English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Let me get this straight....

Child support is for the CHILD
Abortion is for the WOMAN

So what is for the man?

Women argue that forcing men to pay child support is in the best interest of the CHILD. So I guess abortion is also in the best interest of the child too.. right?

I just think that if WOMEN get to have abortions.. MEN should have the OPTION of child support. Meaning we should have the right to NOT pay it.

Again:

Child support is for the CHILD
Abortion is for the WOMAN

So what is for the man?

2007-12-14 07:26:42 · 38 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science Gender Studies

"Tracy" how ignorant... if thats how you feel get back in the kitchen and make my dinner then!

2007-12-14 07:31:44 · update #1

What happen to EQUALITY.. what is equal about 'Tracy the feminist' beliefs?

2007-12-14 07:33:28 · update #2

"History Writer" should of thought of that before you had SEX.. duh... thats what women always say to men...

2007-12-14 07:35:24 · update #3

"Tracy" typical feminist response when wrong about something... avoiding the question..

2007-12-14 07:44:23 · update #4

38 answers

You just have to love the irony.

On one hand women are every bit as capable as men and on the other they need special options because they aren’t.

One answerer points out that men can’t kill the kid to get out of paying completely overlooking the fact that women can (and do) but the most astounding part of the answer was “…when he allows the woman to get pregnant.”, as if it were entirely the man’s fault when pregnancy occurs.

Another points out that the man gets premarital sex without being roped into the marriage…. So the woman doesn’t, I suppose. Apparently HER payout is the ability to cash in on the pregnancy.

Another seems to feel that all women are forced to undergo pregnancy and childbirth without ever once considering that women have options to prevent pregnancy.

Of course there is the old standby, 'It’s not a child until I say it is', and the arguments that men can’t control women’s bodies in regard to abortion forgetting that if the woman chooses to birth the child, *his* body is then used for the next 20 years to provide her with money for her unilateral decision to birth for bucks.

Another correctly points out that it “takes two to tango” then reduces men’s input in to children’s lives to that of buying things, only slightly mentioning that children need father’s influence. Apparently, men’s influence needs to be restricted and controlled by the mother, just like the money forceably taken 'for the children'.

Another states: “Men know, or should know, the risk of preagnancy (and many other risks) and the consequences so either do not have sex or accept that the whole child support, abortion issue--as it stands, is what it is.”, which doesn’t seem to be rational when it is pointed out that *women know or should know, the risk of pregnancy and the consequences so either not have sex or accept that sex can lead to pregnancy.* The hypocrisy is tangible. Then this person goes on to denigrate all fathers: Many "good" fathers stop paying once they split from the moms, and I think that history tells us that when they are not forced to pay, many people do not.” Despite the fact that this information is 100% incorrect. Those “good fathers” are kicked out of the family and just realize they’re being used and the children are not benefiting from the child support.

One of the worst answers falsely states “If a man does not want the child he has conceived, but the woman insists on having it, I think the man can opt out of paying child support as long as he gives up any custody or visitation with the child,…” which is just incorrect and on several levels. Men CANNOT opt out of ANYTHING in relation to pregnancy or child support.

Yet another seems to feel only women can raise a child to become “a productive member of society”, probably without understanding that single mothers are the worst place to raise children, hands down.

Another lovely answer: “You obviously do not want to live up to your responsibility, and have no idea what it takes to raise a child.”… as if women live up to their responsibility by demanding to be paid for their unilateral choice along with the idea that since you are a man, you could not understand what children need and I suppose that includes men like me who have raised, fully and solely supporting 4 children (and their mom). Disingenuous, at best.

Still another proves what it’s all about in the eyes of many: “reinstate proper effective up to age of 18 of the child AFDC and I'll have no problem with men not paying child support if they agree to never try to be in the child's life”... Meaning: women should be paid by the state to give birth and paid to care for their children and fathers should be completely removed. Either way, men pay women to raise the next batch of anti-social misfits.

Many forgot that it may be “her body, her choice” but it remains HIS responsibility. How bigoted can people get?

More than one simply refused to answer your questions… while they did just exactly what they said they refused to do. Can one say simple-minded. If they don’t want to answer, they should simply NOT respond at all. Then telling you the question is “RIDICULOUS”, seems to mean that only feminists are capable of determining the validity of a question.

One posted a story about how some men changed from a pro-life to pro-abortion when faced with a pregnancy (based as a fact for all men through the instance of ONE man). Duh. So do women and both about many things including but certainly not limited to abortion, pregnancy or anything else. People do change their minds quite often and for the exact same reasons, including women.

“One can choose to make the best of it and build character, or one can choose to whine about how unfair life is.” Apparently women should never have complained about their “rights” and just made the best of it to build character, like the right to vote and others. I'm sure this would apply equally to slaves a couple of hundred years ago. 'Just accept mistreatment and be a better man'.

Another tells you to “deal with it” because they personally cannot see a better way to handle the situation. Of course millions of others can but the solution doesn’t reek of sexism, so for them, it is not a viable answer.

Another: “If you help to make the kid, YOU have to help take care of it. If you don't want to pay child support, use a condom, don't have sex, use birth control, and more simply put: DON'T HAVE A CHILD.” Which is a very good argument against abortion on demand and *should*, but doesn't apply to women, obviously.

Yet another admits (unconsciously, I’m sure) that women aren’t as capable as men with the statement “You'll end up paying for it anyway in taxes if there were no child support laws. Without child support a woman ends up having to go on welfare because she can't afford the child on her own.”. and “Further more less abortions equals more of your tax money going towards welfare to provide for unplanned children.
You don't want to pay child support or more taxes? Always use condoms and a spermicide. Don't trust her when she says she's on the pill. PROTECT YOURSELF FIRST.” This should be directed at WOMEN and men..
The same old sexism: it’s always the man’s fault, even when women do something bad.
Then s/he added: “I suppose we could always go back to the old method of things and have those huge orphanages of the Victorian era etc where children learned to be proper thieves and muggers and drug addicts by 10 years old.” Apparently completely unaware that today, these children are being raised by single moms and becoming the main fodder for prison and juvenile detention facilities. Yeah, great strides forward. All that changed was that more children are being institutionalized and crime rate and degree of violence and degradation has increased.

“Well, the man has a choice about engaging in sexual activity.” As do women as well as several OTHER options to deny responsibility.

Another states that if you don’t want to cause a pregnancy and the resulting abortion or child support, use contraception… DUH, women apparently aren’t smart enough to figure out how to use the plethora of contraception available to them.

Yet another that is totally unaware of the law: Guess I'm the only one who reads the civil code. But then again, this may not be true in all states:
The name of the alleged father on any birth certificate must also be signed by that man, acknowledging that he is in fact the father and is therefore legally responsible. No one may force or forge said signature on this legal document.
Don't want to pay child support? Don't sign. It's really that simple. Without that signature, the father is listed as unknown. And unknown can't pay. Despite popular belief, you also cannot force someone to undergo a paternity test.”
Everything contained in this person’s answer is totally in unequivocally INCORRECT.
I can’t figure out if it is just more feminist lies or someone can actually be this ignorant.

Then finally, ” Men should stop complaining about paying child support. It's the least you could do. You don't have to see or hear about the child. Just do electronic transfers and that's it. No dirty diapers, no crying, no puberty that you have to deal with.”
The idea is that mothers are the only ones that love their children; men are simply there to fund the mother’s choice.

The sexism is overwhelming. Sadly, these are the ‘mothers’ raising the next generation of leeches.

2007-12-15 02:03:01 · answer #1 · answered by Phil #3 5 · 3 5

First of all, a Man, or Men, as they grow into Puberty, and start having sexual relations with Women, should have been told what to expect if they do not start using contraceptives when having sexual Relations with any woman.When encountered with a big problem of the Woman getting pregnant, and she decides that the baby conceived should be Born, is when the man, thinks that he was unfairly trapped in paying support for the Child, and thinks that the Woman should have had an Abortion in the first Place, is an Arrogant fool who is only thinking of himself, and not understanding that the Child, should be given a chance to Live. Did the Child say he wanted to Live or die? You and the woman were the ones who conceived the Baby so, it is the Man's responsibility to pay for the support of the Child. Some Men like to play around with woman, having sex with them and forgetting that with the Pleasure, comes responsibility, so why do you think you have as much right as the woman or child. Grin and Bear it, like the Man you are!!!!!!

2007-12-15 04:20:27 · answer #2 · answered by a.vasquez7413@sbcglobal.net 6 · 1 1

I am sick of hearing the woman has a right to not carry a child that she doesn't want or that she doesn't want to take care of the child. There is ADOPTION. If you don't want the child then give it up to someone that does or to the father that might. Oh and here is another option: Keep your legs closed and don't have sex.

FYI People: Fewer then 1% of abortions are performed because of rape or incest. There have been as many as 40-49 million abortions since Roe v Wade.

There are far worse things then having saggy boobs and stretch marks. I dont know, like having your body ripped from limb to limb by a machine or having a hole poked in the base of your skull and your brain being sucked out. By the way the child CAN feel those proceedures.

I find it sickening that so many want to advocate for a proceedure that they dont want to know any of the details of. I guess by knowing actually what is being done to the child a person might actually have to face facts and admit it is wrong.

2007-12-15 04:17:56 · answer #3 · answered by M 6 · 3 0

I am not sure that I agree that abortion is for the woman.

I am a woman, never had to make that decision (never been preagnant), but in my mind an abortion is as much for the child as the woman. I think that a woman who does not want to have or can not take care of a child should have an abortion--and in that case, in my mind it is best that a child not be born to a mom who can not or does not want to take care of it.

As far as fair--I see what you mean and it is a tough call and not 100% FAIR. However, I think that so much of the burden of child rearing has always been on the woman (and continues to be) that what is for the man is sex. Men know, or should know, the risk of preagnancy (and many other risks) and the consequences so either do not have sex or accept that the whole child support, abortion issue--as it stands, is what it is.

Again, I understand what you are saying, but what is the alternative? Men who do not have to pay child support unless they want to? Many "good" fathers stop paying once they split from the moms, and I think that history tells us that when they are not forced to pay, many people do not.

The other option is allowing the men to have a say in the abortion decision...I am just not comfortable with that on many levels, not the least of which is that the baby gestitates in our bodies for those nine months...

Guess I have no answer for you, just more questions. I just wanted to answer on behalf of a feminist who agrees that it is not 100% fair and that it is a difficult issue that is not black and white in the least.

2007-12-14 07:41:42 · answer #4 · answered by Zhedray 3 · 1 5

i keep hearing all of the defenses for abortion is that the woman should abort if she can't/doesn't want to take care of the child... have any of these folks ever heard of adoption? i know of two couples right now who have been on a waiting list for over 5 years now waiting on a baby to adopt. why must you kill him/her? why not give them up for adoption to a family who would love them?

it's like i heard someone say a while back, abortion is so touted but who knows, we could have aborted the person who would have discovered the cure for cancer or aids. we'll never know because those children didn't get a chance to live and show us.

2007-12-16 09:33:01 · answer #5 · answered by starburst9876 4 · 2 0

Practice safe sex. Both the man and woman are responsible for the child because of their actions.

Keep in mind that abortion is not only done for unwanted pregnancies. There are women who have complications and would die if the fetus is not aborted (intrauterine pregnancies). [But I suppose the man would be happier if he can get rid of two birds with one stone.]

However, think about this. How come when a woman gets pregnant and decides to keep the baby, it is her who is automatically entitled to care for the baby, and the man who gets her pregnant and doesn't want anything to do with the baby only get to pay child support? Why not reverse the roles? The men are entitled to raise the child and women will pay for child support.

How do you like that now?

Men should stop complaining about paying child support. It's the least you could do. You don't have to see or hear about the child. Just do electronic transfers and that's it. No dirty diapers, no crying, no puberty that you have to deal with.

Hey, at least you get to pass on your genes. Not that we'd want your ****** genes.

2007-12-14 11:00:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 4

First of all there is nothing FAIR about having to make that kind of decision. You are right the child support is for the child, the child that is born. You can't say that the abortion is for the woman either. The abortion is for both people who dont want to live with their mistake. In cases of rape and incest yes then it is for the woman, but i doubt a rapist will stick around for child support. Are u angry because someone aborted your baby or that they are making you pay support. Either way, no woman gets herself pregnant, so she should not have to pay for the child alone. Are you really so simple minded that you think child support should be voluntary? If you can lay down and have all the fun, you can take care of responsibilities. I hope you dont have kids!

2007-12-14 08:47:51 · answer #7 · answered by me 2 · 3 4

seems such as you have run afoul of fundamentalist progressives. Gotta purchase the finished equipment, or you're a heretic, and forged aside. plenty for the assumption of ladies individuals being value to come to a decision on their very own way devoid of others on the two edge of the priority dictating words.

2016-11-03 06:52:22 · answer #8 · answered by wendland 4 · 0 0

I think you're combining two separate issues, child support for a child you fathered and abortion for a child not yet born. If the man is really interested, he can assume parenting responsibilities - 100% then he won't have to worry about what the WOMAN gets, nor have to pay child support through the courts.

THAT's what could be in it for the man but I sure don't see it happening ~

2007-12-14 07:58:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 4

Guess I'm the only one who reads the civil code. But then again, this may not be true in all states:
The name of the alleged father on any birth certificate must also be signed by that man, acknowledging that he is in fact the father and is therefore legally responsible. No one may force or forge said signature on this legal document.
Don't want to pay child support? Don't sign. It's really that simple. Without that signature, the father is listed as unknown. And unknown can't pay. Despite popular belief, you also cannot force someone to undergo a paternity test.
Of course later, when you need a kidney, good luck finding that kid and if you do, better luck convincing him/her to give it to you.
You do have the option to not be involved. Keep in mind that means YOU CAN'T BE INVOLVED. You give up all rights to your child.

2007-12-14 10:50:26 · answer #10 · answered by Chief High Commander, UAN 5 · 1 4

You'll end up paying for it anyway in taxes if there were no child support laws. Without child support a woman ends up having to go on welfare because she can't afford the child on her own.

Further more less abortions equals more of your tax money going towards welfare to provide for unplanned children.

You don't want to pay child support or more taxes? Always use condoms and a spermicide. Don't trust her when she says she's on the pill. PROTECT YOURSELF FIRST.

I suppose we could always go back to the old method of things and have those huge orphanages of the Victorian era etc where children learned to be proper thieves and muggers and drug addicts by 10 years old. Hey we can bring back having chimneys (cut down on energy costs by using coal) and use the kids as sweepers again...yeah that's humane. Let's go backwards. *smacks forehead*

2007-12-14 09:24:12 · answer #11 · answered by AH0030 3 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers