, which seems to suggest that men could be forced to pay to abort their own children, even if they don’t want to.

Another problem is the escalating cost of pregnancy. If men are forced to pay the full bill for contemporary pregnancies, lots of them will end up bankrupt. Most men who contribute to out of wedlock pregnancies are young and poor, and these pregnancies are now the majority of all pregnancies in women under 30. The expense borne by young men would be extraordinarily severe.

However, law professors don’t care about these losers. Nope, the young men who don’t have advanced degrees and six-figure incomes probably deserve it anyway…

{ 134 comments… read them below or add one }

MRAwesome July 9, 2012 at 14:12

Why is this dumbshit a professor? In the free market, she would be a waitress.

‘Preglimony’ sounds like ‘Uglimony’, which is what women should pay to men if their BMI exceeds 25 without pregnancy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 88 Thumb down 4
Big Un's July 9, 2012 at 14:16

Faint silver lining is that cuckolding women demanding this will get found out much sooner.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 92 Thumb down 0
J July 9, 2012 at 14:25

@MRAwesome

Why is this dumbshit a professor? In the free market, she would be a waitress.

That is the power of the useless women’s studies degree! Before it was inveted in the 60′s, women already had tunnel vision on their own life and comfort. Now they have a degree to make their comfort’s connection to our collective wallets an even more “informed, and refined processes.” What, did you think our opinion or the fact that they use us for murder puppets in feminist wars ever had any bering on their decision making process since time immemorial?

Silly partriarchy, you never get it, speaking of which, my wife told me I need t buy her new shoes. Like the President, best not to keep her waiting! Ta ta

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 4
Just1X July 9, 2012 at 14:30

I suppose that this means that momsy can check out his finances before committing to screwing him over for 26 years and nine months. Very efficient if you don’t give a fuck about men or their rights.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 1
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 14:39

Shari Motri, like all feminuts doesn’t know what she’s talking about. These genetic tests to show paternity have only been around since the 90′s.In fact, in 1995 in the OJ murder case there was a question of whether they were accurate enough to be used as evidence, and I’m not talking about the”contamination” argument either but just the DNA tests themselves.
Before DNA tests were accepted (mostly after 2000) blood tests were used but all these could do is exclude the alleged father not prove paternity.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 7
AfOR July 9, 2012 at 14:46

Two things planet earth will never be short of;

1/ Stupid wimminz

2/ Ugly wimminz

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 63 Thumb down 2
west_coast July 9, 2012 at 14:51

I rather think this is good “news”. So long as the state won`t be paying for the wellfare of these pregnancies. This could actually be used to finally defund planned parenthood and its like minded organizations. Let everyone bear the cost of their actions.
The tax payer shouldn`t be forced to subsidize the “choices” of every irresponsible adult. Believe me if this were to become law most people would think twice before raw dogging lmao.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 3
universe July 9, 2012 at 14:51

If you absolutely have to, make Michelin and GoodYear your best friends, you younger guys. Use your supply only.
You don’t want to be forced to work harder than you do already. Ask an alienated father/ATM what it’s like to be under the thumb of the state and learn from their experiences.
Once young gals catch wind of this proposal, many, and you know it, will make use of it to make a precedent out of you. A free ride is a free ride. Otherwise zip it up and look for a better class of girl, if that’s still possible.
Cut ‘em off by talking to other young guys about this. Then find your way around the traps. (GoodYear in pairs)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 14
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 14:56

btw, the first criminal case in the US where DNA was used was a murder case in Florida in ’87 and it was awhile before it began to be used in all courts or accepted. These DNA patterns were only discovered in ’86 by a professor in England.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 5
Young Guy July 9, 2012 at 15:04

Nothing shocks me anymore regarding female entitlement. It is important to remember these types of people don’t care about anyone but themselves. All they care about is getting theirs in life, and to hell with anyone else. If their selfish actions destroy a nation, then so be it, as far as they are concerned. This is the type of mentality you get from people who use emotion, not logic, to guide their lives. If it feels good, then do it, regardless of the consequences. Short-term thinking replaces long-term thinking, and you end up being shit out of luck after a nation has been gouged. A lot of women don’t understand how things work in life. They consume, consume, and consume. Shari Motri is nothing but a black hole. I know her type all too well. I doubt she has ever produced anything in her life besides feminist bullshit which is used to brainwash people. You see, this is one reason I don’t get involved with women anymore. They really don’t have anything to bring to the table besides problems. I am not interested in spending time with people who give me headaches and poison my life.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 66 Thumb down 17
Uncle Elmer July 9, 2012 at 15:09

Women will fight this as they don’t want mandatory paternity testing.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 65 Thumb down 2
Gamerp4 July 9, 2012 at 15:14

Thank God i dont have a feminist minded wife, she is a keeper i can say but i am damn afraid for my boys but i am trying to give them the red pill but i donot want to force them until they are mature enough to know that, but still i dont want my boys married in feminist controlled state or worse to a feminist NO! NO! NO! , I dont want that.

Between it is rather laughable to expect all this from Men to Pay for “Pregnancy” and even “medical bills”after abortion or miscarriage and for the shits “birthing classes” and “maternity clothes”, could somebody please point her to Equality city, Equality Street, Equality Home to Mr. Equality AKA feminists.

Oh yah contributing to the cost abortion well forgive me Miss Shari Motri but i don’t have a say in abortion “Her Body, Her Choice” remember, I am just a screw ball who unfortunately has a “dick” which is just used to have the sperm and later i become a walking ATM MACHINE, and if i fail to deliver cash at the right time and at the right moment I MIGHT BE THROWN IN JAIL.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 24 Thumb down 23
Firepower July 9, 2012 at 15:19

A girl prof at University of Richmond spouting this stuff is the least of your worries.

What comes next, is it migrates to Harvard Law – and becomes fiat lawschool school ideology taught everywhere…and actual LAW via the next Harvard President and Harvard Supreme Court.

No protest. No activism. No prevention.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 33 Thumb down 19
Rocco July 9, 2012 at 15:21

Since your girlfriend now becomes a paid incubator, tell me again why men shouldn’t use surrogates if they want to have a child.

Surrogate: You get your child.
Ameriskank: You get a child that hates you.

Same price.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 17
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 15:24

“Once young gals catch wind of this proposal, many, and you know it, will make use of it to make a precedent ”

The male pill will be available and will completely change things forever. Men will then dictate the terms. If females want kids it will have to be on men’s terms. Sperm banks are dried up because only an idiot would donate where he can be traced by DNA and then be forced to pay child support in today’s wacky world.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 6
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 15:29

Uncle Elmer July 9, 2012 at 15:09

Women will fight this as they don’t want mandatory paternity testing

You may be right. They don’t want to look like that girl on Jerry Springer who kept having men she fucked tested and still didn’t find the father :)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 6
Traveller July 9, 2012 at 15:31

In Google there is a Shari Motro, not Shari Motri.

Anyway, what kind of name is it? It does not sound as a Western name.

Why does not she proposes that in her original country? Why does not she RETURN in her original country and propose that?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 8
dejour July 9, 2012 at 15:39

If men were given equal choice re: abortion, equal custody, etc., then there is some merit in this.

Also – didn’t know about the paternity blood test. That would make the idea of “male abortion” more possible.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 15:50

If some female accuses you of being the father and you know you’re not, just take the DNA test to prove you’re not.Then file a lawsuit against her and list harassment, infliction of emotion distress and mental anguish and abuse of process as the causes of action. And if you really want to get creative allege a violation of your civil rights and file it in Federal Court against the girl, the county, the judge who signed the order for the test, and anyone else you can think of who was involved like the person who took the test or the cops.
And btw, judges do not have immunity in federal court when there is an allegation of violation of civil rights. Another thing, all of these defendants will need to have separate lawyers which is going to cost them a lot of money :) If every man did this it would bankrupt the counties and no insurance co. would insure them. Judges would be very careful about how they issued orders; and they usually have to step down when they’re being sued for a violation of civil rights.
Make a thousand copiesof your Federal complaint and be sure it’s distributed to every newspaper in the county and all others. E-mail it to everyone or fax it. Get the e-mails and fax numbers using a spider. All of this will cost you little or nothing and there’s nothing illegal about publishing a court document.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 54 Thumb down 10
Days of Broken Arrows July 9, 2012 at 15:51

Wait — contribute to WHAT?

I thought it wasn’t a baby until it was born. Before that it was a choice. She wants men to contribute to a choice?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 1
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 15:52

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 50
Eric July 9, 2012 at 15:53

Feminised Amerobitches believe that they have a monopoly on sex and reproduction. Proposals like these are the natural outcome of that kind of thinking. All of us ‘male pigs’ are taught to pay for the ‘privilege’ of allowing them to bear our children. And of course, the offsping is hers too—including abortion—and the expendable ‘sperm donor’ gets the ‘privilege’ of paying for it all again.

Another reason for sane men to avoid Amerobitches like the plague!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 3
Rebel July 9, 2012 at 16:00

Nobody can force you to pay for pregnancy expenses if you get a vasectomy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 5
Lyn87 July 9, 2012 at 16:00

My first thought was that this might have a silver lining: linking babies to men via DNA – rather than the women’s say-so. At least this has the virtue of forcing a woman to prove that the guy on the hook for the payments is actually the guy who fathered the kid. But then I thought about it for 10 seconds and realized that it would not be much of a silver lining in practice.

Married men will still be presumed to be the fathers of their wives’ children just as they are now. I doubt married women would be required to have the test done. In many jurisdictions it would quickly become illegal for a married man to even have the test done – just like paternity testing in France today. So married men would still not know they were being cuckolded.

It also ignores the fact that women still have 100% reproductive freedom until (and even after) the child is no longer in her body. A man’s freedom ends at ejaculation – a woman’s ends about a year later while she decides whether to kill it, keep it, or drop it off at the local hospital and walk away – and meanwhile she has the authority to hold the man legally responsible for at least 18 years if she feels like it.

Woman to herself: “My Body. My Choice.”
Woman to man: “My Body. My Choice. YOUR Responsibility!”

Until feminists get serious about reproductive equality (which will never happen), any attempt to tweak the system should be presumed to be just another way for women in general to benefit at the expense of men in general.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 17
reficul July 9, 2012 at 16:01

To paraphrase Stefan Kisielewski:
“Feminism is a system designed to fix the problems not known in any other systems.”

There was once an institution that was designed to help women cover the cost of child birth/ child rearing.
It was once called marriage and family.
Women truly are stupid.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 6
Eric July 9, 2012 at 16:03

Whammer:
It wasn’t me, I gave you an upvote.

‘They don’t want to look like that girl on Jerry Springer who kept having the men she fucked tested and still couldn’t find the father.’

Actually, a lot of women are such attention-whores they might find that scenario appealing. One of my clients once had a false paternity accusation laid on him, and got DNA tested (although rather stupidly after being milked for paying all the expences of the pregnancy). They never found the actual father either after three other guys got tested too.

The poor boob still didn’t get off the hook very easily afterwards. Now, though, the mom’s a proud, fat, ‘heroic single mom’. She lives with another mangina who works two jobs to support her and collects welfare for the kid.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
confused July 9, 2012 at 16:16

her choice, her responsibility

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price July 9, 2012 at 16:17

In Google there is a Shari Motro, not Shari Motri.

-Traveller

My typo. Thanks for pointing it out.

keyster July 9, 2012 at 16:18

1) There are women who would prefer the “father” not be involved at all, and who either terminate or keep it without him even knowing.

2) There are women who ask for help to pay for an abortion, of which many men gladly ablige.

3) There are women who bring the child to term and either insist he help or don’t want him to have anything to do with the child.

In a Patriarchal (non-Feminist) society the pregnancy of a woman by a man signifies marital union; they are ever joined as man and wife, mother and father. There are no “terminations” and no courts.

“So, yeah, I’m pregnant.”
“What are we going to do?”
“Well, I might keep it I might not…you know my body my choice and all that. But regardless of what I decide you’re going to have give me some of your money.”

Our species procreation, the future of our civilization, lies in the hands of glorified children with no parental control, no guiding authority. The father died with God.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 10
Young Guy July 9, 2012 at 16:30

“In a Patriarchal (non-Feminist) society the pregnancy of a woman by a man signifies marital union; they are ever joined as man and wife, mother and father. There are no “terminations” and no courts.”

Keyster,

If I went back in time to a place where family and marital unions were taken seriously, I am not sure if I would have a heart attack from culture shock or be overjoyed to be surrounded by people who hadn’t lost their minds.

The type of world you older men describe is as alien to me as Mars.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 25 Thumb down 16
Pirran July 9, 2012 at 16:40

I believe her spiritual progenitor is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU4GuVeuSk4

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 9, 2012 at 17:02

Shari Motro got some of her credentials at NYU, according to her profile on the University of Richmond website.

I’m starting to think that New York State (and I live upstate, several hours from NYC, and I don’t like to touch the dot on a map representing NYC despite my namesake) is pretty much the main vector infecting the rest of the country with feminazism. I am ashamed to be from New York State because of this.

I also thought that the University of Richmond would have higher standards in its hiring decisions.

“Professor” Motro leaves her birthplace (and where she spent her formative years) off her biographical information on the University of Richmond website and she is admitted to the bar in New York State, not exactly a ringing endorsement for New York although, like I typed, New York tries to screw over every other state with feminazism because feminazi, mangina, and white knight New Yorkers are still sore that fifteen states did not even want the Equal Rights Amendment, including Virginia, home of the University of Richmond.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 9, 2012 at 17:22

Anagram of “Shari Motro:” “Shit or roam.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3
MRA July 9, 2012 at 17:30

When men want paternity test before birth it only done after woman give consent, I’m sure the law she proposes will force men to DNA test, even after the child is born is illegal to test the child without mother’s consent, in many cases men who have been proved not to be the father have been forced to pay child-support.

Even when DNA test is suppose to liberate men from cuckoldry NOT women that are 100% the baby is their, the science is being used against the one is suppose to protect and liberated.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3
Anonymous age 70 July 9, 2012 at 17:33

>>The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 15:52

>> btw, who’s the little mangina who gave me a thumb’s down? Why don’t you act like a MAN and explain why you did it and give your name? Punk!

I didn’t do it until you whined like a baby, then I did. Pay no attention to thumbs down. They are part of the game here, and many of them come from dearies who come here to discourage men who don’t grasp reality very well. It obviously worked well with you.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 15
canadian July 9, 2012 at 17:36
Anonymous age 70 July 9, 2012 at 17:39

>>‘They don’t want to look like that girl on Jerry Springer who kept having the men she fucked tested and still couldn’t find the father.’

Was that Jerry Springer? I remember some other guy, maybe Donahue or a dork like him. They had a fat black woman on there, off and on for many months. I think they tested maybe 8 men, and finally to their surprise they found it was her HUSBAND who was the father. What a revolting development! She musta’ got drunk and let her husband have it when she didn’t know what she was doing.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 13
My Cunt Is Wet With Fear July 9, 2012 at 17:48

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 33
Zorro July 9, 2012 at 18:06

1. The male pill.
2. Mandatory DNA paternity testing.

…their fucking day in the sun is over. Absolutely over.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 5
Paul Murray July 9, 2012 at 18:40

To tell you the truth – I kinda think that baby daddies paying for pregnancy expenses is a fair call. What isn’t fair is the asymmetry – he has to pay without getting any of the rights that a father should have.

Put me down as the dissenting opinion on this one.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 18
DirkJohanson July 9, 2012 at 18:42

First of all, paternity should be abolished for unmarried guys, except where the guy has otherwise agreed, is a rapist, or impregnated a minor.

Even if paternity is not abolished, since it is now the law of the land that women with health insurance no longer have to pay a dime for birth control, it should be an irrebutable presumption under the law that no guy should be responsible in any way for impregnating a women who has health insurance.

Finally, I should point out that now that gender rating has been outlawed for health insurance, most guys are subsidizing preglimony anyway.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 8
W.F. Price July 9, 2012 at 18:44

To tell you the truth – I kinda think that baby daddies paying for pregnancy expenses is a fair call. What isn’t fair is the asymmetry – he has to pay without getting any of the rights that a father should have.

Put me down as the dissenting opinion on this one.

-Paul Murray

It’s fair as long as the mother shares the burden equally, but who believes that will be the case?

When women have kids out of wedlock and go on welfare, who gets presented with the bill? Not the mother. If they came up with a bill that ordered fathers and mothers to share the costs, that would be fine. But that will never happen under our current regime.

3DShooter July 9, 2012 at 19:04

I have a better idea for this twit academician:

Your Body
Your Choice
Your Re$pon$ibility

And if you can be pleasant enough to get baby daddy to stick around and provide for you all the better (In fact, you better give him the best damn BJ he’s ever had every night for standing with you). If not, you spread your legs, you chose, now you can pay the bills.

It is time to turn the tables. When women no longer have a gov’t support system they might become human again.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 4
dhanu July 9, 2012 at 19:15

These proposals all start like that, with some tests and conditions that seem fair so as to get the initial approval. Once in place, they become more and more hostile toward the men. After a while, you can expect that the DNA testing part would be removed as unnecessary and oppressive to the mother and then every man, even MGTOW’s, would be at peril. With the decreasing number of marriages, it’s just the next logical step to extract the money from all the men. So don’t be fooled by seeing the requisite test as any sort of silver lining; it will be removed sooner than you can say ‘let us now start the tests’.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 5
Andrew July 9, 2012 at 19:18

I am 48 years old, and I have no children. I got a vasectomy back in 1997. It was the best decision of my life. I probably should visit a urologist and get tested to ensure that the vasectomy has not failed.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3
javert July 9, 2012 at 19:22

Why so much buzz about this? There is already a system where the man has paid for the pregnancy for decades. It is called marriage.

There are two good points here: a) This involve charging the costs on the father rather than the taxpayer and I’m all for it. Sure, they are young and poor, but also stupid enough for not wrapping it up. No one has to pay for the stupid.
b) This actually puts paternity testing as the ultimate evidence of being guilty and innocent. Why would we oppose to that? Elmer has said it before, women smart enough to see it will fight against this, but most of them will probably cheer the idea deep in their self absorption.

All in all, this is something the manosphere should support, because we have hidden benefits for that. Specially because we have hidden benefits for that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10
GT66 July 9, 2012 at 19:29

I’ll pay. But only if I can use these slutbucks™ that I’ve been printing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
Eric July 9, 2012 at 19:29

3D Shooter:
‘When women no longer have a government support system they might become human again.’

Excellent point. That’s what the feminists fear more than anything.

The State is always seen as the ‘paternal’ element of the social order. When feminists blab about how they ‘don’t need a man’ it’s because they use the masculine State as a replacement for men (their hypocrisy about ‘patriarchy’ to the contrary not withstanding). This is why they fear MGTOW so greatly—because it exposes the fact that it is men who don’t need women; and it’s women who are dependent on men.

Pull away the State and the bitches lose the masculine social element they really were depending on all along. The whole notion of the superior female would no longer have its camoflague—and the gender supremacist ideology would collapse overnight.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 3
Huck Finn July 9, 2012 at 20:04

If this occurs, more men will be victimized and then even more men and their friends, co-workers, cousins, neighbors, etc will start ghosting, MGTOW, join the marriage strike, and oh yes get vasectomies. Women as a sex have a poor regard for the Law of Intended Consequences since society and government often protect them from their own actions. However, not all counter-actions can be controlled.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 17
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 20:23

“Anyway, what kind of name is it? It does not sound as a Western name.”

She’s probably a Jew because almost everyone I’ve found with that name is (not all) How many people who are not Jews are connected with something Jewish, like attending Hebrew Uni in Tel Aviv or writing books about the conflict in Palestine etc. ?
Hmm? But you should have guessed anyway :)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 11
MKP July 9, 2012 at 20:28

“To tell you the truth – I kinda think that baby daddies paying for pregnancy expenses is a fair call. What isn’t fair is the asymmetry – he has to pay without getting any of the rights that a father should have.

Put me down as the dissenting opinion on this one.”

Me too.

Just keep it in your pants. If you can’t control yourself, you’re open to a world of hurt.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 10
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 20:33
walking in hell2 July 9, 2012 at 20:46

“a father and his baby”

Her language makes me sick. “His baby” when she wants money. Her baby for everything else.

Just another reason to stay far, far away from parasitical American females.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1
The Whammer July 9, 2012 at 21:05

@70- I just wrote that because there are a lot of people who just give a thumb’s down for no reason without reading it or because you wrote something that hurt their weetle fewings a month ago.

I also noticed that the first posts seem to get abnormally high up votes. Why is that?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 18
Bob Smith July 9, 2012 at 21:06

“paternity should be abolished for unmarried guys, except where the guy has otherwise agreed, is a rapist”

I do not want women to have an incentive to lie about being raped, because far too many have no sense of morals when it comes to men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
freebird July 9, 2012 at 21:11

Pro-tip for whiner:
If you’re gonna troll at least change up your username often.
Having men pay for women’s care is already mostly here via obamacare.
The supreme lesbian council has deemed it so.
There will be no anti-cuckholding measures as all men will pay.
It’s just more payments on top of the tax breaks and welfare handouts.
Of course it’s a valid idea:Could create another govt institution known as “office of medical payments’much like ‘friend of the court.’
Yeah, of the millions of men falsely accused and otherwise Penalized by the court system,none of them ever considered it feasible to ‘indict the system.”
PAN had a more rational idea with setting up common law courts.
The fact that Sharia law is sovereign shows this could be done.
In the meantime,MGTOW is the best defense,that and learn to be a lawyer as a survival skill from a young age.
Or at least refuse to pay for an
“office of the court.”
Just stand on your own and tell the truth,good luck.
Best defense is being broke,the fems have won there.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 18
dhanu July 9, 2012 at 21:28

@ Whammer “I also noticed that the first posts seem to get abnormally high up votes. Why is that?”

Because the greatest number of readers come across those posts, not all of which return to read all the latter comments. Plus, the first few posts usually sum up most of the main thoughts and ideas, and the rest are their extensions, explanations, contradictions, and examples or counter-examples based on articles, news stories, and personal experience.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 6
Josh the Aspie July 9, 2012 at 22:13

Okay, a few thoughts here.

It’s the woman’s natural responsibility to shield herself from unwanted consequences. If she refuses to take acts that do, it’s her responsibility to live with them.

This obviously isn’t recognized by our legal system as it exists, despite it being a basic moral truth.

This basic moral truth is even further reinforced by the fact that said woman has several chances to opt out of the pregnancy.

Given that a woman can force her ex-husband to pay for a kid she got screwing around with another man while married to her, does this mean that she can double-dip? Expect the feminists to say yes.

Finally, articles like this really make me wonder why men commit suicide over alimony, child support, etc. While I do not intend to advocate either with this post, hommicide seems to be a more rational approch than suicide, relatively speaking. It provides a societal cost against the negative conditions placed upon him.

Are men really that conditioned in favor of violence against themselves, and against violence towards their oppressors that they are more likely to act in a fashion destructive toward self than those who act to oppress him? Rather than killing himself, why doesn’t the father kill the ex-wife that took his children, or the judge that did, or the “court expert”. It really does baffle me.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 3
Josh the Aspie July 9, 2012 at 22:22

Just one last thought. Why on earth are people assuming that this will reduce government payments to a pregnant woman? Does being able to finger the baby-daddy for child support reduce the amount that the state pays the mother who decides to lounge around and have no other source of income but her babies? It seems likely to me that if this goes through, the following situation is plausible.

Woman A gets pregnant by Man B, while married to Man C. She then divorces man C, and becomes dependant on Government programs D, E, and F. Woman A then uses the courts to get her money from both Man B, and Man C. Woman A then has money from sources B, C, D, E, and F, from divorce proceeding through to age 26 of the child. These sources of funding allows her to be a parasite, giving nothing back to society save child G she will no doubt rear poorly, and send thourgh a proonged adolecense. If child G is a male, pitty him.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 9, 2012 at 22:28

@ Josh the Aspie

I myself have Asperger’s syndrome (as well as bipolar disorder) so I have to ask four off-topic questions:

Do you also get accused of having bad powers of perception (I am not saying that you do), mostly from women?

One of the stereotypes of people with autism-spectrum disorders is that they are unable to love, much as people with Tourette’s syndrome are stereotyped as having mouths that would make a sailor or a truck driver piss themselves. Do you also get accused of being unable to love, again, mostly by women?

Do you also get accused of having bad reasoning skills, again mostly by women?

My largest fixation, as my namesake suggests, is on geography, largely given that it is a non-fictitious concept that overlaps with other non-fictitious ideas. Do women get mad at you for having non-fictitious fixations?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
"The One" July 9, 2012 at 23:10

The Whammer just “hurt my weetle fewings”, so I down-voted him. But prior to that when he demanded to the lone down-voter be brought before him to stand trial, I agreed with him. I too was incensed.

The Whammer, why don’t you try sniping the first post for a change, and quitcherbitchin about those who get the mojo before you?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5
Peter South July 9, 2012 at 23:15

Great stuff, bring it on.

In another few years MGTOW will be a household acronym.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 15
evilwhitemalempire July 9, 2012 at 23:51

Do you also get accused of being unable to love, again, mostly by women?
———————-

heh, what man doesn’t get accused of that by women?

-and in more than one sense i might add

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Poiuyt July 10, 2012 at 00:03

This preglimoney idea is what all prospective MALE leaders, being the eternal cowards that they are, feel about child support issues. Every single one agrees that their fellow MAN and not the system they propagate is the problem. They fail to recognize the natural position that the only honest child support is that which legitimate children get at home from legitimate parents who reside with them.

1. The forcible making of fathers or mothers accountable to their children is no business of anyone’s , not least the state. Well adjusted, healthy and respectful children are products of good parenting and not good state intervention. Especially as the alternative result is not better fed, well educated and adequately clothed children but a better empowered and unlimitedly resourced state that doesn’t know its boundaries.

2. Until the state dips its filthy nose in, a child living with its father and mother naturally eats at the table where its parents eat; sleeps under the roof where its parents sleep defecates where its parents does the same etc, etc. Only after the state interferes does the political question of child poverty deliberately caused become an issue.

3. How is the absent parent made accountable on the one hand but have themselves in turn shown no accounts of expenditure for the child on the other. Are we to assume the non-sequitur of the child’s welfare being met because child support is paid ?

4. Child support encourages bastardization of previously happy children originally born legitimate. It encourages enprostitution in those who stand to gain something on account of their sex or gender alone. It also promotes general bad character and weakness in the children and recipients of the said support as they literally start to live for free and come to expect to continue doing so. Lastly it creates the impression in bad peoples minds that if women and children are entitled to live for free owing no responsibility to others [especially the paying father], then they are themselves also entitled to live this way.

5. Note also that the posterity of children rightfully belongs to parents who have a natural and personal stake in it, not the inanimate state that neither conceives, delivers nor bears the burden of nurturing children.

All in all child support is a cynical power augmenting ruse arrogated to politicians by a majority dominated by liars who hate boundaries. Clever people will however tell you that the state can never ever be a better friend of children than its own parents, OF WHICH THERE ARE NATURALLY TWO !

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
ode July 10, 2012 at 02:59

My Body. My Choice

A common tactic used by feminists is to adopt cheesy one liners because it’s easy to remember. But I have an idea, where is it written that says feminists should have a monoply on creating one liners, Why can’t the MRM do the same?
How about this one:

My wallet. My choice.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 4
Opus July 10, 2012 at 04:00

Surely the next and inevitable extention of the principle espoused by Ms Motro must be, that men (whether the woman becomes pregnant or not) should pay the woman for the privilege of having sex (‘my body, my choice, my remuneration’, should be the motto). Any similarity between that proposal and prostitution is of course entirely coincidental.

In the old days, of course, (as Javert says) when a woman fell pregnant outside of marriage, they had a similar system: Marriage. Now however women want all the pecuniary advantages of marriage and none of the responsibilities – again the similarity with prostitution is clear. Of course some men still marry when they are told be their girlfriend that they are pregnant: a friend of mine did just that and he has gone from being comfortably off, to some penury, as his wife has spent her way through his savings, in just a few short years – and to add insult to financial injury she promptly lost her looks on the birth of the child – just as Schopenhauer says happens; so it seems that always the men are impoverished, and the women enriched.

English law always held the putative father responsible for the illegitimate child, even if there was no marriage, – the state does not want to pay; yet that system also encourages female slutdom, as no one forces a woman to open her legs – but I am at something of a loss to determine what the costs of Pregnancy might be. Men always stumped up for an abortion.

What would really have impressed me would have been if Ms Motro had suggested that, as a true Feminist and believer in female equality and empowerment, that woman should be responsible at all stages for their decisions and attendant consequences. I very much doubt that there is now so much as one male academic excercised by Family Law anywhere in the west (‘it’s not real law’ as my Pupil-Master said to me). When women seek equality they always end by driving men away.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 3
Pirran July 10, 2012 at 04:26

@Geography Bee Finalist himself July 9, 2012 at 17:22
Anagram of “Shari Motro:” “Shit or roam.”

Nice. Yes, I thought she looked like an anagram as soon as I saw her name (I’m getting way too nerdy).

I liked “Harm Is Root” (there must be plenty involving rat, but I can’t be bothered to go further).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Opus July 10, 2012 at 04:57

‘I roar MS hot’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Opus July 10, 2012 at 04:57

sorry

‘I roar SM hot’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Opus July 10, 2012 at 04:59

or better

‘Hot SM, I roar’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Glenn July 10, 2012 at 05:06

It is efforts like this that will speed the demise of feminism once and for all.

All men need to smile, step aside, and let these idiots rush to their doom.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
freebird July 10, 2012 at 05:25

@ “The One”
I guess you didn’t get the memo that whiner is a fem-troll.
About 7 posts back she referred to the guys here as “You loser men” not something a male would write.
Doing a fine job of trolling,this post alone incitement by lies regarding:
1:DNA and OJ simpson(racial)
2.The Joos (racial)
3.Access to legal recourse (salt in wound)
There must be a lot of media misinformation being swallowed by even the awakened men not to see this.
Either that or a severe proclivity for divisionism.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 14
Pirran July 10, 2012 at 05:26

Of course, her preferred honorific , Ms Shari Motro leads to”Mao or Mrs Shit” (or the more profound Manosphere contemplation, “Mao or shit Mrs?”) which is presumably why she doesn’t use it.

That’s it. Damn you, Geography Bee Finalist, I’ve got work to do. This has become a thoroughly distracting displacement activity (or something).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
My Cunt Is Wet With Fear July 10, 2012 at 05:44

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 26
My Cunt Is Wet With Fear July 10, 2012 at 05:52

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 20
freebird July 10, 2012 at 05:55

Speaking of women’s fertility:
For the last decade or longer women turning 16 have been given access to fertility clinics w/o their parents knowledge or consent due to Federal health privacy laws.
These girls inject fertility enhancing
drugs to “pump up their ovaries” to create more eggs to be sold to the clinic,which are in turn bought by older women.
I expect a professional writer to do some research on this concept,get some stats,and make a fine article about women exploiting woman,this would have ‘legs.’
(as no one really cares about men and boys)
Have at it!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 14
freebird July 10, 2012 at 06:09

The girls than take the money from selling the eggs and buy silicone breast implants,other cosmetic surgeries,and often time drugs or presents for thug Bf’s.
Tip-o-the-hat to Michael Crichton,concept came from his 2006 bestseller “Next.”
There are multiple angles to played upon here:
Age of consent to medical procedures,the law that allows that,risking future fertility by using risky drugs,exploitation by older women and their doctors,so on and so forth.
Do I have to do it all?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 14
AfOR July 10, 2012 at 06:30
troll king July 10, 2012 at 06:31

OT.

Feminists objectifying men….who wudda thunk it?

(Un)feminist guilty pleasure: I don’t want to critique Magic Mike

http://feministing.com/2012/07/09/unfeminist-guilty-pleasure-i-dont-want-to-critique-magic-mike/#more-50480

So, if I understand their argument correctly, it seems feminists think the only acceptable form of masculinity is one that apes feminity. So much for choice.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Pirran July 10, 2012 at 06:36

@My Cunt Is Wet With Fear

Assuming you’r not a troll (large assumption), cutting and pasting cod psychology from various sites doesn’t equate to a reasoned debate. “Your Brain on Porn” is an infamous quasi so-con site (man-up, you douches and marry those ex-sluts) and Psychology Today is hardly noted for it’s man-friendly stance.

Hypofrontality (not Hyper – you seem to use various spellings throughout your screed – loss of cognitive function, perhaps?) has been a buzz-term in psychology for a decade or two (but has largely been ignored in conventional medicine – for good reason). It’s hardly new.

Psychology “science” usually has appalling provenance, little or no control comparison and dubious morality. Most of the hype around Hypofrontality was its use against adolescent boys diagnosed with ADHD. One genuinely nasty (and much quoted) study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry in the ’90′s used the MRI’s from a sample size of SEVEN adolescent boys diagnosed with ADHD compared to a control group of NINE “normal” people. This tells you far more about the American Journal of Psychiatry (one of the more prestigious) than the objectivity of the study. In conventional drug trials, sample sizes below 10000 are regarded with suspicion. The usual number is over 100000 for a major release.

The Math matters, dude(tte). Observational bias, huge statistical anomalies and sloppy procedure would rule out the vast majority of sociology and psychology studies from most STEM fields. It’s only taken seriously by ex sociology and psychology masters working in the MSM (the only place they could get a job).

Junk science apart, most of your observations would be more apposite for women than men. To quote:

“Impaired decision-making arising from direct interference with reasoning, logic, and the ability to weigh consequences.
Drives, impulses, and craving are not inhibited because of direct compromise of brain-reasoning ability.
The mind overvalues reward, fails to appreciate risk, and fails to activate systems that warn of impending danger.
The mind misjudges using one’s addiction as “worth it” by being unable to appreciate adverse consequences.”

Sounds like a text-book definition of women on the cock-carousel to me. What do you think?

One final thought, people who attempt to bracket all those they disagree with as insane or mentally deficient has a long and disreputable history on the left. I’ve come across a few (genuinely) insane rad-fems, but most were viciously cynical. I try not to classify anyone as nuts until I have genuine reason.

(P.S. – I cycle 150-200 miles a week and my gray (and white) matter seem just fine.)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Uncle Elmer July 10, 2012 at 06:58

“I also noticed that the first posts seem to get abnormally high up votes. Why is that?”

It’s called “Early Poster Bias” and Elmer has worked it to his advantage on many occasions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Huck Finn July 10, 2012 at 07:40

Just imagine if this becomes law:

The under-age teenage son of a single mother gets his teenage girlfriend pregnant. Does the teenage male’s mother now have to pay pregnancy support, and does the father (if one is around and paying support already) have to pay more? It would be really funny to see the look on a single mother’s face when told she has to pay some girl pregnancy support.

After word gets around, males (minors and adults) will take more responsibility to use their own birth control and not rely on the girlfriend’s promise that she is using hers. I know plenty of men whose wife or girlfriend got pregnant with the woman lying about taking protection. It’s an epidemic of lies (the Rape of Sperm) and many men are still too stupid to catch on to the deceit game females play.

When are those artificial wombs going to be invented?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 14
Stoltz July 10, 2012 at 08:14

Actually, this is the natural progression of feminists ideology:

First, there was/is alimony. With more husbands/fathers working than wives/mothers, this essentially became a wealth transfer from men to women. While some states have reduced (and even eliminated) the amounts, and some divorced women are finding THEY have to pay vs. their ex-husbands, it isn’t as prevelant as it used to be. However, men still contribute in a higher ratio to women in this transfer of wealth.

Second, there was/is child support. This is basically
state-mandated (and criminally enforced) transfer of wealth in which only one side is held accountable (both things in violation of the U.S. Constitution). Again, in 85%+ of the cases it is men who have to pay. In those rare cases where the opposite is true, the percentage of women who actually pay are FAR less than those of men.

Third, there was/is a proliferation of government spending on female-only issues. Again, men pay far more taxes to the government on every level, yet receive far less in return compared to their femal counterparts.

Then we have “Preglimony”.

Is anyone really that surprised?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
slwerner July 10, 2012 at 08:25

Lyn87 – ”Married men will still be presumed to be the fathers of their wives’ children just as they are now. I doubt married women would be required to have the test done.”

Yes, this will continue to be the case as this new way of testing paternity will be used by women who don’t already have the man on the hook to provide for their pregnancy (as it is now, a unmarried man’s legal “obligations” to his baby-momma don’t begin until the child is born – and paternity established in cases where he refuses to consent/acknowledge to paternity).

So, you’re right – it won’t be useful to married men (or even to men in LTR’s) in helping to uncover cuckolding. There is still a vital need for mandatory paternity testing to protect men from fraud.

In addition to your concerns, I’m wondering if implementation of this new form of testing will help the feminists in their efforts to preclude (mandatory) DNA testing at birth.

This might even be seen as a set-back for men’s rights on an issue where good men still need legal protections. I agree that it is demonstrably good to ensure that men are not falsely assigned paternity by word of baby-mommas, but this clearly won’t provide any protection for the men most deserving of it – married men being duped by their unfaithful wives into tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars of paternity fraud.

Whammer – ”If some female accuses you of being the father and you know you’re not, just take the DNA test to prove you’re not.Then file a lawsuit against her and list harassment, infliction of emotion distress and mental anguish and abuse of process as the causes of action. And if you really want to get creative allege a violation of your civil rights and file it in Federal Court against the girl, the county, the judge who signed the order for the test, and anyone else you can think of who was involved like the person who took the test or the cops.”

Excellent!

I’m glad to see at least some men offering pro-active solutions by which men can use the existing system to not only protect themselves, but to also serve as a broader warning against the frivolous ordering of such testing.

In fact, I believe that every man who has to pay for paternity testing to prove that he isn’t the father should file a civil suit against (at least) the women who claimed he was. He should at least recover his cost for testing. If women found that they had to pay, they would finally have a disincentive against trying to “hook” guys who simply have more money that the men they know/suspect are the actual baby-daddy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Opus July 10, 2012 at 08:46

@slwerner

You’re a lawyer, (I believe) and thus I do not doubt you are right in what you say in your last paragraph. Good American Law; but, for those reading here who live in England, I would say that it would be suicidal advice. Issuing civil actions against people where you can never be quite sure how the case is going to proceed, and where even if you succeed and obtain an order for costs against the Defendant, (but on what basis? Common Fund?, Party and Party? – it makes a difference) the Defendant is likely to be impecunious, you will more often than not end up seriously out-of-pocket. Of course should you lose you will end up with her costs too, and being England where the State will fund the impecunious (Legal Aid), the woman will be able to litigate until the cows come home, and you (as a man) will have to fund it yourself and your lawyer, not wanting to be out of pocket, will insist on your paying his costs up front. Of course there is that pernicious modern invention (new to England at any rate) Contingency Fees, but who would touch that – a long established legal firm (200 years) round the corner from where I am, had to enter into a Deed of Arrangement with its Creditors a year or two back as a result of dabbling in that, and would otherwise have gone Bankrupt which would have meant that all its Partners would have been ‘struck off’ as being unfit to practise law – by reason of their poverty.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Buddy Guy July 10, 2012 at 08:47

“my wallet, my choice”

Love that!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Keyster July 10, 2012 at 08:55

For millenia there was either the Mother or the Whore.
A moral code kept the Mother and the Whore distinctly seperate.
Feminism has combined both into one righteous identity, to the point it’s hard to tell the difference. It’s a strategic position of power, to keep men off balance and always guessing; Maternal Power of Mother and Sexual Power of Whore is now the one modern woman – – unfettered by societal criticism or scorn, on the contrary promoted and celebrated.

Leave Mothers and Whores to their own devices without societal constraint, whether it be religious, political or patriarchal, and cultural decline is inevitable. It’s too much power in the hands of babes. It’s Power over the Male, which was the intent all along.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
slwerner July 10, 2012 at 09:22

Opus – “You’re a lawyer, (I believe) and thus I do not doubt you are right in what you say in your last paragraph. Good American Law”

Not a lawyer myself – just surrounded by them. My wife is an attorney, more than a dozen of my friends (from childhood and school) became lawyers, I have three uncles and a grandfather who were lawyers, and our “social circle” includes too many to count.

Anyway, for those in the US, a court-admissible (different from those low-cost tests which will allow an individual to learn the truth; but which lack the chain of custody that a court would require) DNA paternity test is going to be $500 – $700 (on the low end, with more expensive alternatives available). The costs of filing a Small Claim Court civil suit varies by jurisdiction, but is typically $50 or less.

In such cases, one typically represents oneself, so it’s simply a matter of the time and filing fee. And, even if a woman doesn’t have much money, the courts are likely to instruct the parties to come up with payment arrangements that the court will then order. [There is no equivalent to this in the UK?]

It’s not perfect, but if enough women who just “picked” a guy because they knew he had more money that their baby-daddy ended up with judgments against them, word would get around, and women would be more likely to not try to hook some guy they knew couldn’t be the father.

As a broader point, in my estimation, it’s more about getting guy’s to learn the system – how it actually operates, and how to maneuver within it.

I see too much of the gloom and doom attitude in MRA circles – “The system is too big, it’s hopeless. It’s stacked against men, and theirs nothing that can be done about it!”

Yes, the system is “stacked” against men – especially those who do not understand it.

Some years ago, the paternity-establishment racket in California (and elsewhere) was exposed. Welfare counselors would make leading suggestion to women that they should name a man with money as their baby-daddy (and even to give incorrect addresses). But, ultimately, the real problem came down to men who simply did not respond. Men who did not believe themselves the father all too often, born of ignorance of the legal system, simply chose to do nothing – and default judgments were issued against them. Men who could demonstrate lack of service (of legal notification) could contest such a judgment. But, still, many who could have, never did. And, as a result of their ignorance, they ended up “stuck” owing child support for kids of women they may have never even met.

It’s easy to blame the corrupt system (and, it certainly was corrupt). But, if the men had simply made the effort to responded (and get the tests), they could have been spared [I’m not arguing that it’s in any way “just” that men should have to prove their non-paternity, as opposed to requiring that women prove it. Simply pointing out that as unjust as the system was and is, it is still possible to achieve a better outcome if one has the knowledge].

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
Stoltz July 10, 2012 at 09:41

@slwerner

Some years ago, the paternity-establishment racket in California (and elsewhere) was exposed. Welfare counselors would make leading suggestion to women that they should name a man with money as their baby-daddy (and even to give incorrect addresses). But, ultimately, the real problem came down to men who simply did not respond. Men who did not believe themselves the father all too often, born of ignorance of the legal system, simply chose to do nothing – and default judgments were issued against them. Men who could demonstrate lack of service (of legal notification) could contest such a judgment. But, still, many who could have, never did. And, as a result of their ignorance, they ended up “stuck” owing child support for kids of women they may have never even met.

From my understanding, the underlying legal process still exists, though. That is, a woman can name a father of the child, and the father has x-number of days to contest. In most cases, the ‘announcement’ of the father was something silly like publicizing in a local paper. Is this still the case?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12
Keyster July 10, 2012 at 09:48

Yes, the system is “stacked” against men – especially those who do not understand it.

Same goes for the political process; how a law is written, comes up for vote and passes or fails. The power of the internet to reach politicians en masse via email leaves the MRA with no excuses to not get involved.

Feminist, Inc. has Poli-Sci majors, lawyers, PR experts and professional lobbyists marching down the halls of our legislative branches of government every day…but they’ve had no counter-voice until recently, even if it’s virtual but louder.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
troll king July 10, 2012 at 09:55

OT.

This is kinda amusing:

To quote:

“We can probably agree that it’d be shallow/narrow/limiting if you were to get all of your news from one publication. So why do you rely on getting most of your news from one sex? [...] And here’s why, said the speakers from Slate, the New York Times, and Newsweek: men babble, while women contemplate. Men bellow, while women hedge. Men pontificate, while women ruminate. Now perhaps a babbling bellower like me has a place in contemporary discourse, but there’s certainly room for more contemplative ruminators.

“Men feel more entitled to sound off,” said Slate senior editor Emily Bazelon. “Men are prone to blathering.”

“Men’s pieces are full of bluster,” added Pamela Paul, features editor for the New York Times Book Review. “Women care more about blow-back.”

For example, on average women take longer on the standardized tests and in conversation often engage in a kind of “intellectual primping” before giving a response, said Katie Orenstein, founder and CEO of the Op-ed Project, which aims to increase the number of women’s voices in the media. That delayed response might prove detrimental if you’re a contestant on Jeopardy!, but it could be pretty useful if you’re in a nuclear standoff with Iran or simply trading complex financial derivatives.

Orenstein jested that the financial crisis would have played out much differently if Lehman Brothers had instead been Lehman Sisters, which International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagaarde has in the past also noted. “When women are called to action in times of turbulence, it is often on account of their composure, sense of responsibility and great pragmatism in delicate situations,” she wrote in a 2010 op-ed.

The male-female divide looks even worse when narrowing your sample size to more “masculine” topics such as economics and politics, said Orenstein. Women writers tend to stick to the four Fs: family, food, fashion, furniture—which Orenstein labeled the “pink ghetto” of journalism.”

This was written by a male feminist. THIS. IS. WHAT. A. WHITE KNIGHT MANGINA. LOOKS. LIKE!!11!!1

Source:

Dudes, shut up. Ladies, you were saying?
http://www.constructionlitmag.com/additions/dudes-shut-up-ladies-you-were-saying

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Opus July 10, 2012 at 10:07

@slwerner

You asked me a question, as to whether there is not an equivalent system in the U.K.

I am not entirely sure how to answer the question and not just because there is no U.K. system of law – the Scots have their own system and my knowledge does not extend beyond the single jurisdiction which is England and Wales – but because you appear to assume that the woman will immediately cave in. Should she do so, the only question would be the amount of the damages [liability] to be paid. Certainly pressure is placed to settle, however, if everyone settled there would not be an ever lengthening backlog of cases of an almost Jarndyce like proportion. I just cannot see a woman ever agreeeing that she is mistaken (and as I indicated) an impoverished woman (that is most single mothers) will have the financial backing of the State to drag her Defence out for as long as she can – a long time – and that merely firstly on the question of liability. Even the best cases are never 100% guaranteed of success, and cases can fail and do fail for endless reasons. As I said, if I were the man’s lawyer, I would want costs up-front.

We are perhaps less litigious generally than Americans but if I were asked to advise a man who had paid for a Paternity Test as to what he should do, I would firstly advise (this is all hypothetical of course and facts may vary my advice) that proving that the woman did not in good faith assert that he was the Father may be difficult to prove; that if all he has lost is the cost of the test, then that is cheap at the price, and further, that any action taken against the woman will almost certainly look vindictive which will encourage the Judge to White Knight for her. Even if he succeeds, the case will almost certainly gain no publicity.

Just to give you an idea, a few years ago, there was a case locally where a man (coincidentally a lawyer) got into an argument with his neighbour over a boundary between their properties – a slither of land – at the end of which, he being successful, the costs awarded to him against his unsuccessful opponent were taxed [assessed] at over one million pounds sterling. The Judge was scathing that such costs could have been run up, but then Judges are always scathing about costs, yet it only seems to get worse and worse. It is (here) always easier to get into litigation than out. Even if you are successful and even if it is clear the woman has some money, enforcing the judgment (via the Sherriff in the High Court or Bailiff in The County Court) is a nightmare. The Sherriff is not too bad the Bailiffs are quite hopeless, so once again even with the order you may be left whistling for your money. These things can be dragged out for year after year after year. I referred to Jarndyce – Dickens fictional litigant – but exagerrated though it doubtless is, it is not entirely unknown even though that was the Nineteenth Century.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Rebel July 10, 2012 at 10:14

Alimony.

Palimony

Preglimony

And what else?

What other kind of “mony” will they come up with next?

Ans: Allyourmony?

Isn’t it clear that what the objective is here?
Does the word “slavery” ring a bell. Or total submission?
Absolute obedience? You want that? Wanna live your life that way for the sake of a stinking hole?

Become a monk!

Google “anaphrodisiac” and find all the help you need to stamp sex out from your life. That is, if you value your freedom.

No sex, no problem with womyn and government.

Many men have opted for that solution.

I’m an older guy and, of course, a sexless life is no big deal to me.
But even at at much younger age, it is quite possible to set sex aside and concentrate all the energy you will save (as much as 40%) on things you most enjoy.
And you will feel powerful.

You may retort that society will sink, die, wilt, go to hell and what not if children are not produced, but does anyone really care about that anymore? When you are seen as mere garbage?

And why?

Personally, I believe that the wisest words ever spoken were “Carpe diem”. Enjoy the moment. Life is short, believe me.

Sex is no longer worth the zillions of problems it creates.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2
slwerner July 10, 2012 at 10:20

Stoltz – ”From my understanding, the underlying legal process still exists, though. That is, a woman can name a father of the child, and the father has x-number of days to contest. In most cases, the ‘announcement’ of the father was something silly like publicizing in a local paper. Is this still the case?”

Yes, it still works basically the same way – a man is named, and (supposedly) notified, and must act to disprove the putative paternity assigned to him by a woman’s word [back-asswards as it is].

As I recall, the practice of published notifications was one of the things that California got “whacked” for. Published notification is supposed to be the means of last resort – where it can be demonstrated that there is no other reasonable alternative to find the targeted individual. Using it as a “first course” was and is an abuse of the intended function.

Still, the real problem too often came down to men, who did receive notification, failing to understand their need to respond.

Some years back, Glenn Sacks covered the cases of one unfortunate fellow in Philly (as I recall) who shared the name of the intended baby-daddy target. Apparently, the women had only that name by which to identify the baby-daddy, and a search of that name found him, and some clerk simply assigned the putative paternity to him because he shared that name.

When he got the (perfectly legal) notification that he had been named as the father (and needed to respond), he just figured that there had been some mistake, and threw it in the trash. Later, he learned that the court had declared him the father (in abstentia, because he did not bother to respond). As it turned out, if he had but shown up for the hearing, the woman would have (or so she claimed) indicated that she did not know him, and that he couldn’t be the father, and that they had the wrong guy.

Because he chose not to respond, he had to fight a vary expensive legal battle to try to disestablish paternity (actually, that was the easy part) and gain indemnity against the financial liability to the child(‘s mother).

The system is F’d up, there can be no doubt. Why should a man have to prove his non-paternity? The onus should be on the woman (and her advocates in the welfare and (Anti-)Family Court systems) to prove his paternity.

But, rather than sitting back, with thumbs up asses, waiting for the much anticipated collapse, man can, and (IMHO) should learn how to work within the corrupt and broken system, rather than cowering and hoping it collapses before it steamrollers them. I would argue that it is better to go down fighting rather than just cursing the injustice. And the best way to fight the system is to learn to use it (against itself).

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
troll king July 10, 2012 at 10:20

OT.

SEI Quick Poll: Female Breadwinners Twice as Likely to Feel Tension From Partner on Financial Decisions

Source:http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sei-quick-poll-female-breadwinners-twice-as-likely-to-feel-tension-from-partner-on-financial-decisions-2012-07-09

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Huck Finn July 10, 2012 at 10:23

“But even at at much younger age, it is quite possible to set sex aside and concentrate all the energy you will save (as much as 40%) on things you most enjoy.”

I think the savings from abstaining dating, marriage/kids, and having sex with women goes far way beyond 40%.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 14
slwerner July 10, 2012 at 10:28

Opus – ”but because you appear to assume that the woman will immediately cave in. Should she do so, the only question would be the amount of the damages [liability] to be paid. Certainly pressure is placed to settle, however, if everyone settled there would not be an ever lengthening backlog of cases of an almost Jarndyce like proportion. I just cannot see a woman ever agreeeing that she is mistaken (and as I indicated) an impoverished woman (that is most single mothers) will have the financial backing of the State to drag her Defence out for as long as she can”

The thing about the Small Claims civil courts in the States is that there is no need to prove that the women knew she was wrong, only that she was responsible for the cost to the man by making a mistaken claim against him (50%+ responsibility). And, as it is a civil court, she will be provided no representation (at taxpayer expense) [think of Judge Judy – two people come in, no lawyers, judge asks them to give their stories, asks for documentation of damages/costs, and makes a simple determination as to whether or not the defendants acts caused the damage/costs to the plaintiff.]

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
Opus July 10, 2012 at 11:01

@slwerner

We too have a small claims court – but sadly it is not really like Judge Judy, in fact it is largely indistinguishable from the usual court sitting in chambers (technically it is just the usual County Court below a certain amount) but even there you will find that it is not as simple as it looks: you still have to prove your case; there are certain limited costs; all the points I made about enforcing the judgement remain; you may still use and will perhaps need expert witnesses whose fees are chargable against the losing woman and so on; and if you want to win you really need an experienced lawyer to prepare the case, which can of course intimidate your opponent (that’s the idea!).

If all this sounds desparately pssimistic, all I can say in my defence, is that my experience has always been that Plaintiffs are keen and always need to be made to see the realities, for otherwise when they lose they will start blaming you. I recall an acquaintance of mine coming into the Bar one evening, fuming: he had brought a small claims case; to prove his case he had had to do (so he said) forty five hours of work to prepare his case; he was awarded forty five pounds costs against his opponent for this; that worked out of course to £1.00 an hour, but as he said this meant that he had lost forty five working hours which he would otherwise have been able to spend on his business where he normally charged a far greater sum (I forget what) per hour.

We have an invention known as a Mackenzie Friend; that is to say a person can sit in court with the litigant and mutter advice as the case goes along. I once agreed to help a friend of mine out in that way. My friend who of course was not a lawyer had not a clue how to proceed in court, and the Judge (who knew me) eventually ignored my client and asked me to speak on behalf of my friend as if it were not a small claims court and as if I were duly appointed Counsel(!) – a much more sensible arrangement I may say. Indeed even before we entered court (we were fighting the local council) I was negotiating on my friends behalf with the Council’s Counsel, which again was the sensible thing for me to do, rather than my friend having to come back to me every few seconds to say what he had been told, for me to explain and then tell him what to do next.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
troll king July 10, 2012 at 11:03

OT.

The Economics of Change: Gender Studies Departments

http://www.constructionlitmag.com/additions/economics-of-change-gender-studies-departments

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 11:12

@Geography Bee Finalist:

I’ll be happy to answer. I hope that you do not mind that I provide additional background to provide some “why” behind the “what” of my answers. I think that this may help to understand unanticipated answers.

I was quite lucky to have a Mother who was very dedicated specifically to her children, above nearly everything else. That sad, she had a horrible relationship with my father.

As a child I was encouraged by both parents to ask questions, and was given answers. My mother was fairly open with me as to her own understanding of her own emotional condition and perspectives, and helped me to understand how other women (and sometimes men) might be perceiving a situation.

My mother relied on expert advice that I needed this kind of training, and as a result I’ve gotten better training with understanding feminine wiles than some daughters receive. Of course, as an Aspie, I have less of an intuitive sense of social dynamic than most people do, and have instead specifically trained myself (with the aid of others) to have such an understanding.

Under another paradigm my mother broke “the girl code” and gave away secret documents of “team woman”.

On the other hand, she was very happy to train me for various traditionally female tasks. I can cook, clean, and sew quite well, though I don’t always decide to do any of the above. I typically reserve sewing for repair and customization jobs.

As a result, when “battle of the sexes” trivia games come along, I am typically the strong-man on my team, even among teams of married men. Also, in an education colloquium I took, the teacher put up on the board an argument between women and men. The teacher asked the women to analyze the male perspective, and the male students to analyze the female perspective. Most guys in class had no clue, while once I was finally called on, I rattled off an analysis that left most folks in the glass gawping.

“How… how do you understand that?” One of the girls in class asked. I replied that I was raised primarily by women. While true, I did not understand at the time that my farm-stock dedicated house wife Grandmother, and mother who was willing to explain analysis of female interaction I asked her about was the driving difference, not just their genders.

In general, my ability to understand both male and female perspectives, and explain them to others the way that I would explain them to a fellow Aspie who was struggling with understanding the situation has been valued by people I know of both genders.

I am also openly loving, and have specific physical signs of affection toward family members that are acceptable for public display that I use openly and often (hugs, arm around the back/shoulder, scratching of the back between the shoulder blades, petting of the hair). These outward and open displays are both bonding behaviors that serve to enhance emotional closeness, and help to serve my psychological need for emotional closeness, but are also open signs to others of my emotional connection to that person.

I also act to serve others on a regular basis, and if I am ever asked why, I say that I love my fellow man, and that I enjoy helping others.

Thus far, the only accusations I have had about poor ability to connect come from complete strangers with whom I have had some kind of social dust up. The only one I can recall off hand was actually a man, who chased me down after I did not act as he would prefer while driving. He then made baseless accusations in anger, and finally got into his car, mindlessly repeating the phrase “keep on talking, keep being alone”.

I have occasionally been accused of having poor reasoning skills by some, mostly by women, or those men that the folks here call manjinas, but these accusations are few and far between. The vast majority of the time, even people who disagree with my particular opinions respect my ability to reason from facts, and precepts.
However as a mathematician, who has also studied philosophy, I am able to frame the majority of my arguments in such a way that such accusations ring extremely hollow. People that know me, or have met me recently often come to respect my intellect quickly, and friends of the accuser sometimes tell him to back off of the angle of accusing me of poor reasoning skills.

I will admit that I occasionally have not worded my arguments well, or have made errors, however when these things are pointed out, I usually acquiesce, or say that I will re-consider that point later, after the discussion. The ability to give ground encourages others who are willing to have a reasonable discussion to be willing to do the same. It is also a display of intellectually honesty.

For example, at one point I was arguing from a perspective of conservative principles to a mixed group of 5 males and females, all of whom were extreme liberals. However, because I was respectful, listened to their points, and we allowed each-other to speak in turn, despite them speaking 2-3 times as much as I did, while I convinced none of them to change their minds, they did come to respect the idea that someone could reasonably and morally hold the positions that I did.

In general, I have trained myself to be able to understand the perspectives, ways of thinking, and social queues of a large variety of people. I have also trained myself through various bits of formal training, and experience, in the art of argumentation and debate. While I still find holes in my knowledge, that I am ill prepared to deal with, my training in general leaves me with a deeper understanding of the subject than many who rely on intuition, instinct, and experience alone.

As far as fixations go, I tend to have temporary hobbies that I study deeply, gaining knowledge, before moving on to either a new hobby, or an old one that has once again sparked my interest. Women (and some men) that know me are occasionally concerned by my raised interest in a subject that they dislike. Martial arts training, and fire arms are examples of these. My interest in them “scares” people who fear those with training in self defense.

However, in general, my desire to study logical systems is channeled into pursuits that grant me the ability to either earn money (mathematics, computers, etc), or allow me to perform concrete tasks with skill. Most people appreciate having an expert both willing and able to perform concrete tasks for them.

I suspect, however, that my tendency to do nothing but study a particular interest of mine all day when I am “really into it” would annoy the hell out of any woman I tried to date. Also, I tend not to clean unless I get a strong urge to do so, which is strangely similar to female “nesting” instincts.

So, between my ability to openly show affection in an obvious, and socially appropriate way, my ability to understand certain tracks of a woman’s concerns, and mitigate them, my ability to construct my arguments on a logical foundation in the open (rather than in my own mind, then announce the results), my deep study of practical issues that allow me to aid others, and my desire to aid others, I have much less problem with women than many would expect.

However, the way that most women view me is as a non-threatening “big brother” figure, or as date material -for some other woman-. I am handsome enough to hang around with, but over-weight enough that I am not date-material. I fit that comfortable medium where most women will “friend zone” me minutes after meeting me.

Since I am not dating material, but rather a “useful fixture”, most of the problems that “date material” guys have don’t manifest for me.

Of course it doesn’t help that I have a rather old-fashioned approach to a lot of things. I have yet to asked a single woman on a date since high school. Rather, I get to know the women around me. Thus far, I have yet to find one that was date-worthy since high school. If I ever did, she’d already have friend-zoned me, since I hadn’t been asking her out, or checking out her body.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 11:21

@ MCIWWF

You asked people to consider “HYPERFRONTALITY”, then went on to discuss hypofrontality. These would be opposites. I suspect that this was a slip.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4
Wilson July 10, 2012 at 11:58

I believe pregnancy must be covered under Obamacare, and women cannot be charged more than men, so men are already going to pay for the medical costs so that women can have sex with other men and carry their children. I guess she is looking for the father to cover all her expenses for maternity leave. Foreseeable negative consequence: assault leading to miscarriage.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Eric July 10, 2012 at 12:03

Troll King:
Reading Kurczy’s article about the lack of ‘inclusion’ in the media only convinces me further that manginas have a deep masochistic element to their personalities. After listening to all this female abuse at this forum, the first thing Kurczy could think of was penning an article to invite other men to join in on the abuse.

The psychology of this phenomenon is interesting. Feminised women reject real men and pursue bums and thugs. Manginas seem to be operating on some similar psychodynamic: they laugh at things like MGTOW then run to the nearest bully-bitch, only to get kicked in the crotch for their trouble; and then afterwards make apologies and beg for more.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
The Trend July 10, 2012 at 12:06

Can I ask a “stupid man question”? Why is it just a clump of cells when its inconvenient for the woman but “your unborn child” when theres money to be had?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 12:42

@Geography Bee Finalist:

I realize that my above reply may have come across as tooting my own horn. The way I posted, it’s probably accurate.

I’m not saying that I haven’t had to struggle, I have. Nor that I haven’t had advantages, I have, and still do have many challenges. But I personally have put in work, and received help in that work, to mitigate the challenges that Aspies in general have. I have also been blessed with many advantages to mitigate my downsides.

I meat to explain that, and why I have not been experiencing certain negative outcomes it seems you have been experiencing. I did not post in order to say “look at me, I am great”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Eric July 10, 2012 at 12:50

Rebel:
‘Sex is no longer worth the zillions of problems it creates.’

You’re confusing the act of the sex with the objects of sex. Sex in itself is not the problem. It’s like the Socialists say about money being the root of all evil: they confuse the effects with the cause. Money itself is good and not evil; but when its monopolized by the corporations or the State, becomes and instrument of evil. Men turn to alternate economics in these situations and generally prosper outside the system.

It’s the same with sex. Feminised women, the heirs of our puritanical culture, believe themselves to have a monopoly on sex and reproduction. Just like corrupt capitalists and fanatical communists, they use their monopoly as tool of oppression. Men need to react in the same way—circumvent their monopoly and enjoy the good uses of sex while leaving the feminists holding the bag.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Eric July 10, 2012 at 12:55

Josh/Geography Bee:
Women hate us all because we’re men. Everything else is an excuse, not a reason, for their hatred.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:07

There’s another idea for an article:
Research DNA refutation of paternity.
Should be fairly easy with resources like SAVE services,and organization we
should be supporting as they do political work.

I could just as easily make the claim that only 18 states allow for a legal DNA test,and my be right about it.
I could also go on to claim that taking
the required DNA from the mother needed for such a test would be prosecuted as a breech of privacy and simple assault,as well as not being admissible.
It would seem the simple truth would be to refuse to sign the birth certificate,or lacking that notification, be able to refute paternity somehow in most states except California,which would be more vigorous.

Perhaps this is why the “illegal” tests are so popular,that it is illegal to test in most states.
An antagonistic person would frame the counter argument as:
Show me the legal precedent for each state..
It’s true the wimmins get free legal council here in the States was well as the UK,it costs the male in any court adventure.
As for the civil suits,that will allow for half of your costs,but would not allow you damages for distress,ect,nor would a lay person be able to sue a test giver or judge or officer in civil court,as they have legal immunity to the due course of their duties.
One would have to show malicious prosecution and sue in Federal court,a very hard and expense thing to do,once gain would be interested to see s single precedent there.
In short: the deck is stacked against men in the court system.
Prove otherwise!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 14
Keyster July 10, 2012 at 13:08

I believe pregnancy must be covered under Obamacare, and women cannot be charged more than men, so men are already going to pay for the medical costs so that women can have sex with other men and carry their children.

Women traditionally paid more for health care insurance because they use health care services more than men. They not only get pregnant, which is expensive, they’re also prone to all sorts of complications with their lady plumbing. They also use mental health services far more than men.

Besides health care premium equality, women are also exempt from having to make any co-pays with regards to preventive and care needs specific to women (pap smears, pelvic exams, mamograms, breast pumps etc.) No such provisions specific to men’s care. The idea is that women will be more likely to seek care it there are no co-pays.

Who do you think the health insurance companies will pass these costs on to? Why men of course. I don’t think the manosphere fully grasps how misandrist ObamaCare is. But then most of our population doesn’t understand the full ramifications. It’s too complex, which was part of the strategy to get it passed.

Did you know most states Medicaid programs will not cover single men? True. They’ll cover single women and/or men and women with children and married men, but NOT single men regardless of how dire his financial situation might be.

One thing ObamaCare does stipulate is that states Medicaid MUST help single men – – but then the medicaid portion of the bill was struck down by the Supreme Court. Men can’t win!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:16

Actually,during the course of refuting my false DV allegations I let it be known
that I intended to sue in civil court for damages,the judge went out of his way,and out of thing air,he said:
: I find the sisters where acting in good faith to protect their sister.”
Implying that it would require proof of malicious intent (very hard to do) to recover damages from a false accusation.
Of course I would have had to hire a lawyer,and the people I would be suing were on welfare,so it would be nigh impossible to collect.
Just so yall understand my viewpoint and frustration.
Also,my lawyer claimed that a transcript of the criminal and civil DV proceedings would be very expensive,altho I have a feeling he was lying to me.(In collusion w/ the judge and prosecutor)
Yeah also in collusion were the female desk police officer who failed to deliver my summons on time,and the female court clerks who actively worked to manufacture evidence for the prosecution whilst also obstructing my
attempts to clear myself w/o attorney costs.
Stacked deck!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 12
Eric July 10, 2012 at 13:18

Trend:
It’s not a stupid question at all.

It goes back to the cultural belief that women believe themselves the ‘owners of reproduction’ along with the cultural belief that they are the ‘owners of sex.’ Their reflexive anti-male hatred resents even the use of men as ‘sperm donors’. When they decide to have children—even if they ‘want’ children— the monetary sanctions they inflict on men is a punishment for forcing them to be dependent on men for procreation.

Abortion works on the same principle. In that case, they retaliate against the man by destroying what his sperm has produced. Both cases are all about reinforcing the feminine Superiority Complex by punishing men for encroaching on perceived female sexual and reproductive monopolies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:21

“Did you know most states Medicaid programs will not cover single men? True. They’ll cover single women and/or men and women with children and married men, but NOT single men regardless of how dire his financial situation might be.”
That sir is true.

“One thing ObamaCare does stipulate is that states Medicaid MUST help single men – – but then the medicaid portion of the bill was struck down by the Supreme Court. Men can’t win!”

Did not know that,thanks for posting,this bias appear to extend to all legal and benefit procedures.
Especially dental coverage and legal aid.
Makes me angry when people wrongfully assert the playing field is equal on those two important matters.
Housing is allegedly equal,but in practice women receive a good %80-%90 of it from what I’ve seen.Those w/ children go to the front.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 14
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:25

You can bet if a male pill does come along,it will take daily doses for a month ahead to be effective and will cost $5/pill cash money, ($150/month) not free or a $2 co pay /month such as the female pill.
Perhaps more.
Would be very surprised to see the PTB allow it at all,they have been delaying for decades already.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 15
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:32

@eric
“Just like corrupt capitalists and fanatical communists, they use their monopoly as tool of oppression. Men need to react in the same way—circumvent their monopoly and enjoy the good uses of sex while leaving the feminists holding the bag.”

Well said bro.
On the same page.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 14
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:39

Off topic, but:
There is a radio ad that keeps playing here,to effect of “do you have a MALE child aged 5 to 12 years of age with bad behaviors or oppositional disorder?Call us for our behavior modification program..”
Will try to get the name of the place next time around.
I’m sure of few of you guys have heard this ad,as it has been playing for years now.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 14
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:43

On one of my posts above,out of pride of introducing the concept I snipped “do I have to do it all”
That was a stupid thing to say,and apologize for that,I really do need to endeavor to do some actual activism,that is becoming evident.Thanks to those guys who keep drumming at that concept.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 14
freebird July 10, 2012 at 13:52

@josh the aspie:
“Rather than killing himself, why doesn’t the father kill the ex-wife that took his children, or the judge that did, or the “court expert”. It really does baffle me.”

Easy big fella.
We’re attempting to avoid stuff that can used against us.
While some guys do have thoughts such as those out of frustration or lack of due process,most would never actually commit such acts.
So it would be best to avoid saying stuff one would not actually do.
It just looks bad.
Much easier to ghost,and happier too!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 15
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 10, 2012 at 14:05

@ Josh the Aspie

No, you’re not tooting your own horn.

@ freebird

I have not heard those radio ads, but I don’t think those fuckers who created them or the stations that authorized running them know that it takes TWO OR MORE to create opposition and defiance.

They also don’t know that opposition and defiance are what often gets things accomplished, not cooperation and compliance.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Pseudonym July 10, 2012 at 14:13

I think it is fully reasonable to expect some alpha bro to pay for all of his spawn he’s generating who will someday comprise the cast of “Jersey Shore: The Next Gneration” and be financially shackled to whatever horrible Snooki-type caricature of a “woman” that he made the mistake of knocking up.

And that’s what this professor apparently thinks, too: “The guy had a role in making the baby and, once we definitively establish that the baby is his, he should have a role in taking care of it from the very beginning.”

That’s fine. Fair is fair. But, if the men have to bear an equal share of the burden of a child (or, not even necessarily “equal”, but definitely “some” share), then why are they entirely cut out of the decision-making process regarding the child, which is the benefit of having a child?

This professor thinks that women have a right to a man’s money via the baby, but then (in the most extreme example) can kill the child whenever she wants. Where is the father’s right in making baby-related decisions? If this professor wants to pretend that she wants “equality” of any sort, then her proposal should also include a part about establishing joint-custody over an unborn child, making unilateral abortion decisions illegal. (If we’re going to have legalized abortions at all, I think the best approach is to allow the father and mother to establish a contract about when it will and will not be allowed.) This principle could then continue to guide parental relations after the child is born.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 14:33

@freebird

I did note that I was not advocating that the man kill anyone, including himself. If feminists choose to ignore that, that makes them bitches, not me an advocate of violence.

It was a differential question, based off of a supposition I was not advocating. If the man is going to kill someone, then why kill x instead of y?

Seriously, I do not understand the choice to eat a gun. What I understand even less is the choice to do so specifically in the context of being oppressed.

My response to being oppressed, which I have successfully suppressed, and anticipate continuing to successfully do so, under the assumption that things do not get significantly worse, is to act against the oppressor, not myself. Thus far this impulse has been channeled into making rational choices, and being an active participant in local government and charity work.

But if I was going to die anyway, or the level of oppression reached the point where my soul could only cry “Give me liberty, or give me death!” and I saw no plausible avenue to liberty other than through death, why not die gloriously, fighting for good?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 14:42

@Geography Bee Finalist himself

I hope that you found my answers helpful in some way or another.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 10, 2012 at 14:48

@ Josh the Aspie

Your answers were helpful.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Ted July 10, 2012 at 14:49

@AfOR

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2171324/Young-mother-accused-men-rape-didnt-want-trouble-late-night-partying-jailed.html#ixzz20G5yP4PO

“Judge Stephen Hopkins QC told her: ‘Every false allegation of rape increases the plight of those women who are genuinely victims of rape.

“‘It makes their allegations harder to prove as juries are concerned at the possibility of convicting an innocent man.”

Notice the good Judge’s order of priorities. He seems to be irritated about those pesky juries.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 15:02

@Geography Bee Finalist himself

If you would like to have further “off topic” conversations, I’d be willing to do so. Would you like to get in touch?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Geography Bee Finalist himself July 10, 2012 at 15:07

@ Josh the Aspie

I am rather reticent about putting my contact information on The Spearhead, but I assure you that I did compete in the National Geographic Bee (then called the National Geography Bee in 1993 and 1995) and made it to the finals both years. Another commenter confirmed this by Google.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 15:27

@Geography Bee Finalist himself,

I understand. If you follow the link under my name, you will find my website. It has a link to my blog. While I am still working on the first new crop of articles, it does have one “I’m back” style post that can be commented on. I tested it recently, and commenting does seem to be working. If not, I’d like to know that as well.

If you leave a comment with an e-mail address there, I can contact you at that e-mail address. If you prefer not, I am fine with that as well. I simply wanted to make you aware of a method that we could start private conversations unrelated to present blog posts.

As far as your being a Geography Bee Finalist, that is quite an accomplishment, and one that I respect.

I myself had a hard time with geography in school due to a wide variety of factors. Had it been taught differently, my level of interest (and thus accomplishment) would likely have been much higher.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
freebird July 10, 2012 at 18:54

Thanks for the clarification josh, you’re right I did jump the gun a it on your comment.
I suppose I’ve made similar comments in the past, a bit hypocritical of me.
That’s the difference between men and women,women never admit wrong,or take accountability.
So that’s pretty close to an apology.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 13
ActaNonVerba July 10, 2012 at 19:06

Responsibility begins at conception, eh? I couldn’t agree more. So, along with what this womyn has suggested, the following will be instituted: 1) Within 3 weeks of discovering the pregnancy, the woman must use the blood test and let doctors determine who the father is and notify him (not tell the woman to tell him, notify HIM). Married women must do this too because it is every woman’s “responsibility” to stop paternity fraud. 2) Obviously, there will be no more abortions (unless a non feminist doctor determines risk to the mother’s life, PROVEN rape accusation). After all, “responsibility” begins at conception and that includes “responsibility” of the woman for the new life she has created. 3) I could go on and on. Jail for not obeying visitation orders. Performing daily unapid labor for the state in return for government benefits, etc.. Lots of great “responsibilities” out there for women that I’m sure they would already be taking on if they were aware, right?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Whammer July 10, 2012 at 21:26

@slwerner & Opus

I’ve tried to explain these things but I’m afraid that most of the people commentig just do not have the level of sophistication to understand and want to just believe some nonsense.

@Opus- the systems in the US and UK work fairly the same. In the Civil division in the US you have what is called Small Claims and the limits you can sue for depend on the jurisdiction. It’s usually about $5k. Above that sum you have to sue in the Law division and even here there are usually two tiers, perhaps up to $20k in one and then unlimited in the other. It’s the same in England although it’s not called small claims and the limit is 5k pounds.
You can bring a lawyer with you in small claims but since the sums are so low it isn’t worth it (however, corporations must bring a lawyer) What usually happens is that one of the lawyers working under the judge (law clerks) tries to arbitrate a settlement and if this doesn’t work then the judge hears the case. You as the Plaintiff must prove your case just as you would have to in a higher court so you had better be prepared (few people in small claims are). The burden of proof in on you and the standard is the prepondernce of the evidence. So you’re going to have to show that the female put you to some expense and show the receipts for that. The female is not entitled to a lawyer although she may get some legal aid or feminist law group to help her. But your case is pretty open and shut and you should win. As Opus said, it may be hard to collect the money but that’s another topicI won’t go into here.
But let’s go back to the original case for a moment where she accused you of paternity. The burden of proof was on her which means if she wants a DNA test she’s going to first have to get an Order from the judge and pay for it. The judge cannot force you to pay for the test and if some mangina judge tries it you file a motion to dismiss his Order. Of course since he’s the one ruling on motions it will likely be denied so at this point you file an appeal to the appelate division (and tie them uo for 6 months :) ) You’ll win the appeal but you going to have to know how to write a brief. The female will have to do the same and I doubt if she’ll know how so she’ll have to hire a lawyer which will cost her many times more than just paying for the paternity test :)

************************************************
“Still, the real problem too often came down to men, who did receive notification, failing to understand their need to respond”

These are the same useless idiots who get a speeding ticket and either don’t pay it or show up in court to contest it. Then they wonder why cops show up at their house to arrest them or they get stopped driving and the cop arrests them when the bench warrant shows up on his computer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4
Josh the Aspie July 10, 2012 at 21:43

@Freebird

Hey, as long as you’re willing to accept the clarification, I’m cool with it. ^_^

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
The Whammer July 10, 2012 at 22:09

@Opus

“Of course there is that pernicious modern invention (new to England at any rate) Contingency Fees, but who would touch that .”

In the US lawyers will only take a case on contingency if they know it’s almost a sure thing and where they will only rarely have to try the case and know they can settle it. They know that the person or entity has deep pockets or is an insurance co. that will settle so its generally just about how much, not if they will win. Suing the cops and city in some high profile brutality case is almost a sure settlement too. Sure, there’s always a rish to the law firm but they’re very careful and selective on the cases they take on contingency and are getting 50% of the proceeds, and likely charges some expenses to the client if they win or settle a case.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
Art Vandelay July 11, 2012 at 04:57

The insidious thing about proposals like these is that they can find footing in both major US parties. The Democrats love goodies for women. The Republicans will like that it’s not the state paying and that the men are punished for inflicting that condition on a poor, helpless woman.

I recommend false identities and only hookups away from home.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
David K. Meller July 12, 2012 at 11:05

AfORs–9 July 2012 14:46–forgot to mention the most important type of “wimminz”, at least for discussions like this:

Stupid wimminz and ugly wimminz…

The most important kind of wimminz we must begin to worry about are the GREEDY wimminz!

Good point otherwise.

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Johnny July 17, 2012 at 14:36

As matter of fact, we have a similar law here in Brazil.

A pregnant woman may demand on court an order to make the supposed father of the child to pay for the pregnancy and living expenses of the woman. That kind of order, in brazilian law, may even be issued by a judge BEFORE hearing the man in court.

There is no DNA testing before issuing the order, whatsoever, and after the child is born, if the paternity isn’t confirmed by a DNA test, the man can’t demand the money back on court.

I believe brazilian law, on this matter, is worse than the proposed preligmony rule.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: