# Tricking Your Husband Into Having Another Baby



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Interesting video from Wendy Williams show aired recently about how a woman wants to trick her husband into having another baby when he's stated he does not want another one. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5CNHwhHWPoQ

Notice that Wendy Williams indicates to go ahead and trick him -- that it's okay because he said he wanted a second child. Notice the crowd reaction (almost 100% entirely female) when she asks whether they agree that she's completely justified in deceiving her husband. From the crowd's reaction at least 95% enthusiastically agree. I guess HE doesn't have a right to change his mind, but it's a female's prerogative to do so. She has full rights to abort his baby however. He has no say but financially responsible if she decides to keep it. 

Folks, this is why men are leaving the plantation and Going Their Own Way. Men have no reproductive rights and yet are financially held accountable even when a woman uses lies and deception to get 'her way'. What do you suppose the female crowd's reaction would be if a man had a vasectomy and never told his wife when she was trying to get pregnant??

And as evidenced by the almost unanimous crowd support, the majority of women support such deception. This is the state of marriage for men -- we are nothing more than a utility for what women want. Another prime example of solipsism. When you combine that with hypergamy and Briffault's Law, no wonder men are opting out of marriage. 

*Solipsism *-- The view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist.

*Briffault's Law* -- The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.

There are a few corollaries I would add:

Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

Any agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit (see corollary 1)

A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current/future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male (which is not bloody likely).

P.S. Notice the man in the pink shirt's reaction at 1:00 -- priceless! I guess he had a glimpse of the Red Pill.


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

Well, coming from someone who has actually known a couple who were in this situation, none of the woman's friends were supportive of her contemplating getting pregnant behind her husband's back. None of their friends were supportive of him going and getting a vasectomy behind her back. That couple shortly after got a divorce.

So some women on a show do not speak for all women, and in my own circles, we don't watch crappy television, nor participate on crappy television, nor approve of anyone deceiving their partner for any reason.

If you judged all people by those who went on these talk shows, you could only conclude that we are all a waste of space.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

If the husband doesn't want more children, and is firm in that stance, he shouldn't put himself into the position of being tricked. All kinds of jargon filled social commentary are unnecessary. You don't want children, take personal responsibility for your birth control.

If you want to maintain your reproductive authority, practice it. But being a man who decides BC is "her problem" when you are firm against more children? That's playing Russian Roulette and then wanting to complain about the outcome. 

All that being said, the relationship in that story has issues. She's deceptive, and he changed the terms of their relationship after the fact (AKA the bait and switch) by deciding against more children after originally supporting the idea. As no doubt she chose him as a spouse partly for their agreement on having children. They need MC to decide if their relationship can survive his change of heart, not inserting another child into a troubled relationship. 

Also, not really sure judging all women based on the behavior of the audience of a kind of trashy talk show is really a fair corollary. Should I make deductions about all men based on what I see on trashy court shows or Jerry Springer? Who even knows if those audience reactions are legit and aren't staged.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

breeze said:


> Well, coming from someone who has actually known a couple who were in this situation, none of the woman's friends were supportive of her contemplating getting pregnant behind her husband's back. None of their friends were supportive of him going and getting a vasectomy behind her back. That couple shortly after got a divorce.
> 
> So some women on a show do not speak for all women, and in my own circles, we don't watch crappy television, nor participate on crappy television, nor approve of anyone deceiving their partner for any reason.
> 
> If you judged all people by those who went on these talk shows, you could only conclude that we are all a waste of space.


No, one woman does not speak for all women which is why I commented on the crowd's reaction. The vast majority of them supported her deception. Assuming this is a random sample of women nowadays and they had no knowledge of the show's topic when they arrived at the studio, don't you think that it fairly represents women's mentality towards men today? How can you discount this type of reaction by trying to state it's only one person's opinion?


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

So when your average audience members on Springer indicates their support for a wild threesome with a midget, you really think that represents the average persons mentality?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Dreald said:


> Folks, this is why men are leaving the plantation and Going Their Own Way. Men have no reproductive rights and yet are financially held accountable even when a woman uses lies and deception to get 'her way'. What do you suppose the female crowd's reaction would be if a man had a vasectomy and never told his wife when she was trying to get pregnant??


Well, he did break the original agreement to have two children. It is not as though something happened and they are not able to have more children. He is consciously breaking the contract. The reason is not given. That would be interesting to know.

If a woman could not get pregnant, probably the husband would be asked to go for a sperm count test. That would show he had had a vasectomy. He could not get away with lying.

I think couples have to be on the same page, at least about big things, for the marriage to work. This couple is no longer on the same page. 

I do know a couple where the man did not want children, and the wife got pregnant. Accident? Who knows. Now, of course, he could not imagine life without his son. 

Men are not forced to stay in marriage, Dreald. They can leave, and many do. And if they really do not want to be with the woman, it is probably ultimately for the best, for both of them.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Jinx! The gig is up!

Oh no ladies, what will we do now? Because what happens on some TV is of course not at all staged or subject to crowd mentality.

I've always wondered where the got the studio audience for the Jerry Springer show?


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Also, how is the reality that women might get pregnant when men don't want it a new development? We honestly think "accidentally" getting pregnant isn't as old as time?

The difference now is people have more control over their reproduction (assuming they utilize it) and there is no longer the social stigma attached to producing children in non-marriage relationships. You can now opt to "leave the plantation."

Love all the armchair philosophy about "women these days" though.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Starstarfish said:


> So when your average audience members on Springer indicates their support for a wild threesome with a midget, you really think that represents the average persons mentality?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


LOL


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

He broke the original agreement to have two kids so it's ok to trick him? By this logic, every woman who marries agrees to have sex with her husband. If she later refuses, it's ok to rape her?

Nobody builds a healthy marriage or family on fraud. My ex-wife pulled this little stunt, not to get a second child but to get pregnant so I'd marry her. That worked for her until she made the mistake of bragging to others how she had deliberately and secretly quit taking birth control when we were dating. She committed other lies and frauds but that was the one that made me lose the very last ounce of respect I might have had for her. Deliberately getting pregnant over your husband's (or boyfriend's) objection ought to be a felony.
It's essentially putting a man in slavery for at least 18 years without his consent.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Starstarfish said:


> If the husband doesn't want more children, and is firm in that stance, he shouldn't put himself into the position of being tricked. All kinds of jargon filled social commentary are unnecessary. You don't want children, take personal responsibility for your birth control.
> 
> If you want to maintain your reproductive authority, practice it. But being a man who decides BC is "her problem" when you are firm against more children? That's playing Russian Roulette and then wanting to complain about the outcome.
> 
> ...


Wow, I thought marriage was about trust. This is willful deception with huge financial and emotional aspects tied to it. Instead, you place the responsibility of birth control onto the man when essentially we only have three options: condom, abstinence, or vasectomy. Women have 9: female condom, IUD, implant, patch, pill, Plan B, tubal ligation, diaphragm, vaginal ring. How many women would be happy in a marriage where their husband doesn't trust them enough by wearing a condom? 

And again, in regards to the sampling aspect of the audience, you don't know the show's topic until the show starts. The overwhelming majority of women agreed. Yes, I would venture that folks who attend these type of shows are not the 'upper-echelon' of society, but they are a pretty good sampling of where we're at as a society. And yes, I'd have the same opinion of derelict men on Jerry Springer or Family Court. It's sad. 

With regards to the 'bait and switch' comment -- how many marriages start off saying she wants to work after the child turns 5 but later decides she's rather be a SAHM? How many many start off as a fit, willing to compromise spouse who later gains weight and starts demanding more for themselves? How many start off saying she wants two kids but after having one, decides that's enough? And on and on and on...It goes both ways. Briffault's Law/Solipsism in action.

I would agree they both need MC ASAP. And judging from the audience's reaction, so do the vast majority of the other women in the audience. This female entitlement mentality is doing all of Society a grave injustice. Men who have swallowed The Red Pill aren't fighting it as much as thinking that the only way to win is not to play the game. And yet women wonder why men are reluctant to get married nowadays and lament, "Where have all the good men gone?". LOL -- feminism has shown us your true nature...

Bed. Made. Lie.

P.S. And for you 5-10% of the female audience members who didn't clap, kudos. You ladies are the exception. So yeah, I'm willing to risk 50% of my assets and years of child support and alimony, so that I have a 10-30% of not choosing to get divorced.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

unbelievable said:


> He broke the original agreement to have two kids so it's ok to trick him? By this logic, every woman who marries agrees to have sex with her husband. If she later refuses, it's ok to rape her?
> 
> Nobody builds a healthy marriage or family on fraud. My ex-wife pulled this little stunt, not to get a second child but to get pregnant so I'd marry her. That worked for her until she made the mistake of bragging to others how she had deliberately and secretly quit taking birth control when we were dating. She committed other lies and frauds but that was the one that made me lose the very last ounce of respect I might have had for her. Deliberately getting pregnant over your husband's (or boyfriend's) objection ought to be a felony.
> It's essentially putting a man in slavery for at least 18 years without his consent.


So you didn't use condoms why? 

Who here said it was okay? But again, what was your responsibility in that situation? 

Wanting to create more laws to circumvent personal responsibility doesn't seem in touch with your overall political philosophy, Unbelievable.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Dreald said:


> No, one woman does not speak for all women which is why I commented on the crowd's reaction. The vast majority of them supported her deception. Assuming this is a random sample of women nowadays and they had no knowledge of the show's topic when they arrived at the studio, don't you think that it fairly represents women's mentality towards men today? How can you discount this type of reaction by trying to state it's only one person's opinion?


Do you have any idea about how talk shows work? Do you realize that the audience is sometimes deliberately 'stacked' in order to make for more 'interesting' (a.k.a. "shocking")television? 

It would be unfair to make the assumption that ALL women's mentalities are of a 'deceptive' nature based on ONE television show...a show that's listed not as a sports event, the evening news, or 'reality' t.v. The genre is usually ENTERTAINMENT. 

Yes, there are SOME women who would have no problem tricking their spouse into having another child, just like there are SOME men who would get a vasectomy behind their partner's back. But after reading several other forums on this issue, I can tell you that MOST women who have posted were totally AGAINST tricking their spouse, no matter how badly she wanted another child.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Sorry, I didn't realize the point of this thread was another Athol Kay fueled anti - feminism rant, where the point was to agree, yes women are all awful and deceptive and theres no point getting married. My bad.

Please proceed.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Dreald said:


> No, one woman does not speak for all women which is why I commented on the crowd's reaction. The vast majority of them supported her deception. Assuming this is a random sample of women nowadays and they had no knowledge of the show's topic when they arrived at the studio, don't you think that it fairly represents women's mentality towards men today? How can you discount this type of reaction by trying to state it's only one person's opinion?


I'd think, to some degree, the fact that they're all lumped together in a television studio, coupled with the full knowledge that the program is destined to be aired on national television, would have something to do w/ the collective response.

Audience responses on a lot of these shows almost always seem to be a bit over the top.

Either way, yeah... Both parties obviously need to be on the same page w/ regard to how many children each of them wants, and if one party decides to take themselves "out of the game" (which, by the way, is absolutely his/her right), so to speak, a lot of individual reflection and mutual discussion should follow.

If this newfound revelation and subsequent discussions constitute a deal-breaker for either party, it's probably a big enough deal that they should split.

Also, any deception deployed here -- _by either party_ -- would be just absolutely despicable.


----------



## Omego (Apr 17, 2013)

What kind of people go on these shows? Come on, this is all for the ratings.... They need sensationalism. 

I for one, would never do that because 1) it's just dishonest, and 2)during pregnancy and childbirth, a woman needs love and support more than ever. And I don't know of anyone who would deceive her husband in that way.

What I HAVE heard a few times in my circles are stories of the wife getting pregnant and the husband "forcing" her to get an abortion because he either wasn't ready, or didn't want another one, or changed his mind, or whatever, which I think is beyond despicable....

Anyway, I'm getting off track. One can't make any assumptions or generalizations based on a talk show!


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> Jinx! The gig is up!
> 
> Oh no ladies, what will we do now? Because what happens on some TV is of course not at all staged or subject to crowd mentality.
> 
> I've always wondered where the got the studio audience for the Jerry Springer show?


LOL -- I was wondering how long it would be for a female to use the shaming tactic! Congratulations Anon Pink -- you win the prize! :lol:

Ignore all the statistical facts that are out there (70-90% of the time women file for divorce, 80% of ******* women find the men on that site to be 'unattractive' yet it's a nice bell-shaped curve for men, 94%+ she'll have full custody of the kids, almost 90% will receive alimony/child support, 30% of divorce women knew they were marrying the wrong guy, etc. etc.).

Why do women do this? Because men have 'responsibilities', women have 'choices'. In divorce court, she won't be held accountable and stands to receive financial gain (or at the very least enough government assistance) to ensure she'll never be held accountable for her actions. It's sad, but that's just the way it is nowadays. And we're now just starting to hear the injustice of it from a woman's perspective...when their husband's ex-wife is siphoning off money that would otherwise be spent on her.

Yes, there are exceptions where the woman makes more or has more assets coming into the marriage. But we all know how hypergamy works and most women don't marry down, but rather up. Biologically it makes sense for a woman to seek a man who can protect and provide for her. It creates a better environment for the offspring's survival. 

But again, attack the messenger or try and shame them. Standard, typical tactic when one can't support one's position any other way. I had hoped better, but not surprised.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

unbelievable said:


> He broke the original agreement to have two kids so it's ok to trick him? By this logic, every woman who marries agrees to have sex with her husband. If she later refuses, it's ok to rape her?
> 
> Nobody builds a healthy marriage or family on fraud. My ex-wife pulled this little stunt, not to get a second child but to get pregnant so I'd marry her. That worked for her until she made the mistake of bragging to others how she had deliberately and secretly quit taking birth control when we were dating. She committed other lies and frauds but that was the one that made me lose the very last ounce of respect I might have had for her. Deliberately getting pregnant over your husband's (or boyfriend's) objection ought to be a felony.
> It's essentially putting a man in slavery for at least 18 years without his consent.


Quick question... Had you thought about marrying her at all prior to finding out that she was pregnant? If so, what were your thoughts on it...?

Look, I'm not saying that what she pulled was OK in any way, because it wasn't. If she told you that she was on BCP and was taking them regularly and wasn't... Well, that's just despicable.

Having said that, if I found myself in a sexual relationship w/ a woman that I didn't intend to marry, or even thought could be capable of such a thing, I'd probably buy stock in Trojan and accept dividend payments in the form of lots and lots of (and LOTS of) condoms. 

Assuming, of course, that I didn't kick her to the curb first.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Omego said:


> And I don't know of anyone who would deceive her husband in that way.


My aunt did it to her husband. I remember my Mama telling me very clearly, "Son, don't ever let a woman use a baby to trap you in a miserable relationship." Or something to that effect.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Dreald, you are not forced to be with a woman. No man is. And no one can know exactly how the future will go.

You are right, marriage is all about trust. And when the trust is broken, the marriage may collapse.

Try not to worry so much about feminism. Just work on becoming the kind of man that a woman would want to stay with. If she wants to be with you, she will work on the marriage with you.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

GusPolinski said:


> Having said that, if I found myself in a sexual relationship w/ a woman that I didn't intend to marry, or even thought could be capable of such a thing, I'd probably buy stock in Trojan and accept dividend payments in the form of lots and lots of (and LOTS of) condoms.
> 
> Assuming, of course, that I didn't kick her to the curb first.


WHY in the world would you even CONSIDER having sex with a woman who you believed to be capable of such an act? 

Condoms are NOT a 100% guarantee against pregnancy...


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

unbelievable said:


> He broke the original agreement to have two kids so it's ok to trick him? By this logic, every woman who marries agrees to have sex with her husband. If she later refuses, it's ok to rape her?
> 
> Nobody builds a healthy marriage or family on fraud. My ex-wife pulled this little stunt, not to get a second child but to get pregnant so I'd marry her. That worked for her until she made the mistake of bragging to others how she had deliberately and secretly quit taking birth control when we were dating. She committed other lies and frauds but that was the one that made me lose the very last ounce of respect I might have had for her. Deliberately getting pregnant over your husband's (or boyfriend's) objection ought to be a felony.
> It's essentially putting a man in slavery for at least 18 years without his consent.


Wow....I am so sorry to hear she did this. But hey, "Man Up" and "You should have worn a condom", "It takes two to tango -- your fault!"

The ability of women to rationalize their own lack of responsibility is amazing nowadays. And sadly as evidenced by this video and other people's responses here, fully supported. 

P.S. My ex-wife did something similar. We both agreed we would like kids, but would wait a couple of years after we had time to spend together, growing as a couple. 7 months into the marriage, "Surprise honey, I'm pregnant!" She decided to stop taking BC because she felt it was time.

Did she tell me? Nope...she wanted it to be a "surprise". When I told her how deceitful that was....guess what? Like Wendy Williams, she said "But you agreed you wanted kids!" Conveniently leaving out the time-frame we had both agreed to prior to getting married. 

Solipsism and Briffault's Law ladies -- keep trying to reconcile the two. Actions speak louder than words. And men are waking up...


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Omego said:


> What I HAVE heard a few times in my circles are stories of the wife getting pregnant and the husband "forcing" her to get an abortion because he either wasn't ready, or didn't want another one, or changed his mind, or whatever, which I think is beyond despicable....


Ugh. This is absolutely *atrocious*.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Vega said:


> WHY in the world would you even CONSIDER having sex with a woman who you believed to be capable of such an act?
> 
> Condoms are NOT a 100% guarantee against pregnancy...


That is a really good point, Vega. Any birth control can fail, except abstinence.

Taking a long time to really get to know someone before becoming intimate can go a long way to preventing this sort of problem.

_But there are no guarantees . . ._


----------



## Omego (Apr 17, 2013)

GusPolinski said:


> I remember my Mama telling me very clearly, "Son, don't ever let a woman use a baby to trap you in a miserable relationship." Or something to that effect.


That's a very good point. It's also up to parents to educate their sons about this sort of thing, I agree. 

But nowadays, with BC so widespread and diverse, and pre-marital sex no-longer taboo, things are different than in the past.

Back in the day, it was already "wrong" to be sleeping together before marriage. I know of so many stories from the previous generations about couples getting married because the woman accidentally got pregnant. So common. And it was just accepted and done. No one complained about it. 

Anyway, don't know where I'm going with this thread-jack (I do that a lot!). But in this day and age, I don't even understand how a woman could want to do this.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Vega said:


> WHY in the world would you even CONSIDER having sex with a woman who you believed to be capable of such an act?
> 
> Condoms are NOT a 100% guarantee against pregnancy...


Personally, I wouldn't, though you'd have to admit that having this sort of insight into a partner's true self or ultimate intentions is rarely evident at the outset of a relationship. 

Either way, this was a hypothetical situation employed solely within the confines of the situation that unbelievable described.


----------



## DoF (Mar 27, 2014)

Wife and I both think this is a very wrong thing for any woman to do and has potential to destroy a relationship and some. It's shady, fraud, disrespectful, inappropriate and about 20 other things.

At the same time, my wife did it to me when we were very young (our 2nd).......ignorant and extremely stupid. She was honest about it even back then, and at the time I didn't think it was a big deal at all (young and stupid)....but as I matured I realized the moral part of it....so has my wife, and she has apologized for it even more so and agrees that it was completely wrong. To us, it wasn't/isn't a big deal, EVEN though I have little resentment for it towards my wife. We already had one child and have build an amazing relationship/family.....we both wanted more kids....ended up with 4 (#3 was planned and #4 was a mistake).

I'm your proof and living example that this sort of thing CAN work out but under VERY fine conditions. 

Now, for a grown/mature woman to do this would be a HUGE red flag and a complete deal breaker for me. No way. That's not a sign of maturity or trustworthy partner.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Vega said:


> Do you have any idea about how talk shows work? Do you realize that the audience is sometimes deliberately 'stacked' in order to make for more 'interesting' (a.k.a. "shocking")television?
> 
> It would be unfair to make the assumption that ALL women's mentalities are of a 'deceptive' nature based on ONE television show...a show that's listed not as a sports event, the evening news, or 'reality' t.v. The genre is usually ENTERTAINMENT.
> 
> Yes, there are SOME women who would have no problem tricking their spouse into having another child, just like there are SOME men who would get a vasectomy behind their partner's back. But after reading several other forums on this issue, I can tell you that MOST women who have posted were totally AGAINST tricking their spouse, no matter how badly she wanted another child.


Have you been to a taping before? If you have, you know that you're unaware of the show's topic until it begins. I've been to at least a dozen or so while I lived in L.A.

Granted, I acknowledge that these type of shows are for entertainment and the folks that attend these 'low-brow' type of shows aren't the pinnacle of society, but have you taken a look at t.v. nowadays during the day? If there wasn't a market interest, they wouldn't be on. It's just a sad illustration where we are as a society that folks want to watch such garbage, but also an illustration of what women think is okay, based on the audience's reaction. 

The proverbial NAWALT (Not All Women Are Like That) is constantly thrown around to dismiss the majority's bad behavior. And I would agree, NAWALT -- but at what risk does a man take to roll that dice? 70-90% of the time, it's not his decision as to when she exits her marriage. 

That figure right there should be enough for inquisitive folks to question and debate. Sadly, there are those who will claim that men cheat more...which is true. But the variance gap between the sexes has narrowed remarkably over the last 40 years. Some studies show that women cheat more than men, but are just better at lying about it. Much like this woman, talk-show host and the majority of the female audience, who feel justified in lying about taking birth control in order to get pregnant. 

Think men are the unfaithful sex? A study shows WOMEN are the biggest cheats - they're just better at lying about it | Mail Online


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

jld said:


> Any birth control can fail, except abstinence.
> 
> Taking a long time to really get to know someone before becoming intimate can go a long way to preventing this sort of problem.
> 
> _But there are no guarantees . . ._


Exactly. Personally, I believe that every adult should be responsible for their own birth control. If a man doesn't want children, he either gets a vasectomy or accepts that he will HAVE to use condoms, and not leave HIS birth control in the woman's hands...no matter what. 

If the woman doesn't want children then SHE should find her own personal birth control. 

Neither party should put the method of birth control on the shoulders of their partner.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Just watched the video. Honestly it seemed more like roughly 50% of the ladies responded in the affirmative by clapping.


----------



## Omego (Apr 17, 2013)

Dreald said:


> Did she tell me? Nope...she wanted it to be a "surprise". When I told her how deceitful that was....guess what? Like Wendy Williams, she said "But you agreed you wanted kids!" Conveniently leaving out the time-frame we had both agreed to prior to getting married.


I don't think anyone will disagree with you that this is totally wrong!


----------



## DoF (Mar 27, 2014)

Vega said:


> Condoms are NOT a 100% guarantee against pregnancy...


Wife and I don't use condoms and "pulling out" has worked for us for over 18 years. We are not perfect, 1 child was not planned, but at the same time the ratio is still pretty low % (1 out of 6000+ times and some, not bad).

:toast:

But seriously, if we were to use condoms (which would probably never happen).....I would still pull out. Same for birth control. 

It blows my mind that people cum inside and assume these 2 protection methods are 100%.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Starstarfish said:


> So you didn't use condoms why?
> 
> Who here said it was okay? But again, what was your responsibility in that situation?
> 
> ...


I didn't because our birth control plan was the pill. My responsibility was to only have sex with women of decent character whom could be trusted. I failed miserably in my selection process and believe me, I paid for my irresponsibility.
If I ride as a passenger in a car in which my wife is driving, I trust her with my life. If I fall asleep in her presence or I eat something she cooks, I put my life in her hands. Some people can be trusted and some shouldn't be out in public without steel restraints and armed adult supervision. 
If I faithfully used condoms but secretly punctured them in order to get a woman I had been exclusively dating 3 years pregnant against her will, would you be claiming she was irresponsible? Relationships make us vulnerable and there is no way to avoid that fact. I can financially ruin my wife and she can do the same to me. I could expose her to an STD and she could do the same for me. There are a million ways we could kill each other. We live together. Either a person can be trusted or they can't.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Vega said:


> Exactly. Personally, I believe that every adult should be responsible for their own birth control. If a man doesn't want children, he either gets a vasectomy or accepts that he will HAVE to use condoms, and not leave HIS birth control in the woman's hands...not matter what.
> 
> If the woman doesn't want children then SHE should find her own personal birth control.
> 
> *Neither party should put the method of birth control on the shoulders of their partner.*


...UNLESS there is an agreement in place by one one of the parties agrees to shoulder the burden. If husband and wife agree that wife will take BCP and she doesn't, that's on her. If husband and wife agree that husband will get a vasectomy or get T shots and he doesn't that's on him.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

GusPolinski said:


> ...UNLESS there is an agreement in place by one one of the parties agrees to shoulder the burden. If husband and wife agree that wife will take BCP and she doesn't, that's on her. If husband and wife agree that husband will get a vasectomy or get T shots and he doesn't that's on him.


Yes, I agree. I was hoping that I didn't have to make that claim because I was responding to a more sophisticated audience!


----------



## DoF (Mar 27, 2014)

GusPolinski said:


> Just watched the video. Honestly it seemed more like roughly 50% of the ladies responded in the affirmative by clapping.


That's really messed up. Lot of mature women in that audience. 

Would hate to be in the dating pool......:scratchhead:


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

jld said:


> Dreald, you are not forced to be with a woman. No man is. And no one can know exactly how the future will go.
> 
> You are right, marriage is all about trust. And when the trust is broken, the marriage may collapse.
> 
> Try not to worry so much about feminism. Just work on becoming the kind of man that a woman would want to stay with. If she wants to be with you, she will work on the marriage with you.


Exactly -- no man is forced to be with a woman. But they are 'forced' to accept a woman's "decision" and take responsibility for it financially, even if he's unaware or been deceived. Therein lies the hypocrisy. Have you heard of one woman who the court says is responsible for a baby that was conceived out of fraud and deception? I've not. 

Oh, I don't worry about feminism. I think it's done sufficient damage on its own. I'm simply trying to show the hypocrisy and support that women have for things that are in their best interest alone and enforced by our legal system. Almost always at the expense of their husbands or boyfriend who may not agree.

Which is why I am where I'm at now. I spent a long time reflecting on what I could have done differently in my marriage. And I own those aspects that I could have done better. It brought me to The Red Pill and MGTOW -- now I have a much better perspective of women and the state of marriage. 

Like I stated before, sometimes in order to win you simply don't play the game. Which is pretty much the philosophy of MGTOW. It's not a movement per say, but rather a belief that the 'game' called marriage is not worth the inherent risks involved given the state of society today. The typical response to such a comment is typically replied with some sort of shaming tactic. Most MGTOW's could care less what you think....and correctly put, they're thinking about *themselves* and their own best interest; which many define as being 'selfish' and one should just "Man Up". Yet somehow when a woman does it with great financial penalty to a man in deceiving him to have a baby, "clap, clap, clap"....

Ridiculous.

FWIW, I don't abstain from women at all. I've got a nice gf who I've dated for over a year. Pretty, petite and willing to be a co-pilot instead of always being the captain. She is so far, a NAWALT and believes that many of her own friends are entitled, selfish, controlling and unwilling to compromise in relationships. She was married once before and also sees the pitfalls for men in marriage. If this ever changes, she knows my position and understands I won't put up with that type of entitlement behavior.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Vega said:


> Yes, I agree. I was hoping that I didn't have to make that claim because I was responding to a more sophisticated audience!


Ha!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

It sounds like you have found what works for you, Dreald. I wish you the best.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

DoF said:


> Wife and I don't use condoms and "pulling out" has worked for us for over 18 years. We are not perfect, 1 child was not planned, but at the same time the ratio is still pretty low % (1 out of 6000+ times and some, not bad).
> 
> :toast:
> 
> ...


Well, we've been using condoms for 21 years and have never had an accident.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

GusPolinski said:


> Ha!


Compliment. Definitely!


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

GusPolinski said:


> ...UNLESS there is an agreement in place by one one of the parties agrees to shoulder the burden. If husband and wife agree that wife will take BCP and she doesn't, that's on her. If husband and wife agree that husband will get a vasectomy or get T shots and he doesn't that's on him.


The only problem is that BCP isn't a 100% guarantee. If you are playing a numbers game, the smartest decision is to stack the numbers in your favor. That doesn't ultimately come down to trust or the strength of your relationship, or who agreed to what. It's scientific fact. If you play a game with a chance of losing, even if all players are "playing by the rules" you still might lose. 



