Times have changed, but courts are living in the past

[Primemuscle]

100% agree, good post!

I never climaxed inside a woman when their was a chance she could get pregnant.
If you show some dick control, you can have sex and never risk knocking her up.

Interesting. This is ancient birth control. Pulling out prior to orgasm was something our grandparents did. There is always the risk of pre-cum carrying some sperm that magically impregnates the woman. And of course, if you don't quite get out fast enough, you could deposit some impregnating sperm before you leave.

When my son and son-in-law along with their wives decided they'd had all the babies they wanted, they had vasectomies. Most of the time this takes care of future unwanted pregnancies. Have you considered a vasectomy? You've made it clear that you didn't want children.

How about all these dudes that want to fuck ladies unprotected and don't want children go get a vasectomy before they screw around?

[Primemuscle]

No it's not! It's totally factual that a woman can end her pregnancy via abortion. If she chooses not to get an abortion, then the pregnancy is all on her. As agnostic007 pointed out before. If the man doesn't want her to get the abortion, and she does, well she gets the abortion, regardless of what the potential father wants. So, if she alone want to give birth, then let her pay for the little bastard, that she alone wanted.

So I take it from this, that should said woman be unable to support the child/children, it is acceptable to you that taxpayers do rather than the impregnating father(s). I don't feel like looking up the stats but the bulk of single women who are on ADC are single mothers who for various reasons the father(s) of their child/children have taken a hike.

If I got a woman pregnant, it seems fair that I participate in the support of that child verses anonymous tax payers who likely had nothing to do with her getting pregnant.

Let me take a guess here, since you are championing men shucking their responsibility, you also are against ADC. News flash! In most, if not all developed countries, unwanted children are not just left to die of starvation because their parents screwed and then screwed up.

[Erik C]

So I take it from this, that should said woman be unable to support the child/children, it is acceptable to you that taxpayers do rather than the impregnating father(s). I don't feel like looking up the stats but the bulk of single women who are on ADC are single mothers who for various reasons the father(s) of their child/children have taken a hike.

If I got a woman pregnant, it seems fair that I participate in the support of that child verses anonymous tax payers who likely had nothing to do with her getting pregnant.

Let me take a guess here, since you are championing men shucking their responsibility, you also are against ADC. News flash! In most, if not all developed countries, unwanted children are not just left to die of starvation because their parents screwed and then screwed up.

If a woman doesn't want to pay for a baby, for its whole childhood, then there should be a mandatory abortion, so the taxpayers don't get stuck with the bill, and society isn't stuck with another garbage baby, from a mentally inferior mother. And, everyone on government assistance should have their tubes tied, before they get any government handouts, of any kind. Caring about shit people, just gets you more shit people being born.

[Primemuscle]

If a woman doesn't want to pay for a baby, for its whole childhood, then there should be a mandatory abortion, so the taxpayers don't get stuck with the bill, and society isn't stuck with another garbage baby, from a mentally inferior mother. And, everyone on government assistance should have their tubes tied, before they get any government handouts, of any kind. Caring about shit people, just gets you more shit people being born.

There's a problem with your ideas, it is called compassion, which obviously you are totally lacking. Another barrier to your ideas is that in free countries, humans have rights. You seem to have no problem violating those rights. Even third world countries have laws which prohibit enacting your ideas.

Maybe we should just cut off a man's penis who impregnates a woman and then takes no responsibility for it. Seems brutal, but so do your ideas.

[Erik C]

There's a problem with your ideas, it is called compassion, which obviously you are totally lacking. Another barrier to your ideas is that in free countries, humans have rights. You seem to have no problem violating those rights. Even third world countries have laws which prohibit enacting your ideas.

Maybe we should just cut off a man's penis who impregnates a woman and then takes no responsibility for it. Seems brutal, but so do your ideas.

Your "compassion" is just an excuse to allow irresponsible behavior. Someone's human rights, don't include the right to infliction upon other humans, the results of their irresponsible behavior. In order for there to be better society, society must have minimum standards of acceptable behavior, with no exceptions, meaning no "compassion" for shit people who ruin everything, for everyone else.

You want to cut off the penises of men who get women pregnant. But you refuse to hold women who get pregnant, against the will of the man who was only intending to have consensual sex, and not make a baby, to own up to her responsibility and get an abortion, or keep the child entirely at her expense, as she is the only one who wants the little bastard.

[Primemuscle]

Your "compassion" is just an excuse to allow irresponsible behavior. Someone's human rights, don't include the right to infliction upon other humans, the results of their irresponsible behavior. In order for there to be better society, society must have minimum standards of acceptable behavior, with no exceptions, meaning no "compassion" for shit people who ruin everything, for everyone else.

You want to cut off the penises of men who get women pregnant. But you refuse to hold women who get pregnant, against the will of the man who was only intending to have consensual sex, and not make a baby, to own up to her responsibility and get an abortion, or keep the child entirely at her expense, as she is the only one who wants the little bastard.

I never said I wanted to cut off anyone's penis. That was merely an example of how barbaric your ideas are.

I don't know where you live, but get real! There are not going to be laws requiring women have their tubes tied or that they get abortions. What is real is that anonymous taxpayers will continue to support the "mistakes" of irresponsible men and women because the options (you suggest) are unthinkable and grossly repugnant to the majority of the population.

With rare exception a women cannot get pregnant against the will of a man. Consensual sex carries the inherent risk of resulting in a pregnancy which is the responsibility of both the man and the woman. The only way a man could be held harmless is if the woman raped the man with the intention of getting pregnant.

[Erik C]

I never said I wanted to cut off anyone's penis. That was merely an example of how barbaric your ideas are.

I don't know where you live, but get real! There are not going to be laws requiring women have their tubes tied or that they get abortions. What is real is that anonymous taxpayers will continue to support the "mistakes" of irresponsible men and women because the options (you suggest) are unthinkable and grossly repugnant to the majority of the population.

With rare exception a women cannot get pregnant against the will of a man. Consensual sex carries the inherent risk of resulting in a pregnancy which is the responsibility of both the man and the woman. The only way a man could be held harmless is if the woman raped the man with the intention of getting pregnant.

Consensual sex, is for sexual pleasure and nothing else. If a women gets pregnant, and refuses to have an abortion, how can that possibly be the man's fault? Honestly, grow a brain already.

Reality is unthinkable, and grossly repugnant to the majority of the population, because we have allowed so many mentally inferior people, to reproduce, to the detriment to society in general. And, that will only lead to the down fall of our society, because morons, such as you have "compassion" for shit people.

[Primemuscle]

Consensual sex, is for sexual pleasure and nothing else. If a women gets pregnant, and refuses to have an abortion, how can that possibly be the man's fault? Honestly, grow a brain already.

Reality is unthinkable, and grossly repugnant to the majority of the population, because we have allowed so many mentally inferior people, to reproduce, to the detriment to society in general. And, that will only lead to the down fall of our society, because morons, such as you have "compassion" for shit people.

When a man and a woman have sexual relations with the intent of procreating, it is consensual sex. Hopefully, there is some pleasure involved as well.

I think you have consensual sex confused with casual sex. When two people engage in casual sex, unless they are idiots, they use protection. This is not just to prevent unwanted pregnancies, it is to avoid catching or spreading STD's. Obviously, there are a lot of idiots, both male and female who choose to ignore the risks.

Abortions should not be considered a contraceptive measure. The time to think about unwanted pregnancies is before they happen. The responsibility to make sure they don't happen fall to both the man and the woman. 

[Erik C]

Abortions should not be considered a contraceptive measure.

It's the ultimate contraceptive measure, when all else has failed. When a man doesn't want the baby, but the woman does want it, and doesn't get an abortion, then at that point she is the only one responsible for bringing that child into the world, and no one else should be penalized for her stupid decision.

[Primemuscle]

Every woman I married had her own career, assets, credit, $$$, car, etc.
I'm just a middle class schmoe, so they had as much to lose as I did.

In my last marriage we had a townhouse and she was working 55 miles from it.
It was only 6 yrs into a 30 yr mortgage, and I offered to let her have it .
She refused as it wasn't practical for her.

I lived there for a couple years and eventually sold it and moved.

Ok, the real issue with this is, that men traditionally produce more $$ and assets in the typical marriage.
The woman raises kids and lets the man be the bread winner.
Nothing wrong with that, UNLESS one wants a divorce.

THEN, when things get split up, the man feels cheated.
Solution :
1. BOTH partners work and make a decent living. That way BOTH husband and wife equally contributed to the household assets.
2. No kids 

I totally agree with part 1. Marriage is a partnership. My wife worked throughout our marriage. She made decent money too. We're both retired now. Each of us has a decent retirement income. If one of us out lives the other, they will be fine financially.

As for not having children, I don't see where having children is a problem. It certainly was not for us.

[Mr Anabolic]

Bottom line... the courts will NEVER be fair towards men.  The laws will always be skewed in favor of the woman.

For 100% protection of your wealth and assets:

1. NEVER get married (gay or straight).  
2. NEVER get any woman pregnant.
3. NEVER shack up with her.

[Howard]

I totally agree with part 1. Marriage is a partnership. My wife worked throughout our marriage. She made decent money too. We're both retired now. Each of us has a decent retirement income. If one of us out lives the other, they will be fine financially.

As for not having children, I don't see where having children is a problem. It certainly was not for us.

Good reply and it's obvious you were meant to be parents.
In my opinion, some were meant to be parents and others aren't.
Both types are needed to have a stable world.

[WalterWhite]

For YOU that may be the best course of action and I obviously agree with #2.

The one major flaw in your thinking is that the man will always be one the greater money and assets.
My current wife is a banking executive  and makes a LOT more then me.
Before we moved to the Mts and downsized ,we lived in her 5 Br home on 5 wooded acres.
That was recently sold and she put the equity into her retirement account.
Plus, she has two resort rentals that do pretty well for a supplemental income.

I sold my smaller place before we got married when we agreed that was the sensible thing to do.
I'm no bum, but she came into the marriage with more wealth and assets them me.

My ex wife was a board certified psychologist and made slightly more then me.
When we divorced 9 yrs ago, she was happy to leave and go on with her life "as is".
I did the same and things went smoothly with no fighting or hard feelings.

My point is too many men marry a woman without a career .
They  agree to be the bread winner and TAKE CARE OF HER.
At that point she's a DEPENDENT, instead of an equal partner.

If you get divorced, her and the courts, have an expectation that you will continue to take of her.

Moral to the story: Go into marriage as equal partners and have BOTH contribute to the household.

You forgot to mention waiting until you are older.  I had no clue in my mid 20's that I would be in a position to make the kind of money I eventually made.  Also you have not had kids. If you had you might have made the choice to have your wife remain home with the child/children.

If there were millions in assets and multiple properties do you think your wives would have still parted amicably? As I stated before money can complicate things.

[Howard]

You forgot to mention waiting until you are older.  I had no clue in my mid 20's that I would be in a position to make the kind of money I eventually made.  Also you have not had kids. If you had you might have made the choice to have your wife remain home with the child/children.

If there were millions in assets and multiple properties do you think your wives would have still parted amicably?

Good reply and excellent food for thought.
No idea what would have happened had I been wealthy or had  kids.

[Tapeworm]

they do say that, but I disagree. If a woman chooses to have the baby against the "fathers" wishes, she should also be willing to sign a release stating she won't hold him financially responsible. If not, he should have input

Right on.  The one who has to pay out vast sums for more than 2 decades has no say and the one who can choose to sit and collect has the only say.

The incubation period argument doesn't wash either.  He's not making her do it.  She's an informed adult choosing to have a baby instead of an abortion.  But never mind that.  Once these 'dangerous' 9 months are over and the kid is born, how does that my body/my risk/ my decision logic translate into 18-22 years of financial responsibility?  If it's because it's 'his child too' then he had an equal right to kill it early on, no?  Which, of course, he didn't and we're back to the 'my body' argument.  Yes, that's your body and this is my wallet.  This is not your wallet because that's your body.

Come on now.  Can we admit that at least some women are less than angelic and see getting pregnant as a lotto win?  They are going to be taken care of and not have to work or worry about money any more.  There are at least as many deadbeat moms out there as deadbeat dads.

[SF1900]

Getbiggers should just marry each other. Since all getbiggers are millionaires, even if there is a divorce, no one will walk away poor.

[muscularny]

I remember a time when being single in your 30's was a big no no, it was better to say you were once married and divorced now than to say you never got married (I am talking late 90's till -2005 or so). Now if you get married normal people under the age of 45 think you went insane. The divorce rate is climbing like crazy, and the shocking part is that even people who have been married for decades all of a sudden want a divorce lol.

What annoys me most is the same people who went through nasty nasty divorces sometimes multiple times are the ones pushing everyone to get married ASAP.

I do appreciate the nice show married young people put on in public as to how happy they are, I find it disrespectful that they think everyone is stupid enough to not know the fighting and police calling going on in their sloppy stinky household.

For those of us who have friends that are hooked on anti depressants we know all to well one of the sides is they become these hopeless romantic fools, falling in love eery 6 minutes with someone they are going to married right away.

This is not about courts or whatever, right now, there is no upshot in a man getting married, 0! The only benefit I see is the entertainment they seem to provide to everyone that knows them.

[Primemuscle]

For YOU that may be the best course of action and I obviously agree with #2.

The one major flaw in your thinking is that the man will always be one the greater money and assets.
My current wife is a banking executive  and makes a LOT more then me.
Before we moved to the Mts and downsized ,we lived in her 5 Br home on 5 wooded acres.
That was recently sold and she put the equity into her retirement account.
Plus, she has two resort rentals that do pretty well for a supplemental income.

I sold my smaller place before we got married when we agreed that was the sensible thing to do.
I'm no bum, but she came into the marriage with more wealth and assets them me.

My ex wife was a board certified psychologist and made slightly more then me.
When we divorced 9 yrs ago, she was happy to leave and go on with her life "as is".
I did the same and things went smoothly with no fighting or hard feelings.

My point is too many men marry a woman without a career .
They  agree to be the bread winner and TAKE CARE OF HER.
At that point she's a DEPENDENT, instead of an equal partner.

If you get divorced, her and the courts, have an expectation that you will continue to take of her.

Moral to the story: Go into marriage as equal partners and have BOTH contribute to the household.

I agree with the concept of marriage being a partnership. There are all sorts of partnerships. If a couple agrees to an arrangement where one of them maintains the home while the other one works, this is a partnership too.

As for what happens should the partners decide to dissolve the marriage, this is often unfortunately a very negative process where no one really wins....kind of like when a business partnership ends. Occasionally, when partners separate, each just goes their own way. My parents did this. No one paid the other alimony or child support. Whichever parent I lived with supported me.

[Primemuscle]

Good reply and it's obvious you were meant to be parents.
In my opinion, some were meant to be parents and others aren't.
Both types are needed to have a stable world.

It is totally fine for people to choose to not have children. I know married people who made this choice and seem very happy with it. Obviously, they do other things which enrich their lives.

[The Abdominal Snoman]

25 years married to a cop the woman should be in a padded room. The amount of abuse a lot of these women put up with. Starting out, most cops work all hours of the day/night for years. I also believe cops were rated #1 for adultery...I've never met a cop that wasn't rumored to have a side piece...A lot of chicks throw themselves at the uniform. If there's one job where the wife should get half, it's a cop...Especially married 25 years to one of these animals...

[muscularny]

25 years married to a cop the woman should be in a padded room. The amount of abuse a lot of these women put up with. Starting out, most cops work all hours of the day/night for years. I also believe cops were rated #1 for adultery...I've never met a cop that wasn't rumored to have a side piece...A lot of chicks throw themselves at the uniform. If there's one job where the wife should get half, it's a cop...Especially married 25 years to one of these animals...

I've never met a cop married man that wasn't rumored to have a side piece...A lot of chicks throw themselves at a the uniform man wearing a wedding ring.

[Agnostic007]

25 years married to a cop the woman should be in a padded room. The amount of abuse a lot of these women put up with. Starting out, most cops work all hours of the day/night for years. I also believe cops were rated #1 for adultery...I've never met a cop that wasn't rumored to have a side piece...A lot of chicks throw themselves at the uniform. If there's one job where the wife should get half, it's a cop...Especially married 25 years to one of these animals...

oh jeeezus...