Article: Shouldn't Men have a choice too?

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Jvesti
wyldfire there is clearly a hole in your logic.

What if the mother is a scam artist? Should she not go to jail because she "has a kid"? What if she is a murderer, or scams people out of half their money??

The child IS suffering because its with Amber Frey, and will be raised by this con artist that's let be one.

The fact is, trash like her should NOT be raising children. This is a suitable parent?

Andrea Yates was probably a great mother too accept for her criminal behavior, the ... killing n all.

First of all...there is no proof that shows that she didn't really believe this guy was the father. And obviously, there was just as much a chance he could have been the father or else he wouldn't have believed it in the first place.

Yes, the woman was wrong for not telling him there was someone else who could be the father and also telling that man. There's also no proof that she didn't tell him another guy could be the father...especially if she said she was pretty sure the baby wasn't the other guy's. Bottom line...you don't know the woman's intent or what was actually said and not said. On top of that...none of this has anything to do with what kind of a parent the woman is. I've known some people who did some really screwed up things who took perfect care of their kids, were very loving and would be considered great parents by any standards.

I'm going to share another personal story about myself. This is going to open me up to a great deal of personal attacks...but it's a perfect example of what I'm trying to explain.

I was dating a guy for about 8 months. We had an agreement to be exclusive. I had a family emergency and had to leave town for a couple of weeks. During that time he had sex with his best friend's girlfriend. When I returned from the emergency trip, I learned what he did and broke up with him. I had a very brief fling with his best friend. When the guy I had been seeing found out he came over, crying, apologizing for what he did and begged me to give him another chance. We had gotten along really well, had fun together and I said what the hell. The two times I had sex with his best friend we had used condoms. The guy I got back together with, two nights after I had been with the friend, we had unprotected sex using the rhythm method (pulling out). We took a risk, stupidly. After about a month, I broke up with him again because he lacked follow through when he said he was going to do something. It annoyed me to no end. About a week later I discovered I was pregnant.

In my position, who would you assume the father was? Obviously, the guy I had slept with regularly and that one time without a condom. (This is why I am pushing the use of condoms as hard as I am.)

I was completely honest with him and told him that although I was pretty sure the baby was his, there was a slight chance it could be his friend's.

When my daughter was 6 months old we had a paternity test done. The results came back showing that he wasn't her father. He hadn't paid any child support and he actually didn't want the test. I was the one who insisted on it being done...because I wanted to know for sure.

So...my daughter was conceived while using a condom. It was her father's condom. He actually chased me pretty hard for about 5 years and I told him before hand that I get pregnant easily. Part of me thinks he may have poked a hole in the condom. He did want a child. He had tried with his ex girlfriend to have a child. He really wanted to be a father and he loves our daughter very much...and the guy who I thought was her father really didn't want to have another child...so it worked out okay in the end. I certainly didn't want to get pregnant, but I oppose abortion and take responsibility for my behavior...and my little girl is the damn best mistake/accident I evern made/had. She's the light of my life...and her father and his family adore her. There was a happy ending. We had her last name changed to match her Daddy's and he'd give her the world if he could. He didn't really want to have a child under the conditions we had her...but he's thrilled to have her just the same.

So...situations like this aren't always so cut and dry as you're trying to make them. I've always been incapable of lying or holding back the truth...so I stressed the fact that even though I felt pretty certain it was the guy I had been dating's child...there was a chance it wasn't. I also insisted on a paternity test even though he did NOT want one. I was wrong about who was the father, and I was sincerely shocked.

Yeah, Amber Frye named the wrong guy as the father of her little girl...but neither you or I know if she did it on purpose, or that she intended to wrong anyone. The guy who did pay child support obviously loved the little girl as if she were his, and I dare say he's probably more upset that he's NOT her father than anything else. And if he loves her the last thing he would want is to stick her Mommy in jail. He probably doesn't even want that child support back, but just wants to have the right to see the child he loves.

If he wants the money back (and he might not)...then have the real father refund it. If he wants to continue contact...give him visitation. If he wants to sue Amber Frye...let him...but I doubt he'd want to hurt the child he loves enough to have been supporting all this time.

Dude...very clearly you're pissed over some woman that hurt you in the past. Amber Frye has nothing to do with you and neither does this guy. Yeah, it sucks what happened to him...but since you weren't there you really don't know what happened. And you don't know how he feels or what he wants. You're pissed and just looking for any reason to be angry and hate on women in general because someone hurt you. Honestly...what the hell is the point in that? What do you gain from that? Not a damn thing other than a bad attitude and a miserable existence.

Yeah, there are bad women out there who will treat you bad...and there are bad men out there too. Rest assured...any woman who has hurt a guy has also been hurt by a guy at least once too. Men don't have it any worse or easier than women and vice versa...we all make mistakes and we all get done wrong...it's part of life.

But you know what? When an innocent child is brought into things that's when it's time to set aside all the "he said, she said", "he did/she did" nonsense and do right by the kid because they need and deserve it and have nothing to do with who did what wrong. That's the bottom line.

 

[Oxide]

I got through the first two pages before it all got very repetitive, but here is what needs to be considered in my opinion:


While there is always an option of abortion for women, there is also a chance that she will not be able to have children after the operation. (if you want to argue this get the facts)

Given that,

Wyld, you are singing the same old song of "Put on a condom". In my exprience, it is THE GIRL who says "I want to feeeeel you inside me" and then puts the condom away. Just something to think about.

I still havent seen you respond to "Why does the man have to pay child support when the woman used DECEPTION to concieve the child" - for example, poking condoms. To argue that a man "had a choice" is simply ridiculous here, becuase if it was HIS choice, she would not get pregnant.

Women have MUCH more control when it comes to preventing pregnancy, so why do the fingers keep on getting pointed towards the guys when we have only 1 real option. Is it becuase women are irresponsible when it comes to this, so we are going to let them slide? Come on, you dont honestly believe that...


I just thought of something... tell me if this sounds reasonable -
(i dont know much % wise child support is, but let's say it is 40%)

If a guy wants the kid and leaves the woman - he will pay the 40%..

However, if he states that he does not want to have the kid BEFORE the child is born, the number will be cut down in half to 20%...

this will keep the golddiggers away (somewhat) and give a reality check to all those "professional mommies"




I remember the advice i got on this board about a year ago, it stuck with me till now.. Unless you are planning on marrying the woman, wrap it up

 

[Wyldfire]

The guy still needs to pay because the CHILD is entitled to that support. It's not about giving money to the woman. It is about supporting the child, which is the responsibility of BOTH of it's parents, whether one of the parents wanted it or not.

So many of you keep looking at it like you're rewarding the woman for something. That's NOT what child support is. Child support is providing for the CHILD, who is entitled to that support regardless of the circumstances of it's birth.

And as a single mother, I assure you that no woman who got pregnant with your kid (be it on accident or on purpose) is living high on the hog with child support. Providing for a kid is NOT cheap and even $200 a week for one kid doesn't cover all the needs. Diapers are expensive. Formula is expensive. Kids need to go to the doctors constantly and they get ear infections, diarrhea, colds...the list goes on and on. They outgrow their clothes so fast and they piss, puke and sh*t all over everything. Constant laundry, crib, carseat, stroller, high chair, playpen, walker, swing...it's endless. And the mommy is NOT going to be out partying with your child support payment...she's too damn tired. Feedings every 4 hours, gas, constant diaper changes. Trust me...she'll be putting every cent of that child support to use buying everything and anything for that baby that will keep it content and quiet so she can get some sleep.

The cost only goes up as those kids get older, too. The second they can talk it's "gimme, gimme, gimme" or "I want, I want, I want".

 

[RaWBLooD]

yay my favorite thread with 2 more pages to read through
go go go.

 

[A-Unit]

Re:

I will admit women can avaricious little creatures, bent on manipulating the will of men, hard to read, harder to grasp, and requiring a never-ending source of pleasure and happiness. That's their whimsical ways.


It's like getting a pet, you KNOW a dog will sht! on rugs, piss on couch corners, chew whatever it feels like. In a simplistic manner, that's its nature. You can't get mad at a dog for things YOU should have trained it to do and not do. Moreover, when it diverts BACK to its original status of BEING a dog and doing DOG things, it's not it's fault either.


To me, most guys know what they're getting when they get a woman. Some smidgen of hope is all they possess that there is some REASON and LOGIC there, but when push comes to shove, as this discussion alone has ferretted out, WOMEN revert to EMOTION.


------------------------------------------


It's wrong for a woman to trap a man, it's wrong for the laws to be painted as they are the way they are. It's wrong if a man doesn't want a kid and woman only wants it to garner half his paycheck that it should be that way, and I know it to be that way. It doesn't matter whether you've known her 1 hour or 10 years, she has the kid, you're obligated unless she lets you off the hook.


We are dabbling with Russian Roulette here. There isn't 1 woman who would say....


"Good, you deserve being pregnant you dumb hore. You should pay for the whole responsibility of the kid. I don't care if it was an accident on both your parts and you're doing it to get back at him. You pay the whole thing and let him go free and fvck another girl and do the same thing all over again."


----------------------------------------


Wouldn't happen.


In this instance, the law isn't written 'grey'. How can it be? Will the courts discern between a 10 year marriage and 1 night fling, and as such, tell the young girl who was just fvcked and left for nothing to pay for it on her own, abort, or put it up for adoption? That isn't the courts place. That's morality, folks.


The courts place is to determine the 'award and income' of the couple. The courts CANNOT be given the right to morality or values by saying when or how such things are taken care of. The law is only in place to make sure wrongs are righted and parties made as whole as possible.


What I get we are asking is to be let off the hook, whether it is an accident or not. Whether it was a ONS or a 10 year relationship. Whether she maliciously got pregnant over time or it was a one night happen-stance even where she 'tricked you.'


---------------------------------------------


If you're with a girl several months, fvcking, and for some reason, she ends up pregnant, that's both your problems. Whether she said 'I'm on the pill' and she wasn't, or she sabotaged your condoms, I still see that as a man's fault, and so would the court even he went to reverse her decision.


If you're with a girl only 1 night, you're truly stupid here, especially if she's prego THAT night. And maybe she was an avaricious bytch, who was only out to get PREGO. Well, why would you put your seed in her womb without even knowing her?


I submit it's not fair in a lot of cases toward men. I know, I have divorced family and consulted with them in an advisory capacity. But this is also not cut and dry. Morality plays a role when she is prego, and the state of affairs AT THAT POINT is much different. A life is on the way, each and every day, and it's possible someone does not support abortion. I believe the man should have a right to have the child and support if he wants. HOWEVER...how can the STATE impose law on a woman's body???


Imagine the precedents THAT would create???

And what if she was forced to term, and the man let of the hook, who then pays?? The state. No thanks, I'd rather my taxes go elsewhere.

Can she be forced to adoption?? No. This is a man-woman case, if anything there needs to be less government involvement. This is why I believe NOT ENOUGH responsibility lies with the public; they shirk it to the government, to the courts, to the law.


Hey, I've done the ONS a few times with girls a barely knew. If something happened, I CHOSE to engage in that activity, which to me is as risky as war, perhaps more so. You're gambling with HER life, YOUR life, and possibly a NEW life.


-----------------------------------------


We have a choice...it begins BEFORE you fvck her. Why? Because after that, it is nearly impossible to HAVE a choice. Think guys...many guys want to do steroids, we don't want to be told, 'dont do them, you could die of cancer, and small balls, and no hair' do we? Yet, it's OUR BODY. We don't want a woman telling us not to do it because it makes us nuts, and we don't want the state/gov telling us to stop just because they're looking out for us, or because they can't make tax money off it. WE WANT IT BECAUSE WE OWN OUR BODY.


It's a very grey area. Reproduction is moral, ethical, and religious act, not one of logical or legal. If the state or gov acts in any way to influence it could be catastrophy of human rights, setting precedents that are unheard of and unwarranted.


----------------------------------------


I see where disheartened men migh like more control, more say when a woman gets prego, but that's a sticky situation of relationships and not one easily tread. Hopefully I stayed on topic, this post has gotten long and informative and should motivate young DJ's to take heed when THINKING the lifestyle is all candy and rainbows and lovely nights out. More than anything, the more successful you are with women at your own level, the MORE you will encounter these problems. Not only with your own women, but from hearing it through friends.



A-Unit

 

[Wyldfire]

Bottom line...

Child Support is something the absent parent pays to help provide for their child. It is NOT a reward for the custodial parent of the child.

 

[RaWBLooD]

wyldfire doesnt know how to debate, the way she is debating is that shes right, she "experienced" something similar and you cant prove her wrong ( as if anyone cares what her situation is ? )
she doesnt give any points but that the law is the law the man must pay and condoms are 100% effective.

2 bad there cant be an intelligent woman discussing this.

 

[Jvesti]

Originally posted by RaWBLooD
wyldfire doesnt know how to debate, the way she is debating is that shes right, she "experienced" something similar and you cant prove her wrong ( as if anyone cares what her situation is ? )
she doesnt give any points but that the law is the law the man must pay and condoms are 100% effective.

2 bad there cant be an intelligent woman discussing this.

I'm not going to bother responding to her. Because its pure non-sense. It has no base in reason. It's "just because" justification. She claims I hate women and am mad at some woman because I stated that amber fry should not be raising a child. Go figure.

Besides, what in the hell would a woman be doing actively partipating in a site for men? Kind of weird if ya ask me.

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Jvesti
I'm not going to bother responding to her. Because its pure non-sense. It has no base in reason. It's "just because" justification. She claims I hate women and am mad at some woman because I stated that amber fry should not be raising a child. Go figure.

Besides, what in the hell would a woman be doing actively partipating in a site for men? Kind of weird if ya ask me.

Actually, Jvesti...you are making the assumption that a woman is unfit to raise a child based on YOUR belief that she intentionally named the wrong guy as her daughter's father. However, you have no facts to point to that supports your beliefs. I illustrated to you how easy making a mistake regarding the paternity of a child can be by sharing my own experience.

I didn't say you "hate women"...I said you appear to be looking for a reason to "hate on" women. That means you're looking for a reason to complain about women and blame them for something that you don't even have all the facts on.

If you look at the facts here it's quite clear that I'm actually the one making sense and you're reacting in an emotional way.

 

[Oxide]

Dont personally attack anyone here, you are driving the discussion nowhere.

Once again, Wyld, tell me what you think of this:

I still havent seen you respond to "Why does the man have to pay child support when the woman used DECEPTION to concieve the child" - for example, pokingholes in condoms. To argue that a man "had a choice" is simply ridiculous here, becuase if it was HIS choice, she would not get pregnant.

 

[RaWBLooD]

Originally posted by Jvesti
I'm not going to bother responding to her. Because its pure non-sense. It has no base in reason. It's "just because" justification. She claims I hate women and am mad at some woman because I stated that amber fry should not be raising a child. Go figure.

Besides, what in the hell would a woman be doing actively partipating in a site for men? Kind of weird if ya ask me.

i personally love woman, how can you hate women in general, i don't really hate anyone so i dunno , they are fun to feel and look at, and the mature ones got some cool outlooks on life.

 

[RaWBLooD]

Originally posted by Oxide
Dont personally attack anyone here, you are driving the discussion nowhere.

Once again, Wyld, tell me what you think of this:

hey thats similar to one of the many posts i made

 

[Wyldfire]

Originally posted by Oxide quote:
I still havent seen you respond to "Why does the man have to pay child support when the woman used DECEPTION to concieve the child" - for example, pokingholes in condoms. To argue that a man "had a choice" is simply ridiculous here, becuase if it was HIS choice, she would not get pregnant.

Actually, I've answered it repeated times. You just don't like the answer. A-Unit essentially gave the same answer that I did as well.

The man has to pay child support even if the woman used deception to conceive the child because it is the CHILD'S RIGHT to receive the financial support of BOTH parents. It is the responsibility of BOTH parents to provide for their child REGARDLESS of the circumstances under which the child was conceived and born.

The man has TWO choices to avoid pregnancy. One is a 100% guarantee there will be no pregnancy and the other one has a slight risk involved. The only 100% guarantee there will be no pregnancy is to NOT have sex with that person. The other choice is using a condom. If you honestly believe that women, by nature, are deceptive and go around poking holes in condoms in order to get pregnant there is a way to avoid that...BRING YOUR OWN CONDOMS. If you think she's trying to poke holes in them, then make sure you flush them when you're done lest she grab the turkey baster and run into the bathroom with sperm filled condom in hand.

Listen...once in awhile a condom will break or leak. If you don't use them right or use old ones, your risk of an unwanted pregnancy is higher. Everyone KNOWS condoms are not 100% effective but neither is ANY birth control. The only 100% guarantee is ABSTINENCE.

To sum it up...everytime you have sex with a woman you know the risk. If you choose a deceitful woman who would intentionally get pregnant against your wishes just to try to trap you then you did a bad job choosing a woman to have sex with. That is NOT the fault of any child resulting from YOUR choice to have sex KNOWING that even with birth control there is STILL a risk of pregnancy. The law DOES NOT CARE whether you wanted to have a kid or not. All the law cares about is that you take responsibility for your choices and provide for that child. And don't say you didn't choose to have a kid because everytime you have sex you choose to risk having one and everyone knows it.

The CHILD'S rights are more important in the eyes of the law. They will ALWAYS be more important. If you want a 100% guarantee that you won't have a child you don't want to have then you simply need to not have sex, end of story. IF you are going to have sex knowing the risk and potential consequences and a pregnancy results, you are going to have to man up. That's the reality now and it will always be the reality because child support is not about the man or the woman, it's about the child.

 

[TesuqueRed]

The reasons why men have to pay child support even if there was deception, accidents, acts of god or whatever else happens has been established law for awhile now. Old stuff that. Wyld gave a fairly clear thumbnail description why the courts see it that way. In my experience usually young guys unfamiliar with the way the world works or guys very self-involved usually scream bloody murder over this. Women usually see them as pvssies at this point and they largely are -- pvssies as in that they're either young and naive (young, hung and dumb per steele ) or self involved or both, often.

Funny how they realize that after getting knocked up - ever wonder about that? Anyway...

Those aren't crimes in themselves, it's just that these righteous pvssies are not MEN and think they are. Want that last point explained? Give me a holler and I will.

Why a woman chose a shyt-for-brains emotional adolescent to father her child under deception is another issue. I usually won't bother with those discussions as most points anyone here makes about that are either stupidly obvious (on the level of "look! the sky is, like, blue, ya know?" -- case in point "that's, that's, that's soooo wrong! she's a bytch!, that's pure evil! that's..." et-fvcking-cetera...) or devolves into something merely mean-spirited and pointless. Some people here have raised interesting points about it, like incentives why women do it and incentives why men allow it to happen. But those posts are rare.

Last point -- Ox, Raw, Jvesti et al -- wyld doesn't need me defending her but I do get tired of seeing someone like wyld and others put up intelligent, reasoned posts and then have the usual circle jerk responses of:

--a) she's a woman and anything coming from that direction is worthless
--b) it's (fill in the blank) posting again, and it's wrote orthodoxy around here that we jump on your shyt as worthless
--c) you make sense and can't argue/debate/reason because according to gospel according to sosuave women are unreasoning creatures, and you're a woman, so A = B and B = C so A = C and therefore you can't reason.

Fvcking spare me.

She and the others do have well reasoned arguments and gender often is an interesting enhancement, not a point for discrediting everything they say en masse.

I see responses like a/b/c above (and more can be named but I'm to tired to recall them now) and either you're too deep into some viewpoint you can't read a response on its own merits and respond intelligently to it or -- and I'm beggining to suspect this is the case with a few members -- the intellectual discussion is above their ability to follow regardless of how well written or clearly explained it is.

I won't even bother addressing the retards who jump up with "this forum is for MEN only". If that was true those very members wouldn't be allowed to post here until they could demonstrate a certain level of maturity and reading comprehension.

And as for reading comprehension -- I read some well reasoned responses and then see some 2-bit barstool lawyer jump up with "you make no sense Wyld and I'm not even going to bother responding.." or "you made one flaw -- ONE! -- and for that we can take you out back to be shot..." (the last is an overstatement...)

I frankly see no personal attacks that she makes. She may let fly with a few colorful terms. Usually these are well chosen and woven into the fabric of her argument. We've all let fly worse, and -- key point here -- if you can't handle that you really aren't ready for the real world, you need to still be with your mommy because she can explain all those bad things people say to you aren't true (for fvck's sake...) I haven't seen anything out of line or made without a point behind it.

And hell, a well chosen slap down to someone who needs it gets extra points in my book.

For the record, I have seen a few over-the-top attacks and slurs made on sosuave. We all have been colorful here, but rarely do we rise to the level of being out of line (except to the overly sensitive among us.) Usually we police it ourselves and the mods don't have to get involved. Occasionally they do get involved. Nothing here rose to that level.

I say this with all due respect due to active members -- you guys (ox, jvesti) and others -- who participate here in the hurly burly that are the sosuave boards. All the same -- circle jerk responses like a/b/c above were tiresome 4 years ago and are tiresome now. Most members here are better than that, they can follow better reasoned posts, and their posts should reflect it rather than popping off with some irrational, from the hip circle-jerk emotional response like they accuse the women of doing.

So fvck me if I'm wrong. But now the floor is open. Flame on bros! :rockon: :woo:

 

[TesuqueRed]

you misread it.

wyldfire was an instance. this was to be applied more broadly than that as i see this as endemic to the board and applicable to a number of other posters, not just wyld.

as i said, and i repeat, she doesn't need me defending her and typically defends herself on her own. my point is broader than that.

read it again if you doubt me. it's not 3 pages. it's longer than most posts here and is a challenge only for the impaired.

reading comprehension. it's an issue here.

 

[( . )( . )]

I take it by your lack of response you understand where I'm coming from.

Seems weve come along way from talking about yet another injustice men face to where we are now with this current wankfest havent we, See the dilemma?

See if you can use your powers of deduction and figure out how we got here, and how it turned pear shape. Now go Sleuth.

 

[RaWBLooD]

Originally posted by TesuqueRed
The reasons why men have to pay child support even if there was deception, accidents, acts of god or whatever else happens has been established law for awhile now. Old stuff that. Wyld gave a fairly clear thumbnail description why the courts see it that way. In my experience usually young guys unfamiliar with the way the world works or guys very self-involved usually scream bloody murder over this. Women usually see them as pvssies at this point and they largely are -- pvssies as in that they're either young and naive (young, hung and dumb per steele ) or self involved or both, often.

Funny how they realize that after getting knocked up - ever wonder about that? Anyway...

Those aren't crimes in themselves, it's just that these righteous pvssies are not MEN and think they are. Want that last point explained? Give me a holler and I will.

Why a woman chose a shyt-for-brains emotional adolescent to father her child under deception is another issue. I usually won't bother with those discussions as most points anyone here makes about that are either stupidly obvious (on the level of "look! the sky is, like, blue, ya know?" -- case in point "that's, that's, that's soooo wrong! she's a bytch!, that's pure evil! that's..." et-fvcking-cetera...) or devolves into something merely mean-spirited and pointless. Some people here have raised interesting points about it, like incentives why women do it and incentives why men allow it to happen. But those posts are rare.

Last point -- Ox, Raw, Jvesti et al -- wyld doesn't need me defending her but I do get tired of seeing someone like wyld and others put up intelligent, reasoned posts and then have the usual circle jerk responses of:

--a) she's a woman and anything coming from that direction is worthless
--b) it's (fill in the blank) posting again, and it's wrote orthodoxy around here that we jump on your shyt as worthless
--c) you make sense and can't argue/debate/reason because according to gospel according to sosuave women are unreasoning creatures, and you're a woman, so A = B and B = C so A = C and therefore you can't reason.

Fvcking spare me.

She and the others do have well reasoned arguments and gender often is an interesting enhancement, not a point for discrediting everything they say en masse.

I see responses like a/b/c above (and more can be named but I'm to tired to recall them now) and either you're too deep into some viewpoint you can't read a response on its own merits and respond intelligently to it or -- and I'm beggining to suspect this is the case with a few members -- the intellectual discussion is above their ability to follow regardless of how well written or clearly explained it is.

I won't even bother addressing the retards who jump up with "this forum is for MEN only". If that was true those very members wouldn't be allowed to post here until they could demonstrate a certain level of maturity and reading comprehension.

And as for reading comprehension -- I read some well reasoned responses and then see some 2-bit barstool lawyer jump up with "you make no sense Wyld and I'm not even going to bother responding.." or "you made one flaw -- ONE! -- and for that we can take you out back to be shot..." (the last is an overstatement...)

I frankly see no personal attacks that she makes. She may let fly with a few colorful terms. Usually these are well chosen and woven into the fabric of her argument. We've all let fly worse, and -- key point here -- if you can't handle that you really aren't ready for the real world, you need to still be with your mommy because she can explain all those bad things people say to you aren't true (for fvck's sake...) I haven't seen anything out of line or made without a point behind it.

And hell, a well chosen slap down to someone who needs it gets extra points in my book.

For the record, I have seen a few over-the-top attacks and slurs made on sosuave. We all have been colorful here, but rarely do we rise to the level of being out of line (except to the overly sensitive among us.) Usually we police it ourselves and the mods don't have to get involved. Occasionally they do get involved. Nothing here rose to that level.

I say this with all due respect due to active members -- you guys (ox, jvesti) and others -- who participate here in the hurly burly that are the sosuave boards. All the same -- circle jerk responses like a/b/c above were tiresome 4 years ago and are tiresome now. Most members here are better than that, they can follow better reasoned posts, and their posts should reflect it rather than popping off with some irrational, from the hip circle-jerk emotional response like they accuse the women of doing.

So fvck me if I'm wrong. But now the floor is open. Flame on bros! :rockon: :woo:

i think you've lost your balls long ago, especially thinking CONDOMS IS THE ANSWER in every one of her posts being an intricately woven and subtle remark that makes sense.

 

[Wyldfire]

What TR is basically saying here is that for as long as I've been posting here there have been a few of the same types of guys who behave the same way towards me. There was a short time in the beginning where it stopped and the forum was better for it.

I'm not the one taking things off topic, nor have I ever been. It is you guys who feel compelled to attack me who are the reason for threads going off topic. I always post on topic when I come onto a thread. It only becomes "about wyldfire" because some of you choose to make it about me.

I'm not going to sit back and tolerate some idiot attacking me...so I slap back and usually pretty hard.

You don't see me fighting with everyone. You only see me fighting with people who start sh*t with me. So fellas...if you want threads to stay on topic it's on YOUR shoulders to make that happen. Don't f*cking attack me and I won't have any reason or need to defend myself. I've been here a long time and I'm not going anywhere. If you can't handle me being here you have the choice of leaving.

You're not going to get me banned by starting fights with me, either. I've never started a fight with anyone on this forum EVER. You will, however, eventually piss off all the most respected members of this forum and will become an outcast if you continue to behave like a moron. I've watched it happen many times over.

Now...let's get back on topic.

 

[A-Unit]

Having your cake and eating it too.

As a man, i know the plight of our sex. We have feminism. We die earlier. Courts are not skewed in our favor (which means we should avoid them at all costs, or accept their penalities gladly). Women and children first.


------------------------------------------


Whether I have indicated my own 'siding' with wyldfire or not...that isn't the point. Nor should anybody divert from the topic at hand to attack anyone personally. It's useless and worthless and unproductive.


Responsibility gentlemen. Something we ALL have lost. Something much of the men OF society have given away. Responsibility to ourselves and our male brethren.

R_E_S_P_O_N_S_I_B_I_L_I_T_Y.


It's ALWAYS been a man's job, and supreme destiny, to tend the earth. In the garden of Adam and Eve, we had dominion over WOMEN and ANIMALS and the EARTH.


The sad fact here is, men WANT to have their cake and eat it too. They want sex with no frills. They wants rights with no responsibility. Young youths of hs and college age wrecklessly run around campus hoping that NO girl gets prego, and that if she does, she aborts so both their lives are ruined.


While in college I had no less than 8 friends experience SOME sort of run in with pregnancy. Some, got abortions. Some, however, did not, and the men did not have much choice, even in instances the pregnancy was not maliciously plotted.


----------------------------------------


The law isn't meant to be RIGHT, it's meant to be JUST. To provide JUSTICE. Why? Whether or not the kid was unwanted by you and, through some act of avarice, she became prego...maybe a turkey baster + used condoms, no pills, poking holes in condoms, coaxing you into unprotected sex, etc...doesn't matter. She drags you to court and the judge will say...


"I don't care if you don't want the baby, you CHOSE (i.e. responsibility) to stick your prick ANYWHERE near her pvssy. Therefore you acted before hand. You knew the risks young man, now you must pay the consequences for acting your choices."


A cop doesn't care if you're speeding to get to someone's aid, especially if you kill someone ON THE WAY, you're still liable. Just as if you're speeding because you're drunk, YOU KNEW WAY AHEAD of time you were. This grey area doesn't matter.


Why? Because, what rules can be formulated to balance this out??? As I stated, a woman being pregnant, regardless of HOW, doesn't matter.


NOW, I will admit, if she rapped, then SHE would be liable, all her own, if you can prove rape. BUT, if you chose sex with her, who cares whether she did or didn't.


--------------------------------------------


I don't care how many women say they don't want to have kids, ALL WOMEN do. The genes are right there in their bodies, TELLING them to have kids. Bang. Maybe this is the guy. And if "accidently" she was impregnated, then maybe it's a "sign" it was time.


This world is full of too many fatherless kids, and too many kids who have absent, mindless, pvssy-like fathers, and broke, poverty stricken kids to add to the mass of them. We don't more by creating laws that make it ok for men to be let off the hook by fvcking and then walking if there's evidence of even the slightest malice.

-------------------------------------------

A few closing questions...


How do we differentiate between a woman who's divorced and a woman of only a 1 night stand??


To what degree are you liable if you engage in sex, and yet she sets you up to get her pregnant??


Who decides what happens to a baby that grows in a woman's body?? Would you want an arbitrary government official passing judgement on your body?? Do you think it should become law that the state passes such laws??


------------------------------------------


We know condoms are only 99.9999% effective, BUT, if you TRULY don't want to run the Russian Roulette risk of having kids, DON'T have sex.

If you didn't want to get into a car accident, you wouldn't get into any car ever. Just because you ride in a volvo, your security isn't guaranteed. It just means you are safer than you would be a Mazada Miata. I've seen plenty of Volvos wrecked, and even a bus can total a volvo, so no vehicle is FULL proof, just like sex isn't full-proof. BUT, the point is, if you couldn't handle the risks of driving a car (i.e. breaking down, being hit, getting broken into, speeding, weather, pedestrians, etc), you wouldn't drive. Don't curse the NATURAL CONDITIONS of driving for something happening.


Those people in Cali who live through quakes can't curse Cali. They must curse themselves for being there, and possibly without earthquake INS.



A-Unit

 

[FollowTheWhiteRabbit]

From page 3, I didnt notice if anyone else caught this but it sure as sh.t pissed me off.

Originally posted by Wyldfire
Rollo...what about STDs? The pill doesn't protect against those. And missing one pill once in awhile won't throw the effectiveness off. She'd have to miss several pills on a regular basis to make the pill ineffective. But that's neither here nor there...

Niether here nor there, are you frickin kidding me? If she doesnt take her birth control long enough for it to be ineffective and then lies and says "im on birth control dont worry about the condom" then it is her fault, she lied deceived the man, twice!!!. Once for the birthcontrol and then again for saying he didnt hav eto wear a condom. The man should have no responsability in this case. She knew the risks involved and ignored them for whatever devious reason.

That sh.t pisses me off, a girl I was talking today said she was tired of working and that she might as well get pregnant so she can stay home and have someone else pay for her ****. Thats not verbatim but pretty damn close, girls are rediculous these days. Equal rights, equal pay, with all the other advantages girls got before to, men buying them things, supporting them, ensuring their safety when they mouth off to people in public(Ive almost gone to jail because a girl I know mouthed off to some random person on the street) and all these demands without even the slightest sense of shame or fear that they seem like a selfish b.tch.

Girls today want it all without the responsibility, they can lie, get pregnant from a man with money get whatever percentage of his pay he has to give them then go to court and get more money of the man while noone monitors where this money goes(my mother use to buy new curtains and matching garbage cans for the house on a regular basis and always had a new car but never seemed to have enough money to get me new school clothes and supplies, hmmmmmm....). And if they need more money, take the man back to court, I spent years dealing with fueding parents in the court system while the women would bad mouth the father to her children and the father would hold his tongue and enjoy his time with his children since they were more important the name calling. Talk about confusing for the child when the mother something bad about the father while the father does nothing but love and enjoy his time with his children, when he allowed to see them.