Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. Gameplay
      2. Missions
      3. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Arena War
      2. After Hours
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA Next

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Gay Tony

Men and Child Support

Recommended Posts

Gay Tony

This is something I've recently thought about lately, and I know it's controversial but hear me out, follow along, and correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Two people don't consent to having children just by having sex.

 

When women have sex with men, they have a choice to have the child or not and weigh in the consequenses/benefits of doing so.

 

Imagine if women were forced to have kids and take care of them until they were 18. Isn't this forcing men to have kids, then?

Edited by mr toasterbutt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienTwo

I just want to be clear here... you are stating that if a woman wants to give birth to a child conceived during consensual sex, if that other partner does not want the kid, A) Either he is off the hook for child support his whole life or B) The woman should be forced to abort the fetus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gay Tony

I just want to be clear here... you are stating that if a woman wants to give birth to a child conceived during consensual sex, if that other partner does not want the kid, A) Either he is off the hook for child support his whole life or B) The woman should be forced to abort the fetus?

Woman shouldn't be forced to do anything.

 

Man isn't "off the hook" he didn't consent to having a child in the first place.

Edited by mr toasterbutt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienTwo

But what happens in your scenario then when the woman chooses to have the baby but can't afford it on her own?

 

Also, how would you be able to prove that the guy didn't want a kid then change his mind to avoid responsibility?

 

In my opinion, having sex (which is an act which exists mainly to allow species to procreate)brings with it the risks of both STD and pregnancy, even when protection is used. It's a risk you have to accept if your going to make the ladies (or gents) scream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gay Tony

But what happens in your scenario then when the woman chooses to have the baby but can't afford it on her own?

 

Also, how would you be able to prove that the guy didn't want a kid then change his mind to avoid responsibility?

 

In my opinion, having sex (which is an act which exists mainly to allow species to procreate)brings with it the risks of both STD and pregnancy, even when protection is used. It's a risk you have to accept if your going to make the ladies (or gents) scream.

Then she has the baby or doesn't. That's her choice.

 

Right off the bat the man should be asked if he wants to keep the child or not.

 

Either a "yes" or a "no" in some form of writing and must follow through from that point.

 

Unless the woman decides to abort at some point which would pretty much void it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienTwo

Boy, this is sure going to make sex less romantic. Forms to fill out, documents to sign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gay Tony

Boy, this is sure going to make sex less romantic. Forms to fill out, documents to sign.

That's after sex.

 

When she finds out she's pregnant.

Edited by Gay Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlienTwo

But see, that's the problem "He said he wanted a kid, and when I get pregnant now he doesn't? I don't want an abortion, or to adopt, but I cant afford this kid I only had because he said he wanted to." I mean, guys could easily lie to get out of being a responsible dad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I cucked Alex Jones

When you stick your dick in random woman you accept the chance that she might get pregnant. After that it's a fetus in her own body. You have no say what she does with her own body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gay Tony

When you stick your dick in random woman you accept the chance that she might get pregnant. After that it's a fetus in her own body. You have no say what she does with her own body.

 

Could you imagine if someone told a woman that because she willfully had sex, she has therefore consented to keep the child and financially support them?

 

@AlienTwo- That's before sex occurs, which isn't relevant either way.

Edited by mr toasterbutt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TEoS

It's something that is just inherently "unfair." There's no real way to work out a situation where men aren't forced to pay for a child they don't want, women retain control of their body, and unwanted children aren't left in a sh*tty situation. The only thing to do is just accept that if you have sex, there is a chance a babby might be formed.

Edited by NAME CHANGE LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gay Tony

It's something that is just inherently "unfair." There's no real way to work out a situation where men aren't forced to pay for a child they don't want, women retain control of their body, and unwanted children aren't left in a sh*tty situation. The only thing to do is just accept that if you have sex, there is a chance a babby might be formed.

 

That's what I was looking for ^^

Edited by Gay Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Man isn't "off the hook" he didn't consent to having a child in the first place.

The act of sex has a statistical possibility of producing a child, ergo both participants give implied practical consent. If the male parent doesn't want to be held accountable for that risk then they shouldn't have sex. Simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Rikowski

I remember we debated over this a while ago in another topic. My opinion is the same as back then and it has been summarised perfectly by sivi.

Want no babies? Do not have sex. As simple as that.

Life and sex come with responsibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GTA_stu

The act of having sex shouldn't automatically bind you to a contract where you're potentially forced to pay thousands over a number of years. You could maybe make that argument in a situation where both people don't use protection or birth control, although I still think it's a bit of a grey area. But if a couple use birth control and the woman still gets pregnant and decides she wants to keep it, then I think that's a bit different. It's also not unknown for women to sabotage birth control or simply lie that they're taking it. Is it still fair to force a man to pay child support in those circumstances?

 

The state basically just uses fathers in many ways, in order that it can avoid supporting the mother, even if really the father shouldn't bare that responsibility. That case a few months ago, which had a topic in gen chat, is a great example. Where you had a boy that was raped by his teacher and was then forced to pay child support for the baby which resulted from the rape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

the real issue here is that males need their own form of birth control.

 

nobody likes using the condom and only women have access to a fail-safe.

but then 2 people have to rely on 1 person to remember / be honest about using the fail-safe.

 

if men and women both had access to 'a pill' that neutralized sperm and/or blocked eggs, then both parties could finally be trusted to uphold their end of the [true] bargain. because right now it's just a half-assed compromise that requires a lot of f*cking trust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Rikowski

Still, if you wanna completely avoid the risk of having to support a child, just avoid sex.

Or buy the services of a professional escort. Vasectomy is also an option.

Even easier: man up and accept the consequences of your actions.

I'm sorry but this is a "non issue". It is too obvious what's the right thing to do when you impregnate a woman.

 

I used condoms for years and even the old coitus interrupts.

They're not 100% safe but the odds are good.

Never knocked up any girl except my wife. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

that's not realistic for most young men.

 

I'm not going to avoid sex.

I'm not going to pay for a hooker.

I'm not getting invasive surgery.

 

it's beside the point.

why is it that only women have access to an internal birth-control system?

 

where is the 'Male Pill?'

every time this debate gets brought up, I have to remind everybody about how unfair the terms of the debate actually are. the onus of child support only seems to be on the man even though the onus of fail-safe birth control only lies with women. I understand that even the pill isn't 1,000% perfect and that some women cannot use it, but the point remains for 98% of cases...

Edited by El_Diablo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

But if a couple use birth control and the woman still gets pregnant and decides she wants to keep it, then I think that's a bit different.

Why? No-one is stupid or ignorant enough to think that birth control is totally perfect, and whilst I strongly believe that decisions of this nature should be mutual, that isn't always going to be the case. The fact is, there is no feasible way that the legal system can provide support for women who are impregnated through carelessness or dishonest behaviour and yet provide an exemption for cases like the examples you give.

 

It's also not unknown for women to sabotage birth control or simply lie that they're taking it. Is it still fair to force a man to pay child support in those circumstances?

 

It's not uncommon for men to claim that women sabotage birth control but how common it is for it to actually happen? Who knows? My guess would be not very. And again, how do you propose that one determines when it does happen? It's a case of one individual's word against another's. If you have some clever way of legalistically determining between a case where the woman has been impregnated by carelessness and the man is simply trying to absolve themself of responsibility and one where the woman has made a conscious decision to keep a child that is a product of poor luck due to the failure of birth control, let's hear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gay Tony

I appreciate the depth but some of you are over complicating it. Let me explain it again in a more straight-forward fashion.

 

Neither consent to having kids through sex alone. If that were the case women would literally be consenting to give birth and financially support the baby.

Edited by mr toasterbutt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Rikowski

that's not realistic for most young men.

 

I'm not going to avoid sex.

I'm not going to pay for a hooker.

I'm not getting invasive surgery.

 

it's beside the point.

why is it that only women have access to an internal birth-control system?

 

where is the 'Male Pill?'

every time this debate gets brought up, I have to remind everybody about how unfair the terms of the debate actually are. the onus of child support only seems to be on the man even though the onus of fail-safe birth control only lies with women. I understand that even the pill isn't 1,000% perfect and that some women cannot use it, but the point remains for 98% of cases...

 

Like it's not realistic to think you can live a life without such kind of responsibilities/risks.

 

Wanna drive a car? Do it but you might die in an accident.

Wanna smoke? Smoke but you could get lung cancer.

Wanna eat as much sugar a you want? Do it but you might get diabetes.

Wanna have casual sex? Do it but you might impregnate a woman.

 

They are researching the male pill and sooner or later it will be a reality but will it be a success? I doubt it.

I'd never take it.

 

The terms of the debate are not unfair. What is unfair is to think that one of the parents can simply skip the duty part cause he had no saying in the choice of having the child.

The minute you sticked your dick in there you made your choice.

The law establish child support in the best interest of the child who's much more important than the parent the minute he/she has come to this world.

This is what you fail to understand.

Every child has the right to be supported by the parents until adulthood is reached.

What the parents think it's fair or unfair economically it doesn't matter.

The child matters.

 

I appreciate the depth but some of you are over complicating it. Let me explain it again in a more straight-forward fashion.

 

Neither consent to having kids through sex alone. If that were the case women would literally be consenting to give birth and financially support the baby.

 

It was perfectly clear the first time.

 

People do consent to the possibility that a child could be conceived in a sexual intercourse no matter what kind of contraceptive they use.

This is what sex is for, biologically.

If you consent to sex you are consenting to the inherent risks.

That's why you have the responsibility to support economically the child in case things do not go the way you hoped they would.

Both the mother and the father have the economical, social and moral responsibility to support the child.

The law is there to make sure the newborn's rights are respected and fulfilled.

For obvious reasons the mother has the final saying. It's her body not the father's.

If I had a being growing inside me I would definitely want the final saying on it.

It's also a basic woman right.

 

Once again. This is a non issue. It's like debating over the blueness of the sky. Yes the sky is blue and if you have a child you HAVE to support it.

 

Duh!

Edited by Doc Rikowski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

Neither consent to having kids through sex alone. If that were the case women would literally be consenting to give birth and financially support the baby.

It's not so much "consent" but a willing acceptance of risk. Whether or not you want something has nothing bearing on risk or likelihood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
El Dildo

Like it's not realistic to think you can live a life without such kind of responsibilities/risks.

I didn't say to live ones life outside of responsibility.

I've been having sex safely and responsibly (more or less) since I was 15.

 

what I said is that it's unrealistic to expect surgery, abstinence, and prostitutes to be the only answers to this issue... since they're the only answers you seem to be aware of or willing to provide/consider.

They are researching the male pill and sooner or later it will be a reality but will it be a success? I doubt it.

I'd never take it.

really.

that's how you're gonna' brush off the entire point of the Male Pill?

 

oh lordy I'd never trust them crazy doctors!

you never know what kind of cooky concoctions they're gonna' whip up in the mad laboratory!

 

:sui:

 

on what basis do you think that the male pill couldn't work?

and if they create one that works, why wouldn't you take it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Rikowski

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I wasn't meaning it wouldn't work properly. I said it might not be a commercial success. Just my opinion.

 

I wouldn't take it cause I'm fine with the precautions I use (or I used back then when I was a single).

They were not 100% safe but I was willing to take the risk. It was never a problem for me.

 

Surgery, abstinence and (maybe) prostitutes are the only answers if you want 0% chances of having a child.

Even the male pill could have flaws just like the female one. So yes, those are the only answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs

I honestly never thought much about this issue but I do see it as a relevant thing to "discuss"... so guy and girl f*ck, girl gets pregnant and the guy doesn't want to raise a kid with her but the girl won't abort or put up for adoption... in these cases it really doesn't seem "fair" to say that the guy should have to pay for the woman's decision.

 

I know people will say the guy consented to paying child support for his entire life because he put his johnson in her sugar walls, but aren't you then giving credence to the argument of "responsibility" that people opposed to abortion say a woman should be forced to have a kid just because she had sex? Even then we get the issue of practicality, if you got rid of child support in those cases where the guy did not want the kid and encouraged his partner to get an abortion, how is that documented? Do they go to a notary and does the girl confirm he told her to abort the fetus? There's really no way to do that and such a policy would effectively destroy the concept of child support entirely. Really I don't see a way they can change the current system, even though it is quite unfair for many guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ezza.

Look at it this way,

 

I decide to go out for a drive, ensuring to be as safe as possible on the roads I make sure my vehicle is roadworthy and is going to limit the chances of me having an accident as a result of a failure (Metaphor for Protection)

 

There's still an inherent risk present that I'm going to have an accident. Say one of my tires that I made SURE was going to keep me safe causes me to have an accident involving a woman. I didn't want to crash, and I took all of the necessary precautions to make sure that I was going to avoid an accident, as did she. Obviously I regret having the accident and wish it had never happened. However, does that mean I shouldn't pay for her damages? I did absolutely everything I could in order to avoid a crash, while still being able to go out for a drive and yet it still ended in a crash

 

I took the risk, and unfortunately it resulted in an accident. It's the same as having intercourse. You both take the risk, and even though you both took the necessary precautions to avoid impregnation it still happens. Therefore, yes the Man should still pay for child support, just like I would still have to pay for the damages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absurdity

Population control. We allow women to 'gate-keep' pregnancy so they can retain a pseudo-authority over the men - in this way control the men. That's all. It's population control funneled down by our ruling elites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AboveAndBeyoncé

All I want to say is that the sad truth is that it's mostly the African-American Male population that is more part of the child support population..... And most don't pay it faithfully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs

All I want to say is that the sad truth is that it's mostly the African-American Male population that is more part of the child support population..... And most don't pay it faithfully

Sort of, but not really. African American males are extremely disproportionafely represented compared to their population numbers in terms of child support payouts and they do have higher rate of noncompliance with child support orders. That said White males do make up most people paying child support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AboveAndBeyoncé

 

All I want to say is that the sad truth is that it's mostly the African-American Male population that is more part of the child support population..... And most don't pay it faithfully

Sort of, but not really. African American males are extremely disproportionafely represented compared to their population numbers in terms of child support payouts and they do have higher rate of noncompliance with child support orders. That said White males do make up most people paying child support.

 

you said it better than I could thanks for the clarification that's what I was trying to say

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.