> If I faithfully used condoms but secretly punctured them in order to get a woman I had been exclusively dating 3 years pregnant against her will, would you be claiming she was irresponsible?


Irresponsible, no. Naive, perhaps.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

GusPolinski said:


> ...UNLESS there is an agreement in place by one one of the parties agrees to shoulder the burden. If husband and wife agree that wife will take BCP and she doesn't, that's on her. If husband and wife agree that husband will get a vasectomy or get T shots and he doesn't that's on him.


:iagree:

But who does the court punish if one party chooses to be deceitful and have a pregnancy by fraud or deception? ALWAYS the man. 

Link one article that shows a man wasn't liable for child support when she said she got her tubes tied, was on birth control, can't conceive due to medical issues, etc. 

While I agree with your comments, the sad fact is that women will never be held accountable. The worst situation for her is that she has Big Daddy Government to provide for her if the father can't. And you and I as taxpayers pay for her decision.

Best case? Lifetime alimony and child support until the child is 23. With no financial accountability of how the child support is spent, but full financial scrutiny of how much a man makes and his subsequent. Since she's married, even a bigger bonus. 50% of all marital assets with limited liability for any debt. 

Who in their right mind would agree to this:

"Hi Mr. Financial Advisor! I think you're just great, so I'm going to give you all of my money with a 50% guarantee that I'll lose half of it and 70-90% of the time, it won't even be my decision! Yippee! Where do I sign?!" -- the modern state of marriage today.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

For sure, men need to know what they are taking on not only when they marry, but when they have sex, period. If you are going to be on the line for 23 years (not 18?), think long and hard about what you are doing.

And then take responsibility for it.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

MSP said:


> It’s funny how on the one hand you have all the red pill rhetoric about how women behave the way they do due to evolution and how PUAs can use women’s biological drives to trigger them into having sex without the women consciously realizing how they’re behaving. And on the other hand you have the same guys whining about how the hypergamous nature of women is unfair and creates a deck stacked against men.
> 
> Well, which is it, guys? Either evolution has favoured a particular kind of female behaviour because it is the best kind for the success of the human race and you should be totally okay with that—or perhaps you have a flawed belief system.


The reason why PUA developed is because it apparently works...and works well. Men have to react and adapt in order to be successful at attracting mates. Women, not so much if their blessed with good genes. 

So to criticize the PUA, you conveniently neglect the fact that they are responding to what women want. That is, until they face The Wall, their looks are fading and eggs are drying up, has a kid or two, do they then settle for a beta-wallet. Yes, her prime youth and fertility was wasted on those same bad-boy, thug, PUA's but now she's done riding the c**k carousel and surprised that those same men who she ignored previously, are pursuing younger women without all the baggage. 

And these women credulously ask "Where Have All The Good Men Gone?" :rofl:

The point of MGTOW is that we don't care anymore what women want. That doesn't imply abuse or neglect, it just states that we will no longer be beholden to satisfying everything she wants at the sacrifice of our own selves. Is that selfish? Perhaps so, depending on one's perspective or gender.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

jld said:


> For sure, *men AND women* need to know what they are taking on not only when they marry, but when they have sex, period. If you are going to be on the line for 23 years (not 18?), think long and hard about what you are doing.
> 
> And then take responsibility for it.


I fixed that for you.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

jld said:


> For sure, men need to know what they are taking on not only when they marry, but when they have sex, period. If you are going to be on the line for 23 years (not 18?), think long and hard about what you are doing.
> 
> And then take responsibility for it.


:iagree:

And when the male birth control pill is available and/or virtual sex machines improve, watch how society changes....

And I believe the adage is true: "Women are the gatekeepers of sex, Men are the gate keepers of commitment". Unfortunately now, women can deceive men into commitment by fraudulently claiming they were on BC. If not emotional commitment, a financial one. Who in this world believes this is fair or just? And yet again, not one article I've ever found where a woman was financially punished for such deception or responsible for making that choice. Nor have I found one article where a father who wants to keep a baby, can legally force his wife not to abort it. Not one. Yet, fine if it's on the other foot.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Dreald said:


> And these women credulously ask "Where Have All The Good Men Gone?" :rofl:


LOL

Saw this article the other day...

Dear Girls Who Are (Finally) Ready To Date Nice Guys: We Don’t Want You Anymore | Thought Catalog


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

jld said:


> Well, we've been using condoms for 21 years and have never had an accident.


Wow. This is actually pretty impressive.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

Dreald said:


> Exactly -- no man is forced to be with a woman. But they are 'forced' to accept a woman's "decision" and take responsibility for it financially, even if he's unaware or been deceived. Therein lies the hypocrisy. Have you heard of one woman who the court says is responsible for a baby that was conceived out of fraud and deception? I've not.
> 
> Oh, I don't worry about feminism. I think it's done sufficient damage on its own. I'm simply trying to show the hypocrisy and support that women have for things that are in their best interest alone and enforced by our legal system. Almost always at the expense of their husbands or boyfriend who may not agree.
> 
> ...


I'm learning some new acronyms today...


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

There was a couple I lived next to a number of years ago.

She wanted a baby. The man...no way. Controlling A-Hole Freak. Babies were messy, expensive and trouble. Honestly, he shouldn't have been married in the first place.

She had one anyway. She wanted one and she felt (incorrectly) that it would 'draw them closer together as a family'.

That...didn't...work...

And honestly, what a selfish manipulative way to create a life to use as a band aid to deal with a troubled marriage.

The wife is sweet and friendly but she did her marriage no favors and she is paying a far higher price than she probably wanted.


----------



## Omego (Apr 17, 2013)

Dreald said:


> Unfortunately now, women can deceive men into commitment by fraudulently claiming they were on BC. If not emotional commitment, a financial one. Who in this world believes this is fair or just? And yet again, not one article I've ever found where a woman was financially punished for such deception or responsible for making that choice. Nor have I found one article where a father who wants to keep a baby, can legally force his wife not to abort it. Not one. Yet, fine if it's on the other foot.


What you are saying is logical. However, it would be impossible to legislate on this kind of issue. Especially concerning the abortion issue. Besides, how could anyone prove anything?

And once again, as another poster said, either you are in a committed relationship with a trustworthy partner, or you're not, and it's just unfortunate if you've been deceived or picked the wrong person.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

> And when the male birth control pill is available and/or virtual sex machines improve, watch how society changes....


Wait ... when virtual sex machines *improve*? Does that mean rudimentary versions are available now? (Okay, I guess the fleshlight, but that's lower than rudimentary, lol.)

Also, if there's support for the male birth control bill, there should be more drive behind that, rather than making 30 different formulations of Cyalis. But, I get the idea that Conservatives who feel birth control is evil might object.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

GusPolinski said:


> LOL
> 
> Saw this article the other day...
> 
> Dear Girls Who Are (Finally) Ready To Date Nice Guys: We Don’t Want You Anymore | Thought Catalog


I saw that as well. The comments to the article are spot on! Of course the shaming tactics some of the women use are hilarious as well -- as if they think we really care or haven't heard it before!

I also noticed that despite commentators providing facts to support why men are waking up to this, almost all of the women's arguments boil down to what SHE feels is right. Solipsism at it's best.

If you liked that article, you'll love this site, owned by a married wife who completely tears apart this story and summarizes it with, "Okay, MGTOW, I get it now. If this is the option, I’d pass too"

http://judgy*****.com/2014/04/22/okay-mgotw-i-get-it-now-if-this-is-the-option-id-pass-too/

P.S. This is also a great synopsis of it as well: http://judgy*****.com/2014/04/23/a-brutal-cup-of-truth-from-mr-nice-guy/


----------



## MSP (Feb 9, 2012)

Dreald said:


> The reason why PUA developed is because it apparently works...and works well. Men have to react and adapt in order to be successful at attracting mates. Women, not so much if their blessed with good genes.
> 
> So to criticize the PUA, you conveniently neglect the fact that they are responding to what women want. That is, until they face The Wall, their looks are fading and eggs are drying up, has a kid or two, do they then settle for a beta-wallet. Yes, her prime youth and fertility was wasted on those same bad-boy, thug, PUA's but now she's done riding the c**k carousel and surprised that those same men who she ignored previously, are pursuing younger women without all the baggage.
> 
> ...


I deleted my post, because I realized I didn't express myself nearly as clearly as I'd liked. It was more an anti-evolution post than anything, but that is probably also out of place away from the religion forum, too. Mostly, I deleted it because I realized I wasn't being as insightful as I thought I was and I didn't have the energy to make myself as clear as I had to be to get my point across properly. *shrug* It's one of those days. I should go do some work or something. 

FTR, I am not a fan of modern marriage or feminism. However, I prefer to strive for healing and understanding, rather than recrimination and anger. As the saying goes, _Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love. _


----------



## Omego (Apr 17, 2013)

JCD said:


> The wife is sweet and friendly but she did her marriage no favors and she is paying a far higher price than she probably wanted.


Of course she is. I just don't see who would be so naive as to try to force a man to WANT a baby when he clearly said no, in the hopes that he will come around.... It can happen, but it's definitely not the norm, based on what I've seen.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Dreald said:


> And these women credulously ask "Where Have All The Good Men Gone?" :rofl:


I've seen just as many men complaining that the women aren't choosing them even though they are a good man when... they really just aren't. Whining about feminism (darn those pesky equal rights!) and how ALL women are terrible, treacherous monsters who manipulate the system to get everything we want does not make for a "good man" IMO

Are there men who get the short end of the stick, yes. Are there women who do as well, yes. Let's not get carried away here. 
Men’s Rights Myth: Typical Child Support Payments Are Insanely High | Alas, a Blog


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Whining about feminize (darn those pesky equal rights!) and how ALL women are terrible, treacherous monsters who manipulate the system to get everything we want does not make for a "good man" IMO


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

MSP said:


> I
> FTR, I am not a fan of modern marriage or feminism. However, I prefer to strive for *healing and understanding, rather than recrimination and anger. As the saying goes, Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love. *


:iagree:

Why do you not like feminism, MSP? 

I guess a better question is, how do you define feminism?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I think a male birth control pill would be a great idea.

Combine that with women making more money than men now, and we should see some interesting changes in society.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I've seen just as many men complaining that the women aren't choosing them even though they are a good man when... they really just aren't. Whining about feminize (darn those pesky equal rights!) and how ALL women are terrible, treacherous monsters who manipulate the system to get everything we want does not make for a "good man" IMO
> 
> Are there men who get the short end of the stick, yes. Are there women who do as well, yes. Let's not get carried away here.
> Men’s Rights Myth: Typical Child Support Payments Are Insanely High | Alas, a Blog


Where did I say ALL women? I didn't. Sadly, yet another attempt at discounting an issue by trying to make it seem ridiculous by exaggeration. 

I did say, the vast majority of women in that video were fully supportive of the wife deceiving her husband into having another kid. Some saw 50%, I saw more like 80-85%. And yes, it's not a statistical sample but when combined with other facts and articles that support this female entitlement mentality, you simply want to discount it because it's not true of ALL women?


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

jld said:


> :iagree:
> 
> Why do you not like feminism, MSP?
> 
> I guess a better question is, how do you define feminism?



That's a very good question, because it seems that a lot of men define feminism as rabid man hating, women taking and keeping poor victimized men under their thumb. Except that feminism at its roots was supposed to be about women having equal opportunities, which up until very recently in history they didn't have. 

Its the same as civil rights; it may be misused sometimes but at its roots it exists because minorities wanted equal rights and opportunities. Had these rights been afforded there would be no such thing as civil rights, and had women had equal rights there would be no such thing as feminism.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I agree, life. To me, feminism is just respecting women. If you respect women, you are a feminist.


----------



## MSP (Feb 9, 2012)

jld said:


> Why do you not like feminism, MSP?
> 
> I guess a better question is, how do you define feminism?


Oh, boy. Lol! I already deleted one post because I didn't feel like it was clear enough. Some other time, perhaps. It's a big topic to properly discuss, from any angle. Besides, arguing with women online is just not very alpha. 

I am actually going to get offline now and get stuff done.


----------



## MSP (Feb 9, 2012)

jld said:


> If you respect women, you are a feminist.


Unfortunately, this is not how feminism defines itself. 

Perhaps I will come back to this later after all. Gotta go.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Dreald said:


> Where did I say ALL women? I didn't. Sadly, yet another attempt at discounting an issue by trying to make it seem ridiculous by exaggeration.
> 
> I did say, the vast majority of women in that video were fully supportive of the wife deceiving her husband into having another kid. Some saw 50%, I saw more like 80-85%. And yes, it's not a statistical sample but when combined with other facts and articles that support this female entitlement mentality, you simply want to discount it because it's not true of ALL women?


But you're presenting your case as if the t.v. show represents the MAJORITY of ALL WOMEN. 

In all honesty, I have no idea why many of them clapped. Maybe some of them didn't really understand why they were clapping...maybe some of them simply 'followed the leader'...maybe some of them REALLY BELIEVE that it's o.k. to deceive a partner. 

I could probably go onto the streets of *my town* and find 1000's of women who are AGAINST deceiving a partner. 

Would that change your mind?


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

jld said:


> I think a male birth control pill would be a great idea.
> 
> Combine that with women making more money than men now, and we should see some interesting changes in society.


I agree -- it's interesting to note that only now that some women are making more money than men, and the tables are turned on them in divorce, they're wanting alimony laws changed. That and the fact that 2nd wives see how much of her husband's income is going to his ex-wife, are they getting upset. 

I think this will only increase since more women than men are attending college (60%:40%). Yep, once cupcake is affected, why "This isn't right! The law should be changed!" Yet had no problem when it benefited them.


----------



## soccermom2three (Jan 4, 2013)

I think women that do this type of thing are despicable. The last I would want to do is bring a child into this world to be raised by an indifferent father.


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

The day that trifling, ratchet Wendy Williams represents ALL women is the day I build a rocket ship and move to Mars. I abhor her and the fact that people seem to think she embodies what a black woman is. 

Tricking a SPOUSE into a pregnancy (men do it too) is disgusting and low and undermines what a marriage is. I think a vast majority of women would agree. We aren't evil succubi sent to drain men of their money and self-respect. 

I also know that those reactions from the audience are pre-taped and EDITED in. They record them agreeing. They record them booing. The whole range of emotions (insert derisive snort here.) They are also told to be loud, raucous, and over the top. ESPECIALLY on shows like that no-good, disgusting, hypocritical Wendy Williams. 

Oh. And for the record I am a black woman pregnant with her husband's twins. A pregnancy that he requested. Shock and horrors.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Vega said:


> But you're presenting your case as if the t.v. show represents the MAJORITY of ALL WOMEN.
> 
> In all honesty, I have no idea why many of them clapped. Maybe some of them didn't really understand why they were clapping...maybe some of them simply 'followed the leader'...maybe some of them REALLY BELIEVE that it's o.k. to deceive a partner.
> 
> ...


No, based on your logic and reasoning...nothing you say would have any affect. I see fairly clearly from your comments the level of 'evaluation' you're capable of. 

You'd be incapable of explaining why it is that women file divorce 70-90% of the time. Why women almost invariably receive full custody. Why men almost overwhelmingly pay child support and yet nothing to show it was actually spent on their son or daughter. Why 30% of married women who divorce, knew they weren't in love with their fiance.

I could give you article after article, fact after fact and still you'd be blind, not because you're not intelligent, but unwilling to change your paradigm. 

And that friends, is what the Red Pill is all about. Changing one's perspective from what most are often brought up to believe. But when reality and facts hit you head on, you can either ignore it, shame it, or discount it. Some of us choose to view things with a more open perspective and recognize that anecdotes are not the plural of data.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

Omego said:


> Of course she is. I just don't see who would be so naive as to try to force a man to WANT a baby when he clearly said no, in the hopes that he will come around.... It can happen, but it's definitely not the norm, based on what I've seen.


None of this is 'the norm'. Most women would be appalled by this tactic and would exchange significant looks and nods with one another as her girlfriends watched this drama play out.

Men are generally appalled by men who seemingly loved their kids who suddenly, one fight later, kick started his motorbike and left his wife and family high and dry.

Those people don't do those things.

ALL of this is based on the exceptions. Now, Dreald would have you believe all women are like this. Come on now!

Abandonment with child is a VISCERAL fear in women. And the law decided that a man who just scat should pay for his misdeeds.

Let's recall that these sort of laws cut both ways, Dreald. For every man 'taken to the cleaners' by a wife, there is a father happily looking across a courtroom at this POS who knocked up his daughter who is facing wage garnishment.

Every woman is someone's daughter.

That being said. Ladies...and I say this with the utmost respect...some of your sisters...they are going a bit crazy with this law. They are harming otherwise very good men and manipulating the system. Remember, every man who is abused by this is ALSO some mother's son.

So...have a heart to heart with your girlfriends which ISN'T just solidarity. Question their actions and attitudes. Act as if the man in question isn't that ex BF you know and loathe...think of him as your son.

Just a suggestion.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Dreald said:


> Where did I say ALL women? I didn't. Sadly, yet another attempt at discounting an issue by trying to make it seem ridiculous by exaggeration.
> 
> I did say, the vast majority of women in that video were fully supportive of the wife deceiving her husband into having another kid. Some saw 50%, I saw more like 80-85%. And yes, it's not a statistical sample but when combined with other facts and articles that support this female entitlement mentality, *you simply want to discount it because it's not true of ALL women?*


Ya, the whole "NAWALT" thing? Meaning, women who aren't like that are the exception, not the norm? Do you think that makes it less offensive?
I want to discount it because MOST women are not like that, because our Mothers, daughters, sisters and friends deserve enough respect to not be lumped in with the few bad apples.


----------



## TurtleRun (Oct 18, 2013)

That poor husband will probably still love the baby but resent it at the same time :/ what an awful idea.


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

JCD, the only sisters I have are the ones from my mother. And since I only have a brother, I HAVE NO SISTERS. I refuse to be held responsible for what crazy biotches do. I am raising my daughters to be good, moral, HONEST women, the way my mother beat it into me. She was a single mother who taught me that a woman stands up and takes care of her own and does not point fingers at other people for her screw-ups. 

I will not unilaterally support bad behavior of a few women because we happen to have the same plumbing. I absolutely refute that crap that is spread across the internet about women and their so-called devilish ways.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Vega said:


> But you're presenting your case as if the t.v. show represents the MAJORITY of ALL WOMEN.
> 
> In all honesty, I have no idea why many of them clapped. Maybe some of them didn't really understand why they were clapping...maybe some of them simply 'followed the leader'...maybe some of them REALLY BELIEVE that it's o.k. to deceive a partner.
> 
> ...


Care to comment on this video? The one where The View ladies and audience members (mainly female) were laughing at the fact a wife chopped off her husband's penis? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnXCPcq_RTY

Do I think it represents ALL women? No, of course not. But I do find it unsettling at the audience and hosts' reaction. Do I think it lifts the veil of socially-accepted violence if it's against the man? Yes!

Even more disturbing is her supposed "apology":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYkuJXqLDkQ

She can't even say the apology at first without chuckling. And notice how the other hosts discount it by saying it was a "free form discussion" (i.e. DON'T HOLD US ACCOUNTABLE!), that Sharon is the only one apologizing (but they ALL were laughing hysterically when she said it).

Can you IMAGINE the outrage if a husband cut off his wife's clitoris or breasts? Do you not THINK that this would be front page headlines for days?

And no, I don't think these female hosts represent ALL women. But I am surprised by ALL of the host's reactions, including the audience who is primarily women. And if these female hosts don't represent women's views, why in the heck do women watch them? Where was the outrage by women to condemn such a thing? 

It wasn't until men stood up and complained about it was any apology forthcoming. And conveniently, CBS has pulled those videos from its archives....


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Anon Pink said:


> Jinx! The gig is up!
> 
> Oh no ladies, what will we do now? Because what happens on some TV is of course not at all staged or subject to crowd mentality.
> 
> I've always wondered where the got the studio audience for the Jerry Springer show?


TAM?


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Folks, I'll say it one more time. Nowhere have I stated ALL women are like this. Nowhere. It's a typical, reactive response when one shows hypocrisy by discounting it as an exception. 

What I have shown, and can provide countless other videos, news articles, blog posts, etc. to prove it, is this -- ALL women have the capability to act like this and will be fully supported by our legal system in doing so. And socially, it appears that women are okay with it, as long as they uphold the 'solidarity' of women, despite how abhorrent their own actions are. 

And there were be no accountability placed on them. It's just the way things have been and are today. And why more men are choosing not to play the game anymore. It doesn't mean we'll all be celibate and not date or have meaningful relationships, but we will be much more aware of the consequences in interacting with women when the stakes are so high. Our chances of having equality in the court of law, are practically nonexistent. 

Why bring in the State to one's personal affairs (i.e. marriage) when one side of the deck is so heavily stacked?

P.S. As it relates to the videos I've posted, yes -- the MAJORITY of women were acting this way. On Wendy Williams show and on The View. The Majority....but alas, ladies you have an out....true, not ALL women were clapping or laughing...but the MAJORITY of them were. If that's reason enough to discount the issue, so be it. I doubt any level of reasoning, fact or articles would change your mind anyway.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Dreald said:


> Can you IMAGINE the outrage if a husband cut off his wife's clitoris or breasts? Do you not THINK that this would be front page headlines for days?
> 
> ..


WHO | Female genital mutilation


What is FGM? - Desert Flower Foundation

Female Genital Mutiliation/Cutting-FGM


Pressure for female genital cutting lingers in the U.S. - CNN.com


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

AnnieAsh said:


> JCD, the only sisters I have are the ones from my mother. And since I only have a brother, I HAVE NO SISTERS. I refuse to be held responsible for what crazy biotches do. I am raising my daughters to be good, moral, HONEST women, the way my mother beat it into me. She was a single mother who taught me that a woman stands up and takes care of her own and does not point fingers at other people for her screw-ups.
> 
> I will not unilaterally support bad behavior of a few women because we happen to have the same plumbing. I absolutely refute that crap that is spread across the internet about women and their so-called devilish ways.


Of course you don't support their behavior. You are a pretty moral person. 

That being said, while you don't 'unilaterally' support a woman just for similar plumbing, there is a...hesitation to do something on this*somewhat* inequitable issue, and understandably so. "Yes...Emily is going WAY overboard with her Ray, but if we women raise a ruckus, if MY husband leaves me, will _my kids and I_ be protected? But for the grace of God, there go I. Instead of worrying if this is being abused, I think I want to keep it as a handy sledgehammer if things go wrong for me..."

Which lets what inequity happens still stand. Not out of stupid solidarity or happiness at male abuse, but it is in the interests of women to want this law...even if it is abused sometimes...okay...a lot of times. But only by bad people, honest.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

Dreald said:


> Folks, I'll say it one more time. Nowhere have I stated ALL women are like this. Nowhere. It's a typical, reactive response when one shows hypocrisy by discounting it as an exception.
> 
> What I have shown, and can provide countless other videos, news articles, blog posts, etc. to prove it, is this -- ALL women have the capability to act like this and will be fully supported by our legal system in doing so. And socially, it appears that women are okay with it, as long as they uphold the 'solidarity' of women, despite how abhorrent their own actions are.
> 
> ...




:redcard: So...you assert that 90% of the studio audience HAPPILY applauded this woman's decision to unilaterally deceive her husband...but now you want to say 'I didn't say ALL women did this'

Do you mean the 10% who weren't applauding happily?

So are you saying MOST women are like this?

Try decaf. You tend to swing a bit hyperbolic and it doesn't do you favors in the credibility department.

I think MOST men would happily get a nice faithful woman to have and to hold. Unfortunately, between the bad apples among the women, some jaded attitudes in both gender's camps and internet horror stories, they are afraid.

So are the women.

Sad really.


----------



## Omego (Apr 17, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> WHO | Female genital mutilation
> 
> 
> What is FGM? - Desert Flower Foundation
> ...


I read the last article. Good for that mother. And now I'm going to be totally un-PC. What The H***. It's crazy that this still exists....


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Entropy3000 said:


> TAM?


Don't be such a scaredy cat entropy. Be substantive. Are you insulting TAM or are you suggesting the studio audience is a decent cross sampling of the prevailing modern attitudes found in Merica?


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> WHO | Female genital mutilation
> 
> 
> What is FGM? - Desert Flower Foundation
> ...


LOL. Did you even read any of these article before posting? They either describe what female genital mutilation is (thank you for defining...I guess), where it occurs (third world countries), and the only article that does reference it as it relates it to our country (CNN), is that "The United States has outlawed female genital cutting".

I fail to see how any of those relate to my comment. But perhaps this is the level of reflection and investigation you profess. 

Again, was this mainstream news when it came out on The View? I don't recall ever seeing it on any of the major news outlets or on their website and I am an avid news junkie. Why did Sharon apologize and only Sharon (who couldn't even do it with a straight face without chuckling)? Why did CBS remove it from their archives? 

Please feel to link to any story that supports your position that it was covered and covered extensively.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Dreald said:


> Care to comment on this video? The one where The View ladies and audience members (mainly female) were laughing at the fact a wife chopped off her husband's penis?
> .


Pop culture and media is horrible for both genders. I could list videos where women are objectified, disrespected, trivialized, etc. It's really a bad place to look for examples of good behavior. Or do you think the behavior of some men in the media is how most men behave?

There are women who aren't held accountable and there are men who aren't as well (yes, skipping out on child support happens.)


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

I've got to be honest, as mean as it sounds, I often look at Wendy Williams is indeed a woman and wonder if there isn't an entirely different agenda at work on that show. 



> Care to comment on this video? The one where The View ladies and audience members (mainly female) were laughing at the fact a wife chopped off her husband's penis?


American fathers (and mothers) strongly press for their "parental right" to forcibly circumcise infant male children. If you want to start pressure against forcible abuse on male genitalia, I'd start there. That's a far more widespread, accepted and publicly funded practice than a few Lorena Bobbette style wackos. 

Women clapping at this is just as odd to me as men shouting about how their infant son's penis "needs to look like Daddy's." We have a rape culture and a culture that strangely accepts some forms of painful genitalia abuse as "cultural."


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Omego said:


> I read the last article. Good for that mother. And now I'm going to be totally un-PC. What The H***. It's crazy that this still exists....


This is a perfect example of why people need to be called out for just going along with the pressure to conform that their immediate peers exert on them.

Yes being PC is sometimes very old fashioned, but critical thinking doesn't happen until we are forced to think beyond what is right in front of our own little world experience.


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Dreald said:


> Folks, I'll say it one more time. Nowhere have I stated ALL women are like this. Nowhere. It's a typical, reactive response when one shows hypocrisy by discounting it as an exception.
> 
> What I have shown, and can provide countless other videos, news articles, blog posts, etc. to prove it, is this -- *ALL women have the capability to act like this *and will be fully supported by our legal system in doing so. And socially, it appears that *women are okay with it, as long as they uphold the 'solidarity' of women, despite how abhorrent their own actions are. *
> 
> ...


These 2 statements completely contradict what you said in the beginning. First you say "nowhere have I stated ALL women are like this." Then you go on to state ALL WOMEN ARE LIKE THIS. Which is it?


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

JCD said:


> :redcard: So...you assert that 90% of the studio audience HAPPILY applauded this woman's decision to unilaterally deceive her husband...but now you want to say 'I didn't say ALL women did this'
> 
> Do you mean the 10% who weren't applauding happily?
> 
> ...


I would agree -- and when one gender typically has to bring more resources to the table to attract a mate, that gender has more risk should things fail. Especially with the way the Family Court and Divorce system is designed. 

And yes -- one poster stated that NAWALT to which I agree. But they are clearly the exception to this when it clearly shows on both videos the MAJORITY of women were completely supporting such vile, abhorrent behavior. Behavior that would be ostracized and discussed extensively if the shoe were on the other foot. 

I find it difficult to believe such a point of differentiation is difficult to grasp. But perhaps that reflects clearly when you look at STEM fields and the obvious gender 'biases' that are there...:rofl:


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

Dreald said:


> But they are clearly the exception to this when it clearly shows on both videos the MAJORITY of women were *applauding at the 'applause' sign lighting up*. Behavior that would be ostracized and discussed extensively if the shoe were on the other foot.


Here. I fixed that for you. Yes, they still have applause signs.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

I've just got to say, if the response of your average Wendy Williams audience is actually the benchmark for human behavior, conversations about inter-gender politics are moot. We've turned the U-bend as a species and there is no coming back, we are approaching Idiocracy at warp-speed and there's no hope. 

These are the waning days of the human race, behold and weep.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Dreald said:


> No, one woman does not speak for all women which is why I commented on the crowd's reaction. The vast majority of them supported her deception. Assuming this is a random sample of women nowadays and they had no knowledge of the show's topic when they arrived at the studio, don't you think that it fairly represents women's mentality towards men today? How can you discount this type of reaction by trying to state it's only one person's opinion?


It's a bit hard to count those who are clapping for 'yes' and those who are not. I tried, the number of 'non-clappers' is higher than you suggest. Though I too am surprised that more than one or two clapped in agreement.

Do note that the man sitting next to the woman asking the question is enthusiastically clapping.

This is an airhead TV show. What kind of people watch airhead shows? What kind take hours out of their lives to attend live? Well, airheads. 

So some percentage of airheads sit the audience of a dumb show and clap. They are most likely so excited to be there that they would clap at any stupid thing Wendy suggests.

All the video tells you what the people in that show audience did. It says nothing about women at large.


----------



## KathyBatesel (Apr 26, 2012)

Dreald said:


> Notice that Wendy Williams indicates to go ahead and trick him -- that it's okay because he said he wanted a second child. Notice the crowd reaction (almost 100% entirely female) when she asks whether they agree that she's completely justified in deceiving her husband. From the crowd's reaction at least 95% enthusiastically agree. I guess HE doesn't have a right to change his mind, but it's a female's prerogative to do so.
> 
> And as evidenced by the almost unanimous crowd support, the majority of women support such deception.


Dreald, I am a woman, and I found that disgusting. I haven't read other responses, but you're being misleading when you say that the women overwhelmingly supported deceiving him. Look at the hands of who is clapping. MAYBE half.... and nowhere near your estimate of 95%!

I agree with everything else you said in your post, but please don't stereotype and slam women as a whole when what you said is purely not accurate and is "tricking" people, too. It's hypocritical.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Dreald said:


> Folks, I'll say it one more time. Nowhere have I stated ALL women are like this. Nowhere. It's a typical, reactive response when one shows hypocrisy by discounting it as an exception.


Ah.. so anyone who disagrees that the show does not represent whatever you say it represents are by default hypocrites…. Glad you cleared that up.

Here is something else you cleared up.


Dreald said:


> Nowhere have I stated ALL women are like this. Nowhere


So first you say that you have not stated that ALL women are like this.

But then you do state that all women are like this.


Dreald said:


> What I have shown, and can provide countless other videos, news articles, blog posts, etc. to prove it, is this -- ALL women have the capability to act like this and will be fully supported by our legal system in doing so. And socially, it appears that women are okay with it, as long as they uphold the 'solidarity' of women, despite how abhorrent their own actions are.


So now we have it, you do believe and have clearly stated that ALL woman are like this.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Dreald said:


> when one gender typically has to bring more resources to the table to attract a mate, that gender has more risk should things fail.


Everyone sets their own standards about what resources they require their mate to bring to the table. 
Which resources do you think each gender typically has to have to attract a mate?


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Pop culture and media is horrible for both genders. I could list videos where women are objectified, disrespected, trivialized, etc. It's really a bad place to look for examples of good behavior. Or do you think the behavior of some men in the media is how most men behave?
> 
> There are women who aren't held accountable and there are men who aren't as well (yes, skipping out on child support happens.)


I would agree that pop culture and media have done nothing for women except to objectify them in *some* cases and even sadder, that women are profiting from their objectification (ala Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry, Miriam Weeks, etc). But whose choice was that? Were they forced to do so or did they see an opportunity and profited from it? 

And yet ironically, have the gall to come out and condemn this objectification when they no longer benefit from it due to their age, but had no problem with it while they were being paid: Heather Graham: Hollywood Is 'Totally Sexist' The hypocrisy of this cannot be swept away so readily.

And no, some people's behavior does not represent all. But if I saw where men routinely abused women, deceived them in order to gain resources, filed false charges, initiated divorce 70-90% of the time, used their children as pawns in legal proceedings, etc. I too would call them out for their behavior. And we're not even broaching the subject of State law that favors one gender over the other, are we?

There are some cases where men flee their financial obligations and where some men are forced to pay for kids that aren't even their own. But when a woman has a child with a man who is a deadbeat and user, what role does she play in making that decision or is it simply that the man should "Man Up" and be accountable when she knew going in what type of person she was? Is there any serious, negative repercussions from her decision? Nope! You've got Big Daddy Government to provide for her and for her offspring. I can't say the same for men, however. Can you?

How many women knowingly marry a man who is well below their income level? Yes, there are exceptions but the MAJORITY of women want someone of at least equal income opportunity or at least educational level with the hopes of future income being provided to them. Hypergamy at it's finest. 

Have no worries folks -- there are tons more videos, articles and comments that I can provide that support what I'm saying. And hey, I get it. Men are looked at for their resources and utility by the MAJORITY of woemn. It is just the way things are. 

But don't vilify us if we look at women for their beauty and fertility and turn down those who used their prime years chasing bad boys, getting knocked up and accumulated mountains of debt. And I doubt you'd find the majority of men laughing at a woman having her breasts or clitoris cut off on the Dr. Phil show. 

The Blue Pillers, White Knights, Manginas will always be there to rescue you. God knows we have enough of them on here. But there is a growing number of us who have finally seen things for what they are and what men represent to (most) women. 

And with regards to men skipping their financial obligations? Well, that may be true for those men who have no resources for the State to get. But for men like myself who have sufficient resources, why should I be willing to take such risks? Especially when data supports the evidence of such a high risk. Again, look to my anecdote about giving all your money to a Financial Advisor post....doesn't make much sense, does it?


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Starstarfish said:


> I've just got to say, if the response of your average Wendy Williams audience is actually the benchmark for human behavior, conversations about inter-gender politics are moot. We've turned the U-bend as a species and there is no coming back, we are approaching Idiocracy at warp-speed and there's no hope.
> 
> These are the waning days of the human race, behold and weep.


This 100x. :lol:

Wendy Williams and her show just embody everything that is wrong in the world for me. To use her and her audience as an example of anything BUT the lowest common denominator...makes me sick.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Everyone sets their own standards about what resources they require their mate to bring to the table.
> Which resources do you think each gender typically has to have to attract a mate?


Gee, I seem to be fairly illustrative in my comments, so I'll take a turn at writing more terse responses like yourself:

What do you bring to the table besides a knife and a fork that a man can't have outside of marriage?

Do you dispute the biological aspect of hypergamy or Briffault's Law? Have you even read either of those two definitions and if so, please elaborate on why you disagree? Providing links to articles or studies would prove more helpful than a solipsistic response however.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

GusPolinski said:


> LOL
> 
> Saw this article the other day...
> 
> Dear Girls Who Are (Finally) Ready To Date Nice Guys: We Don’t Want You Anymore | Thought Catalog



"I’m not looking to help you raise the mini-me version of some guy you used to bang. I want my own children someday, not the offspring of Mr. Neck Tattoo."

Oh crap !!! That should hit home with a few folks.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

GusPolinski said:


> Wow. This is actually pretty impressive.


I wear a whole rubber suit.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Ah, so men who haven't swallowed the "Red Pill" yet and got themselves a petite, beautiful submissive wife who is the co-pilot are Manginas and Blue Pillers. 

Good to know where we stand on that. It's a Blue Pill versus Red Pill world like the Matrix, except minus all the hot S&M gear. 

If the next revelation OP is that your wife is foreign because American women are "tainted", this thread will win TAM. 



> And I doubt you'd find the majority of men laughing at a woman having her breasts or clitoris cut off on the Dr. Phil show.


Again, why no outrage towards fathers who cheer and clap about this being done to their sons? Would a conversation about circumcision and sexual violence interrupt the Red-Pill misogyny marathon?


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Starstarfish said:


> Wait ... when virtual sex machines *improve*? Does that mean rudimentary versions are available now? (Okay, I guess the fleshlight, but that's lower than rudimentary, lol.)
> 
> Also, if there's support for the male birth control bill, there should be more drive behind that, rather than making 30 different formulations of Cyalis. But, I get the idea that Conservatives who feel birth control is evil might object.



The Big Bang Theory - Howard's kissing machine 

Edited: Gave the link a title.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

So not clicking that link, Entropy.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Dreald said:


> But when a woman has a child with a man who is a deadbeat and user, what role does she play in making that decision or is it simply that the man should "Man Up" and be accountable when she knew going in what type of person she was?


And if men find themselves is a situation with a woman who abuses the system and acts like a manipulative b, should he not also look at his role in making that decision? Perhaps look less at women for "their beauty and fertility" and more for their character and self-worth. We are all responsible for the choices we make. 

I've been a single Mother with 0 child support. I promise you it is not all sunshine and rainbows as you would believe. Sure there are some women (and men!) who live off welfare and abuse the system but their lives are not enviable. Is this really what you view as "winning"?


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

jld said:


> :iagree:
> 
> Why do you not like feminism, MSP?
> 
> I guess a better question is, how do you define feminism?


The women I admire the most on this board I consider true feminists. Cosmos for example. But there are many. These are strong intelligent women who have a real clue. They own their own stuff but they are no ones fool either.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

Starstarfish said:


> Sorry, I didn't realize the point of this thread was another Athol Kay fueled anti - feminism rant, where the point was to agree, yes women are all awful and deceptive and theres no point getting married. My bad.
> 
> Please proceed.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree:

I was going to post here saying how despicable I find it for a woman to deliberately thrust a pregnancy on a man, but I guess it isn't worth my feminist energy


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

lifeistooshort said:


> That's a very good question, because it seems that a lot of men define feminism as rabid man hating, women taking and keeping poor victimized men under their thumb. Except that feminism at its roots was supposed to be about women having equal opportunities, which up until very recently in history they didn't have.
> 
> Its the same as civil rights; it may be misused sometimes but at its roots it exists because minorities wanted equal rights and opportunities. Had these rights been afforded there would be no such thing as civil rights, and had women had equal rights there would be no such thing as feminism.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Agreed. Those women are ... broken. Not true feminists.


----------



## Omego (Apr 17, 2013)

Starstarfish said:


> I've just got to say, if the response of your average Wendy Williams audience is actually the benchmark for human behavior, conversations about inter-gender politics are moot. We've turned the U-bend as a species and there is no coming back, we are approaching Idiocracy at warp-speed and there's no hope.
> 
> These are the waning days of the human race, behold and weep.


Totally. Very funny movie Idiocracy was!


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Dreald said:


> Gee, I seem to be fairly illustrative in my comments, so I'll take a turn at writing more terse responses like yourself:
> 
> What do you bring to the table besides a knife and a fork that a man can't have outside of marriage?
> 
> Do you dispute the biological aspect of hypergamy or Briffault's Law? Have you even read either of those two definitions and if so, please elaborate on why you disagree? Providing links to articles or studies would prove more helpful than a solipsistic response however.


What do men bring to the table besides a knife and a fork that a woman cannot have outside marriage?


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

AnnieAsh said:


> This 100x. :lol:
> 
> Wendy Williams and her show just embody everything that is wrong in the world for me. To use her and her audience as an example of anything BUT the lowest common denominator...makes me sick.


Okay, you discounted that video. Why no mention of The View video? If they don't represent the majority of women, why are the highest rated female t.v. show? Where were the mainstream articles, written by women, condemning such comments and behavior? Especially when so egregious?

To condemn one thing when it suits your prerogative and completely ignore an even more heinous display of genital mutilation acceptance, makes me sick too. On that we agree on. 

P.S. Would you like more videos or news articles of men being falsely accused of rape and yet no prosecution was made for filing a false report? Or the numerous recent incidences where female teachers have sex with underage students and yet receive a small slap on the wrist compared to similar instances where a man receives a lengthy jail sentence. Or how about the women who killed a young male teenager and then had the audacity to sue the family for 'emotional distress'. Or how about the woman who cuckolded her husband for years, yet the courts found that even though the child wasn't biologically his, he was required to continue to pay for child support after the divorce, because he 'acted as though he was the father'. Or the spouse who paid millions in a divorce even though he had a prenup that was subsequently thrown out. Or the fiance who decided not to get married to a gold-digger, yet the judge said she could keep the $45k engagement ring because he sent a text stating that was her 'door prize' in a fit of emotional rage. 

Ladies, I have a TON of evidence to support my position. Unfortunately I doubt it will do little to have you see things from a different perspective. But men will continue to do what we do best: react and adapt. 

But unfortunately, it won't be an outcome that many of you will like. We'll simply enjoy ourselves without worry of social conformity, resource extraction or worry of having our kids taken away from us. All at the expense of what you believed you were entitled to.

Bed. Made. Lie. 

Enjoy the decline fellas and you ladies, enjoy your cat(s) and wine while singing, "You go girlll!"

P.S. Waiting for the "bitter/woman hater comments" that will surely come forth. All the while ignoring the supporting evidence of which my contention is made. It's all about "feelings", right? Such objective perspective....lol.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Dreald said:


> Care to comment on this video? The one where The View ladies and audience members (mainly female) were laughing at the fact a wife chopped off her husband's penis?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnXCPcq_RTY
> 
> ...


That was very F'd up. I remember that. In no way do I think that reflects on women in general but I do think it reflects on our culture today to some extent.
It is what it is. It was not a PC topic though, so they got a pass after being called out. But money talks.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> What do men bring to the table besides a knife and a fork that a woman cannot have outside marriage?


Typically, resources and utility which result in more security for a woman. Which if you've read my previous posts, you'd realize this has already been stated by me. 

And reflects that after most divorces, women are not financially better off than when they are married. Even when presented with a nice cash-out from the divorce. It's like lottery winners -- most are bankrupt within a couple of years because they never had to do the hard work to earn and manage it in the first place.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Dreald said:


> Typically, resources and utility which result in more security for a woman. Which if you've read my previous posts, you'd realize this has already been stated by me.
> 
> And reflects that after most divorces, women are not financially better off than when they are married. Even when presented with a nice cash-out from the divorce. It's like lottery winners -- most are bankrupt within a couple of years because they never had to do the hard work to earn and manage it in the first place.


So according to you, a woman brings nothing to a marriage and men only bring some $$?

This changing quite a bit. These days 70% of married women work with about 50% earning as much or more than their husband.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Cosmos said:


> :iagree:
> 
> I was going to post here saying how despicable I find it for a woman to deliberately thrust a pregnancy on a man, but I guess it isn't worth my feminist energy


And while sarcasm is all good, have you done anything to change this? Where are the female political activists demanding Family Court and divorce laws changed? The only ones I know of are the few ones who are adversely affected. Paltry in comparison to those who stand to benefit. Thus, why we probably won't see a change until the tables are turned -- then it will be, "We have to do something about this now!"


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

EleGirl said:


> So according to you, a woman brings nothing to a marriage and men only bring some $$?
> 
> This changing quite a bit. These days 70% of married women work with about 50% earning as much or more than their husband.


Perhaps, but women make 85% of household spending decisions, so whoever brings it in, statistically, 85% is controlled by the woman.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

When it Comes to Spending Decisions, Women are In Control


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Dreald said:


> And while sarcasm is all good, have you done anything to change this? Where are the female political activists demanding Family Court and divorce laws changed? The only ones I know of are the few ones who are adversely affected. Paltry in comparison to those who stand to benefit. Thus, why we probably won't see a change until the tables are turned -- then it will be, "We have to do something about this now!"


Generally, people (male and female) do not seek to change things until it affects them. That's human nature.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

The Top 30 Stats You Need to Know When Marketing to Women


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Dreald said:


> Okay, you discounted that video. Why no mention of The View video? If they don't represent the majority of women, why are the highest rated female t.v. show? Where were the mainstream articles, written by women, condemning such comments and behavior? Especially when so egregious?
> 
> To condemn one thing when it suits your prerogative and completely ignore an even more heinous display of genital mutilation acceptance, makes me sick too. On that we agree on.
> 
> ...


Don't even get me started on The View. Makes me cringe as well. I just can't watch that stuff. It is sensationalism and touting of bad behavior to a wide audience, which does no one any good. 

Dreald, reading what I wrote about the very idea of a woman tricking a man into having a child MAKES ME ILL, do I strike you as the type to shout "you go girl!" Do ANY of these rational women posting to your thread come off as women who would support that behavior? 

I genuinely want to know. Do we? 

Should I assume because you are a man like my stepfather, that you would try to rape me and defraud my mother? Because you are a man, that you will beat me? No. Because I've encountered some awful men does not mean I will assume YOU are an awful man. I would appreciate if you did not assume that I am an evil hypergamous sloot who is obsessed with the Golden Shower Ratio or my rationalization honey badger. 

And btw I'm married to a good man. And I don't like cats. But I do love wine! I guess you got 1 out of 3!


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

unbelievable said:


> Perhaps, but women make 85% of household spending decisions, so whoever brings it in, statistically, 85% is controlled by the woman.


Perhaps that's because 85% of men could care less about doing the grocery shopping, shopping for the children and household.

Your point seems to be that women are terrible and men are victims. We get your point loud and clear.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

Dreald said:


> P.S. Waiting for the "bitter/woman hater comments" that will surely come forth. All the while ignoring the supporting evidence of which my contention is made. It's all about "feelings", right? Such objective perspective....lol.


Do you really think women do not have our own struggles? Being "**** shamed" after a rape, being taught that the only thing that matters is how pretty and thin we are, women being harassed and looked down on STILL in some work forces, being looked at as b*tchy or bossy in positions of power? Come on now, there is _supporting evidence_ that both genders get crapped on. Get off your poor, poor men have all the bad luck idea.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

Dreald said:


> And while sarcasm is all good, have you done anything to change this? Where are the female political activists demanding Family Court and divorce laws changed? The only ones I know of are the few ones who are adversely affected. Paltry in comparison to those who stand to benefit. Thus, why we probably won't see a change until the tables are turned -- then it will be, "We have to do something about this now!"


I wasn't being sarcastic, I was stating a fact.

As for what I've personally done to try rectify some of the _many_ wrongs in this world? More than you will ever know, but crack on...


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

74.9% of women identified themselves as the primary shoppers for their households, according to MRI’s Survey of the American Consumer in Fall 2011.18
According to a study from the Boston Consulting Group, women in the U.S. reported “controlling” 72.8% of household spending and women in Canada reported “controlling” 67.2% of household spending.19


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Anon Pink said:


> WHO | Female genital mutilation
> 
> 
> What is FGM? - Desert Flower Foundation
> ...


More F'd crap. This is not funny stuff.


----------



## KathyBatesel (Apr 26, 2012)

Dreald said:


> And no, some people's behavior does not represent all. But if I saw where men routinely abused women, deceived them in order to gain resources, filed false charges, initiated divorce 70-90% of the time, used their children as pawns in legal proceedings, etc. I too would call them out for their behavior. And we're not even broaching the subject of State law that favors one gender over the other, are we?
> 
> *Dreald, I'm glad you said this. I've spent many years calling BS out. So here goes:
> 
> ...


*You would benefit from studying a bit about inductive vs. deductive arguments and logical fallacies. 

While SOME of your conclusions are accurate for a majority, and ALL of your statements are true for SOME, it's not reasonable to make blanket statements as if these are "facts" when you're failing to control for variables. 

Variables include "beliefs/values," "resources," "sex," "personal goals," "cultural norms," and "legal standings," just to name a few of the factors that can affect these outcomes. *


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> So according to you, a woman brings nothing to a marriage and men only bring some $$?
> 
> This changing quite a bit. These days 70% of married women work with about 50% earning as much or more than their husband.


Again, please go back and read through posts before jumping to conclusions. I clearly stated that women bring beauty and fertility to a marriage. More often than not, a woman marries "up" so the resources she has are usually not in play. 

I also find it funny that women are fully supportive when a woman who does have a decent amount of resources, is considered 'fiscally prudent' when suggesting a prenup from her husband. Yet will respond opposite when a man suggest a prenup by saying "he must not love you then". 

And yes, things are changing. I've not seen the 50% rate so if you could please provide a link to the article, I'd love to read it.

I have read where women are now receiving 60% of all degrees. This will not play out well later in life when they seek to marry a man with more resources and future earnings than her. There are exceptions, but hopefully even you won't deny that they are the common expectation and desire for a woman. 

Instead, we'll have even more women chasing fewer men who fit all of their 'criteria'. We've already seen studies where 80% of women judge the men shown to be 'unattractive' (yet for men it was evenly split). So for the 20% of men who are 'worthy' of a female's attention, they are going to have one hell of a fun time!


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Omego said:


> I read the last article. Good for that mother. And now I'm going to be totally un-PC. What The H***. It's crazy that this still exists....


Agreed. This is criminal.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

I would be wholly resentful if my H promised we'd have X amount of kids, then decided to take that back..if we were getting along well.. the marriage thriving and $$ not being an issue, of course...

Otherwise, that is a broken Promise, a betrayal of something that meant a great deal to one of us....we were counting on it...it was part of our Plan...our future together.... 

I didn't watch the video or read the replies on this thread.. but of course I would not support this deception.. . even if he did promise (though I would be highly upset & he would know- I'd still fight to resolve it honestly)...as otherwise this is asking for the sh** to hit the fan..

ME & mine discussed children before we ever married.. the deal was ...at least 3...and if one of those was not a girl, I'd want to keep going... Don't think many men would do this.. but he gave me a blanket *>>* "you can have as many as you want so long as you take care of them" (meaning not whining , complaining they were too much work, asking him to get up in the middle of the night , changing diapers, putting him on Daddy patrol).... He honored what he said to me.. and I honored my end.. we ended up with 6... (#5 was that little girl)...

Trust.. it's all about Trust.... be careful what you promise...and hold on to it. This would solve many marital ills..


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

unbelievable said:


> The Top 30 Stats You Need to Know When Marketing to Women


This does not distinguish between married and unmarried women. Keep in mind that about 60-70% of all households are headed by women. It would make sense that in these households, the women make the spending choices.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

KathyBatesel said:


> *You would benefit from studying a bit about inductive vs. deductive arguments and logical fallacies.
> 
> While SOME of your conclusions are accurate for a majority, and ALL of your statements are true for SOME, it's not reasonable to make blanket statements as if these are "facts" when you're failing to control for variables.
> 
> Variables include "beliefs/values," "resources," "sex," "personal goals," "cultural norms," and "legal standings," just to name a few of the factors that can affect these outcomes. *


The 95% comment was one made from observation in viewing the video. I only saw perhaps 15-20 women NOT clapping and the rest supporting it. I would estimate the studio holds well over a 120 people. There's no 'study' involved there so I'm not sure where you're going with that. Perhaps my 95% comment was a bit on the high side, but clearly the vast majority did support it and it's laid out for all to make their own judgement as to the exact percentage. 

And when inevitably presented with the NAWALT! argument, I did agree. There are exceptions, but the MAJORITY (and as evidenced by both videos), DO support deceiving your husband into having a child or laughing at a wife cutting off her husband's penis. The videos themselves support my statement. 

And while NAWALT!, the facts are, our legal system and society, supports any woman who later chooses to act like that. This needs to change. But I doubt it will because then you truly will have equality and let's face facts: folks want equality when it benefits them. But if they're asked to reciprocate, they're fine leaving things be.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Anon Pink said:


> Don't be such a scaredy cat entropy. Be substantive. Are you insulting TAM or are you suggesting the studio audience is a decent cross sampling of the prevailing modern attitudes found in Merica?


I did not even watch that video. I was just kidding. No deep social commentary.

You know me. I frighten easily as my ego is so small, limp and fragile. Last night I had to be read a story so I could go to sleep. Some warm milk and Bailey's. I threw away my MMSL long ago and I needed it last night. No the book was The Lion who ate the Peanut Butter. It centers me.

One day at time Anon. One day at a time. (((HUGS)))


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EleGirl said:


> Generally, people (male and female) do not seek to change things until it affects them....


...AND/OR, until they have the _resources_ to change.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

JCD said:


> Here. I fixed that for you. Yes, they still have applause signs.


Perhaps. Good point. So this may be more about sheep and peer pressure.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Starstarfish said:


> I've just got to say, if the response of your average Wendy Williams audience is actually the benchmark for human behavior, conversations about inter-gender politics are moot. We've turned the U-bend as a species and there is no coming back, we are approaching Idiocracy at warp-speed and there's no hope.
> 
> These are the waning days of the human race, behold and weep.


It all happend six times before.

Sometimes it feels like rather than cleaning up we just spread the dirt around. We fix one injustice by choosing another victim. That is the pessimistic view.

I see things like a pendulum. Progress is measured by the point at whcih the pendulum varies. That tends to be slow. Adaptations. To me anyway it is all Darwinian. Every adaptation has it day. But over the long term survival is what matters. Just my view.
Change happens and we have to deal with it. It's a process.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> And if men find themselves is a situation with a woman who abuses the system and acts like a manipulative b, should he not also look at his role in making that decision? Perhaps look less at women for "their beauty and fertility" and more for their character and self-worth. We are all responsible for the choices we make.
> 
> I've been a single Mother with 0 child support. I promise you it is not all sunshine and rainbows as you would believe. Sure there are some women (and men!) who live off welfare and abuse the system but their lives are not enviable. Is this really what you view as "winning"?


I don't believe he ever said it was sunshine and rainbows.

He stated that a woman who marries and has a kid outside of the agreement of her husband...who then USES that kid to leverage into his wallet for 18-23 years in the ensuing divorce is acting dishonorably. It is a kind of fraud.

If there is no agreement within the marriage to having a kid, she should be willing to pay for it herself.

This is not the case of a husband changing his mind. Once he agrees, he needs to pay some coin.

A simple legal ruling would help: if the man signs the birth certificate, he is 'accepting responsibility' to the baby. Absent that, the woman is 'on the hook'. With skin in the game, women would be more thoughtful about who they hooked up with. And men, if you REFUSE to sign but still try to stay with her...well...sleep lightly. You deserve all the pain you get.

At least that is the point that I am taking away, leaving his meds alone, no matter what their color.


----------



## soccermom2three (Jan 4, 2013)

unbelievable said:


> Perhaps, but women make 85% of household spending decisions, so whoever brings it in, statistically, 85% is controlled by the woman.


If my husband wants to take control of the grocery shopping, clothes shopping for the kids, school supply shopping, etc., he can have at it.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

soccermom2three said:


> If my husband wants to take control of the grocery shopping, clothes shopping for the kids, school supply shopping, etc., he can have at it.


I don't MIND doing chores. I hate to be told I am doing a chore WRONG, in that gray area 'this isn't the way _I_ do it" meme.

So, if you don't mind your kids wearing plaid, go ahead. If you insist on it getting done 'the right way' (i.e. yours), that isn't on him...

Just a word to women whose men suddenly seem less interested in chores than what he used to be...


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> This does not distinguish between married and unmarried women. Keep in mind that about 60-70% of all households are headed by women. It would make sense that in these households, the women make the spending choices.


Thanks for the link EleGirl -- it made for an interesting read. I wish the Forbes link still was active as I found the other ones (except for Inc.) to be blog posts and somewhat uncertain of the 'studies'. 

That said, here's what it said and my comments below:

1. The average American woman is expected to earn more than the average American male by 2028

*Not surprising that this will hold true and believe it will be. Already women comprise 60% of college degrees, some of which was affected by providing preferential admission treatment for women and minorities. The big question is whether women will want to be the primary breadwinner when choices are often between family or career for a woman. Taking time off to raise children, inevitably affects earnings and explains part of the wage-gap myth.*

2. 51% of U.S. Private wealth is controlled by women

*Is that through what a woman earned herself, brought into the marriage or received through marriage? There's a big distinction there. Controlled and earned are not the same and dovetails directly with the fact that women do make the majority of purchasing decisions in marriage. Men are taught to provide financial resources and is a primary selection when determining mating by a female, so no big surprise there. We also don't know what amount was earned by the late husband, but transferred to the surviving spouse.*


3. Women account for over 50% of all stock ownership in the U.S.

*Again, I wish it was more specific because it doesn't answer the question of who actually earned those stocks. There's a system of wealth transfer that exists in all relationships and generally it's the man provides this in order to attract and retain a suitable mate.*

4. Women control more than 60% of all personal wealth in the U.S.

*It'd be interesting to note the division you mentioned above: unmarried vs married. Also, if it could be defined by age. Most men die before their spouse, so again I believe the wealth transfer may be affecting this.*

I didn't address the remaining aspects of the article because it dealt with more of the marketing to women and their buying decisions than division of assets.

Like I said, it was an interesting read. There's no question we are experiencing a seismic shift in the roles women and men play in relationships and many of these age-old traditions will inevitably change as well. The bigger question is: when women 'have it all' will they be happy with the result?


----------



## Laila8 (Apr 24, 2013)

Sorry, but I don't get how any man can be "trapped" into a pregnancy. Did he willingly have intercourse and ejaculate into the woman without a condom? Then he was not trapped. It's more a case of him not taking responsibility for his own birth control. If he truly doesn't want a kid? He can 1) get a vasectomy or 2) abstain from intercourse or 3) use condoms.

And if the marriage or relationship is so bad that he knows he doesn't want to be with that woman or have kids with her, then why is he having sex with her in the first place?

These guys want to eat their cake and not get fat. Either eat the cake and accept you might get fat, or don't indulge in the cake!


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Starstarfish said:


> Ah, so men who haven't swallowed the "Red Pill" yet and got themselves a petite, beautiful submissive wife who is the co-pilot are Manginas and Blue Pillers.
> 
> Good to know where we stand on that. It's a Blue Pill versus Red Pill world like the Matrix, except minus all the hot S&M gear.
> 
> ...


I am reminded of American Woman and Tainted Love.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Starstarfish said:


> So not clicking that link, Entropy.


Do go ahead. It is from Big Bang Theory.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

JCD said:


> I don't MIND doing chores. I hate to be told I am doing a chore WRONG, in that gray area 'this isn't the way _I_ do it" meme.
> 
> So, if you don't mind your kids wearing plaid, go ahead. If you insist on it getting done 'the right way' (i.e. yours), that isn't on him...
> 
> Just a word to women whose men suddenly seem less interested in chores than what he used to be...


Wow...that brought a flashback from my marriage. Cupcake had to have everything done HER way and anything different (even if it resulted in the exact same outcome), was unacceptable. I believe she was somewhat BPD, which unfortunately a higher percentage of women have than men and it's an awful situation to always be walking on egg shells.

I also did almost all the cooking, grocery shopping, food planning, finances, yard work, and 30-40% of the cleaning. She did put clothes in the washer and folded them after they were dry. I guess that was something.... 

Unfortunately it's been shown that the more a man does what's traditionally been female responsibilities, the less interested she is in him to have sex. Guess what also was a problem for me in my marriage?


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

EleGirl said:


> What do men bring to the table besides a knife and a fork that a woman cannot have outside marriage?


Let's get real. Many men do not have a fork at all.

A dull knife maybe. Others cannot make up their mind and bring a broken plastic spork. Pitiful I say!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Dreald said:


> Unfortunately it's been shown that the more a man does what's traditionally been female responsibilities, the less interested she is in him to have sex. Guess what also was a problem for me in my marriage?


I've heard that, but that is not true for me. Whenever dh does something that makes me feel loved, whether taking me on vacation or washing the dishes, it just adds to my desire for him. And that desire is already pretty strong.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Laila8 said:


> Sorry, but I don't get how any man can be "trapped" into a pregnancy. Did he willingly have intercourse and ejaculate into the woman without a condom? Then he was not trapped. It's more a case of him not taking responsibility for his own birth control. If he truly doesn't want a kid? He can 1) get a vasectomy or 2) abstain from intercourse or 3) use condoms.
> 
> And if the marriage or relationship is so bad that he knows he doesn't want to be with that woman or have kids with her, then why is he having sex with her in the first place?
> 
> These guys want to eat their cake and not get fat. Either eat the cake and accept you might get fat, or don't indulge in the cake!


It simply wouldn't be an issue if a man could prove he was duped into thinking she was on birth control and lied, but made accountable financially for her decision. We all know that doesn't take place, despite her having 3 times as many birth control options as men do.

Again, what would be your reaction if a man duped his woman into thinking he was fertile when he had a vasectomy and didn't tell her? Here's an article from a legal website where the woman wanted to sue her ex because he lied about having a vasectomy. Can a man sue a woman because she lied about being able to get pregnant? If so, never heard of such a case. 

As to your other points -- spot on. Why shouldn't men just go seek a professional and not worry about pregnancy aspects at all? I don't condone it for myself, but I do understand the rationality of it. And why does a man have sex with a woman he doesn't want to be with or have kids with? Well, apart from the obvious reasons, it's the same reason why a woman will stay with a man if he provides sufficient resources that she cannot get if she pulls the big "D". It's what men want (sex) and what women want (security). That's not completely accurate in its entirety, but those two are at the top 3 for every man or woman.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

jld said:


> I've heard that, but that is not true for me. Whenever dh does something that makes me feel loved, whether taking me on vacation or washing the dishes, it just adds to my desire for him. And that desire is already pretty strong.


It's comments like these that give me hope for those men still interested in rolling the two-sided dice of marriage. Keep up the good work and be an example to your daughters and friends! 

I take it one of your 5 Love Language is Acts of Service?


----------



## soccermom2three (Jan 4, 2013)

unbelievable said:


> 74.9% of women identified themselves as the primary shoppers for their households, according to MRI’s Survey of the American Consumer in Fall 2011.18
> According to a study from the Boston Consulting Group, women in the U.S. reported “controlling” 72.8% of household spending and women in Canada reported “controlling” 67.2% of household spending.19


Yes, this is totally makes sense. I don't understand this argument. Part of the job of being a SAHM is to do the shopping for the household, so of course she's going to be primary spender. Heck, even when I was a WOHM, I did all the shopping for the household. My husband didn't want to do it.

If a man posted here that he worked full time and his wife was a SAHM but he did all the household purchases, grocery, clothing, etc. The men here would be telling him he's a Beta guy. Not one would say good for you, you've got control of the money.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

JCD said:


> I don't MIND doing chores. I hate to be told I am doing a chore WRONG, in that gray area 'this isn't the way _I_ do it" meme.
> 
> So, if you don't mind your kids wearing plaid, go ahead. If you insist on it getting done 'the right way' (i.e. yours), that isn't on him...
> 
> Just a word to women whose men suddenly seem less interested in chores than what he used to be...


"Do we have pans to cook with?" -- Bill Cosby


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Entropy3000 said:


> Let's get real. Many men do not have a fork at all.
> 
> A dull knife maybe. Others cannot make up their mind and bring a broken plastic spork. Pitiful I say!


LOL -- agreed in some cases, albeit rising with this upcoming generation it seems. I just hope that young, beautiful woman doesn't waste her youth on someone like him. Unfortunately, this doesn't appear to be the case given the rising marriage age stats. 

And results in articles previously referenced where those men who were dismissed earlier in life, now no longer want the used up party girl who squandered her beauty and assets on a worthless thug.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Dreald said:


> It's comments like these that give me hope for those men still interested in rolling the two-sided dice of marriage. Keep up the good work and be an example to your daughters and friends!
> 
> I take it one of your 5 Love Language is Acts of Service?


No, they are actually words of affirmation, quality time, and physical touch. Interestingly, dh's love language is acts of service, and so that is the first thing he thinks to do for me.

My desire for him is, again, all about feeling loved by him. The more he does for me, the more overwhelming love and gratitude I feel for him.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Do you really think women do not have our own struggles? Being "**** shamed" after a rape, being taught that the only thing that matters is how pretty and thin we are, women being harassed and looked down on STILL in some work forces, being looked at as b*tchy or bossy in positions of power? Come on now, there is _supporting evidence_ that both genders get crapped on. Get off your poor, poor men have all the bad luck idea.


Your perception of my post and why I made it is entirely wrong. I don't think that either gender has it 'easy' and we each are judged differently by both men and women. 

My point is that men are starting to realize that the risks inherent in marriage are so one-sided and when combined with a fairly common thought that men are clowns, some of us are choosing to live happily as a bachelor. Not foregoing women, but just unwilling to enter into a legal contract given the entitlement and legal precedence that benefits one sex over the other. 

It's my belief from what I've read, the articles written by women lamenting this fact and rising statistics, that men are moving away from a traditional perspective of marriage given what they've seen happen to their fathers, brothers, uncles or friends. 

I'm saddened by it. I do believe that a solid, loving and respectful marriage is one of the biggest blessings God could have given us. Unfortunately like most things government run, it's been bastardized by choosing one winner (women) vs loser (men) when divorce occurs. There are exceptions to this, but rare. My Mom's estate was one such example where her husband of 10 years got almost all of her assets. Complete NPD if I ever saw one.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Dreald said:


> LOL -- agreed in some cases, albeit rising with this upcoming generation it seems. I just hope that young, beautiful woman doesn't waste her youth on someone like him. Unfortunately, this doesn't appear to be the case given the rising marriage age stats.
> 
> And results in articles previously referenced where those men who were dismissed earlier in life, now no longer want the used up party girl who squandered her beauty and assets on a worthless thug.


My step daughter has married three of these so far.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Entropy3000 said:


> I am reminded of American Woman and Tainted Love.


How about American Beauty and when Kevin Space finally grew a set of balls and told his wife, exactly how she was treating him! The feigned look of shock and indignation by Annette Benning was classic!


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Entropy3000 said:


> My step daughter has married three of these so far.


Wow. I hope you weren't expected to contribute to any of her weddings!

And there's another topic to discuss one day -- the female entitlement of grandeur weddings nowadays! My how it's changed!


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> Perhaps that's because 85% of men could care less about doing the grocery shopping, shopping for the children and household.


Yeah, pretty weak argument (on unbelievable's part) IMO.


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

JCD said:


> I don't believe he ever said it was sunshine and rainbows.
> 
> He stated that a woman who marries and has a kid outside of the agreement of her husband...who then USES that kid to leverage into his wallet for 18-23 years in the ensuing divorce is acting dishonorably. It is a kind of fraud.
> 
> ...


The only change I'd make to this is that the State would require DNA testing to prove validity of the father who is signing the birth certificate. 

If the test proves not to be his, she receives no alimony and limited child support for a certain duration. But like that's ever gonna happen -- government might be on the hook for the kid even more than they are now, if they made it 'fair'.

And let's not forget legal precedence established by the courts, where even if you are NOT the biological Dad, the fact that you acted like one (even under fraud), you are now financially and legally responsible for the bastard child...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/07/15/georgia.child.support/

Or this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer

Unfortunately I can't find the article where an underage boy, (who was technically and legally 'raped' by a 32 yo woman), is later sued for back child support once he turned 18. Did the woman serve time? No. Was he required to pay child support for a kid that was conceived through a rape? Yes

Tell me again why a man nowadays wants the State to 'bless' his marriage through a legal contract that usually works against him and in one direction?


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

My wife and I have nearly the same education level and no doubt intellectual level as well. We both earn very similar amounts every paycheck. Before we got married we discussed how long we would wait before having children, five years. Check, did that... Before we were married we discussed how many children we would have, two was the number. Check, did that... No doubt there were unexpected issues and things along the way. For one, neither of us expected to have child born with a mental disability. We did not initially plan to send either child to private school. Needless to say, even with the unexpected along with a that we planned for, we dealt with every circumstance and situations like mature adults. The premise of tricking someone or being tricked seems to be a maturity issue to me.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

I don't watch the view because, wait for it, i'm at work. I have no idea who's even on it these days let alone what it says.

I'll keep in mind that I only bring a knife and fork to the table when i'm at work this week.
Geez, hard to believe some of these guys have marital trouble.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

Dreald said:


> Wow. I hope you weren't expected to contribute to any of her weddings!
> 
> And there's another topic to discuss one day -- the female entitlement of grandeur weddings nowadays! My how it's changed!


Trying not to thread jack.

She was a mini-me. Different circumstances than the article. My wife was married very young. But the premise is still there. I married her and raised this adorable little two year old as my own. My bio daughter is freaking awesome and I could not be more proud. Sigh. I do wish I had more of my own bio children.

I actually bought my step-daughter a home for her and her family. Got this guy a job. For the sake of the grandchildren. Two months in he fails a drug test and is in jail for seriously beating her. He also trashed the house. Ran the car I got them into a tree in the front yard. He jumped bail. I ended up evicting them because I said I could not allow myself to enable any longer and so on. My step daughter and her children could have stayed. I still love her. I always will. But I cannot fix her or even help her.

Tell me about nice guys. I did this against my better judegment because I love my wife and because the children deserved a chance. Naive? Sure. But unfortunatley for me ... I am that guy. There are no do-overs ... there are no do-overs ....

The lesson. Don't be me. I am fully accountable for doing this to myself.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Dreald said:


> No, one woman does not speak for all women which is why I commented on the crowd's reaction. The vast majority of them supported her deception. Assuming this is a random sample of women nowadays and they had no knowledge of the show's topic when they arrived at the studio, don't you think that it fairly represents women's mentality towards men today? How can you discount this type of reaction by trying to state it's only one person's opinion?


Given that it was a tv show, do you really believe it was not fiction?


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

Dreald said:


> The only change I'd make to this is that the State would require DNA testing to prove validity of the father who is signing the birth certificate.
> 
> If the test proves not to be his, she receives no alimony and limited child support for a certain duration. But like that's ever gonna happen -- government might be on the hook for the kid even more than they are now, if they made it 'fair'.



I would have no problem with mandatory DNA tests.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Entropy3000 said:


> Trying not to thread jack.
> 
> She was a mini-me. Different circumstances than the article. My wife was married very young. But the premise is still there. I married her and raised this adorable little two year old as my own. My bio daughter is freaking awesome and could not be more proud. Sigh.
> 
> ...


Sorry to hear this, ent. A woman has to be ready to give up an abusive man on her own. And it is so hard to be patient until she gets to that point.

Good you stopped the financial enabling. I am sure it was hard, though.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Dreald said:


> Wow. I hope you weren't expected to contribute to any of her weddings!
> 
> And there's another topic to discuss one day -- the female entitlement of grandeur weddings nowadays! My how it's changed!


Hmm. You think it comes from just the girl, not both? Or from their parents?

We spent $500 on our wedding, and it was the happiest day of my life. Dh wanted a big church wedding, but I did not. _I saved us a lot of money . . ._


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

jld said:


> Sorry to hear this, ent. A woman has to be ready to give up an abusive man on her own. And it is so hard to be patient until she gets to that point.
> 
> Good you stopped the financial enabling. I am sure it was hard, though.


It was a foolish last attempt on my part. Words cannot describe. My main concern is for the children.
But this is part of the reason I get upset over certain things like abuse. It hits home.


----------



## KathyBatesel (Apr 26, 2012)

Dreald said:


> Wow...that brought a flashback from my marriage. Cupcake had to have everything done HER way and anything different (even if it resulted in the exact same outcome), was unacceptable. I believe she was somewhat BPD, which unfortunately a higher percentage of women have than men and it's an awful situation to always be walking on egg shells.
> 
> I also did almost all the cooking, grocery shopping, food planning, finances, yard work, and 30-40% of the cleaning. She did put clothes in the washer and folded them after they were dry. I guess that was something....
> 
> Unfortunately it's been shown that the more a man does what's traditionally been female responsibilities, the less interested she is in him to have sex. Guess what also was a problem for me in my marriage?


I think you and I agree on many things, despite my arguing about your methods of presentation. What you wrote here is something I have seen a lot of men complain about. 

I think it boils down to whether or not we hold our partners accountable to the relationship. If we give (hold ourselves accountable) but they don't, and we don't REQUIRE them to step up by holding them accountable, there can only be one possible result - a loss of relationship quality. Same is true whether it's marriage, child/parent, parent/child, siblings, or friends.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Entropy3000 said:


> It was a foolish last attempt on my part. Words cannot describe. My main concern is for the children.
> But this is part of the reason I get upset over certain things like abuse. It hits home.


Of course it does. I hate abuse, too. And in my case, I have just seen it on women. That is why I am always pushing guys to step it up, and really love their wives.

We all come out of our own background, ent. Understandable. 

How are the kids doing, btw?


----------



## committed4ever (Nov 13, 2012)

Dreald said:


> No, one woman does not speak for all women which is why I commented on the crowd's reaction. The vast majority of them supported her deception. Assuming this is a random sample of women nowadays and they had no knowledge of the show's topic when they arrived at the studio, don't you think that it fairly represents women's mentality towards men today? How can you discount this type of reaction by trying to state it's only one person's opinion?


Haven't read this long thread yet, so sorry if this has already been brought up. But I think the initial reaction of the crowd was the real one. Go back and listen you will see that the initially gasped when she said that. I think the rather reluctant clapping when Wendy asked was just because she had already expressed her agreement. By the way, Wendy's husband cheated on her maybe 3 or 4 years ago and they reconciled.


----------



## TiggyBlue (Jul 29, 2012)

committed4ever said:


> Haven't read this long thread yet, so sorry if this has already been brought up. But I think the initial reaction of the crowd was the real one. Go back and listen you will see that the initially gasped when she said that. I think the rather reluctant clapping when Wendy asked was just because she had already expressed her agreement. By the way, Wendy's husband cheated on her maybe 3 or 4 years ago and they reconciled.


There are also signs directing audiences to clap, laugh, sigh ect on a lot of shows.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

jld said:


> Hmm. You think it comes from just the girl, not both? Or from their parents?
> 
> We spent $500 on our wedding, and it was the happiest day of my life. Dh wanted a big church wedding, but I did not. _I saved us a lot of money . . ._


Ours cost $7000, which we wrote the check for ourselves, and that was only because we could easily afford it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

KathyBatesel said:


> I think you and I agree on many things, despite my arguing about your methods of presentation. What you wrote here is something I have seen a lot of men complain about.
> 
> I think it boils down to whether or not we hold our partners accountable to the relationship. If we give (hold ourselves accountable) but they don't, and we don't REQUIRE them to step up by holding them accountable, there can only be one possible result - a loss of relationship quality. Same is true whether it's marriage, child/parent, parent/child, siblings, or friends.


We are indeed on the same page. My only comment is the desire for men and women to hold themselves equally accountable for their actions. One can clearly see just from a legal perspective, this is not the case for women. 

It sickens me when women stand up for other women, even when it's unjustifiable or in the case of The View, sickening, so as to maintain solidarity amongst the Sisterhood. This is also known as The P*ssy Pass....and it's shared among men as well. 

When you take away the social requirements of accountability for a woman, favor her in the courts of law, and provide for her financially (ala Big Daddy Government's entitlement programs such as WIC, SNP, Section 8, Foodstamps, etc), there's very little 'accountability' expected of a woman nowadays. Or at the very least, little repercussions of her actions and choices.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

jld said:


> Of course it does. I hate abuse, too. And in my case, I have just seen it on women. That is why I am always pushing guys to step it up, and really love their wives.
> 
> We all come out of our own background, ent. Understandable.
> 
> How are the kids doing, btw?


Another thread but people get abused. 
Women in certain ways but men in others. Sometimes the same way.
You just have to be able to see it for what it is.
There are things for men that trump physical abuse is what I am saying.
Also abuse is not always one sided.
The couples take turns in their own ways and escalate things.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

lifeistooshort said:


> Ours cost $7000, which we wrote the check for ourselves, and that was only because we could easily afford it.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Was this recently, life? And I am guessing $7k is considered pretty cheap now?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Entropy3000 said:


> Another thread but people get abused.
> Women in certain ways but men in others. Sometimes the same way.
> You just have to be able to see it for what it is.
> There are things for men that trump physical abuse is what I am saying.
> ...


Sounds like another thread idea. 

How are the kids doing?


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

Maybe I'm crazy, but I like grocery shopping.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

JCD said:


> Maybe I'm crazy, but I like grocery shopping.


Lol. I do, too.

When we're on vacation, I like to go in a local grocery store and just see how it is. Really fun in foreign countries.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

JCD said:


> If there is no agreement within the marriage to having a kid, she should be willing to pay for it herself.
> 
> This is not the case of a husband changing his mind. Once he agrees, he needs to pay some coin.
> 
> ...


I would agree that in the case of a woman _deliberately _tricking a man into having a baby, he should have the option of terminating his parental rights and responsibilities. But what about for everything else, just not wanting a baby but oops, you had unprotected sex anyway or a birth control failure or sometime during the pregnancy he just decided he wanted to walk away? These are far more common than women tricking men, a blanket law like this may save a few men but there would be far too many situations where it could be abused. 

If a woman has a baby with a man who doesn't want one, she is still "on the hook" and has to care for and raise a child on her own while the majority of the time not getting enough child support to cover half the expenses, sometimes none at all.

The amount of women who are rolling in the cash they tricked their way into getting from child support and lottery like pay outs is a minority. There's always going to be a few cases that are on the far ends of the spectrum but those shouldn't dictate all situations.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

jld said:


> Sounds like another thread idea.
> 
> How are the kids doing?


We are in touch with CPS or whatever they go by these days. The impact to the kids? TBD. The ones that were taken away from her years ago are doing well but mainly because they were taken away. Sad.

Moving on ...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Good point, SGC. I can't tell you how many marriages I know where there was a BC failure. In every one I personally know, the parents were glad they had the kid, timing or not.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Entropy3000 said:


> We are in touch with CPS or whatever they go by these days. The impact to the kids? TBD. The ones that were taken away from her years ago are doing well but mainly because they were taken away. Sad.
> 
> Moving on ...


Oh, geez, ent. So sorry.


----------



## MSP (Feb 9, 2012)

jld said:


> Why do you not like feminism, MSP?
> 
> I guess a better question is, how do you define feminism?


I'll tell you what I think, without exactly answering your questions:

 Men and women are of equal value as human beings and deserving of equal dignity. 

 Men and women have biological differences that affect how we emotionally respond and make certain choices.

 Due to our biological differences, men are better at some things than women and vice versa. 

 Our differences should be celebrated rather than seen as a highlighting of the other gender’s weaknesses. 

 Modern society is anti-family and causes division between the sexes.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

MSP said:


> I'll tell you what I think, without exactly answering your questions:
> 
> Men and women are of equal value as human beings and deserving of equal dignity.
> 
> ...


Could you elaborate on the last point, please, MSP?


----------



## Dreald (Aug 30, 2012)

Since I first started this topic and interested in a lively debate, I've had several hours to think about things and came up with what *I* think is a decent analogy and hopefully redirects things from a personal attack against me, but to reflect on the state of relationships today. 

We've all heard of the KnockOut Game where typically young, black males cowardly hit an unsuspecting victim if they are White. It's not that the victims are always White, but more it's the exception rather than the rule that they're not. 

White folks are afraid of pointing out the absolute insanity and injustice of this for fear of being labeled a racist. Major news outlets won't carry it (or if they do, prevent comments/discussion) for fear of promoting racism. Black leaders have to-date, largely ignored it and simply stated that it's an isolated occurrence (sound familiar ladies?....NAWALT?). I mean, come on folks -- several people have died as a result and many others have permanent disability as a result). 

IMO, it's a display of what a generational impact occurs when the family unit is utterly decimated. We all know that over 70% of Black males are born out-of-wedlock; for White's it's 40% and rising. Yet I have heard little to hold the Black family accountable; particularly young Black males. Nor has the White community addressed it either. What you were once socially obligated to do (even by force via 'shotgun wedding' by the pregnant woman's father), the government has now taken their place. 

We also don't hold Black or White females for their role in bringing in a child into this out-of-wedlock. Typically it's rationalized that he should have worn a condom or stay abstinent. There are over 9 birth control methods for women, all of which may now be obtained without parental consent. It's not working out like we had hoped when the man is always held accountable and she is not. Thus the rising rates of out-of-wedlock births. Women are largely the gatekeepers of sex; Men of commitment.

But like the hypocrisy that I've addressed in this thread, there are still a majority of folks who've responded in similar ways as how we've responded to The KnockOut Game. It's either dismissed as an 'exception', shaming/personal attack (i.e. 'racist' in the above example), ignored completely or otherwise rationalized because of some prior injustice served on them. I find little interest in holding women accountable to the same degree that men are held to -- both socially and legally. Yes, there are *always* exceptions but just because you personally haven't been affected to it or have a different experience, it cannot be denied that men are abstaining from wanting to enter marriage and women are deciding to post-pone marriage with a belief that Mr. Big will be right there to scoop them up when they're ready. 

Men should be stepping up and wanting to have a family. There's an issue where a segment of our younger generation both here and in Japan, where they've refused to grow up and accept the responsibility of being a husband and father and focus on providing for the family. But they also need some greater reassurance through our Government that they won't be fleeced should she decide she wants out nor tricked into having a baby he doesn't want. Government should severely limit it's incentive to have a marriage out of wedlock and make both the man and women accountable by limiting the amount of money and services delivered. What was once provided as a temporary measure of support, has now turned into decades of entitlement passed from generation to generation. 

Until we start talking about the obvious disparity between proper responsibilities of both sexes, and excuse one gender over another, we'll continue to see the same declining marriage rates. It's my belief that in the not too distant future, we'll have primarily two classes of folks getting married: the very poor and the very rich. One is wealthy enough to afford it (even with divorce, etc.); the other relies on government programs to provide for it with no repercussion for their poor decisions such as determining whether they can provide for additional children or not. 

I guess I'm just not so clear on how anyone can be so entrenched in an idea because it doesn't suit their narrative. I've been on both sides, complete Blue Pill and believed everything that mostly my Mom raised me to believe. My folks are good midwestern folks who were married over 25 years. My Mom remarried a great guy who was my Stepdad for over 15 years before he passed. And then she married a complete tool who essentially was just after the lifestyle she could provide for him while she was alive and took her estate to the cleaners when she died.

I tried marriage, it was an expensive lesson. I wish I could say the same for cupcake. I've read a lot from MMSL and how to improve myself. I've read His Needs, Her Needs, The 5 Love Languages, No More Mr Nice Guy, etc. I've spent a lot of time here initially and some manosphere blogs. I'm not saying I know everything or have complete perspective, but I am saying that there appears to be a growing problem in men wanting to marry and women expecting an alpha when they want an alpha and usually a beta to pay for their life lessons. Trying to stifle discussion through shaming tactics, personal attacks or perspective only through one's own experience and unwilling to entertain others, IMO is harmful for society. I just wanted to hear the general consensus of this forum and indeed I have. I've come away a little more wiser as a result...which further's my resolve. But I'm not opposed to being wrong -- I truly hope for the next generation, I am. 

Good night ya'll!


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

Dreald said:


> No, one woman does not speak for all women which is why I commented on the crowd's reaction. The vast majority of them supported her deception. Assuming this is a random sample of women nowadays and they had no knowledge of the show's topic when they arrived at the studio, don't you think that it fairly represents women's mentality towards men today? How can you discount this type of reaction by trying to state it's only one person's opinion?


I don't think you get my point. It doesn't fairly represent women at all because of the TYPE of person that would sit in an audience of a talk show, or even WATCH it. You will not ever see me sitting in an audience on one of those shows; does it therefore fairly represent all women? I don't feel it represents me at all. Just so you know, I'm not all that different to many women I associate with.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

jld said:


> Was this recently, life? And I am guessing $7k is considered pretty cheap now?


Three years ago. We dated for 6 years before we got married and yes, I think that's pretty cheap these days. That includes the $450 I paid out of pocket for my dress. We didn't have a wedding party either.....just his daughter and my 2 sons stood with us. We had about 75 guests; mostly friends.....it was a great party 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

I don't see how more rules and regulations are going to change people's mentality. This thread is an example of how we as a society are perpetuating the cycle that leads to the denigration of a sex as a whole. Whether it is about men or women, the goal is the same. The typical, he says, she says debates that are ultimately born from resentment.

Hold up the women you most deplore as a 'common' example of a woman to your children and who do you think they will emulate?


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

> Yes, there are always exceptions but just because you personally haven't been affected to it or have a different experience, it cannot be denied that men are abstaining from wanting to enter marriage and women are deciding to post-pone marriage with a belief that Mr. Big will be right there to scoop them up when they're ready.


Uh, or women are deciding to post-pone marriage to go to college and have careers because the end run of their universe isn't getting married when their father won't feed them anymore.


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

Starstarfish said:


> Uh, or women are deciding to post-pone marriage to go to college and have careers because the end run of their universe isn't getting married when their father won't feed them anymore.


That's exactly right. It's easy to make broad sweeping statements that the reason less people are choosing to marry is because men don't want to get screwed over in a divorce (and I've seen this written on this board a few times already) but in reality there will be many different reasons from both men and women for postponing marriage, or choosing to never get married at all.

It's also easy to say that laws should be changed or brought in that stop men from having to pay child support for children they didn't choose to sire. You might think that would make women more careful in regards to birth control. If that were the case, wouldn't men be more careful right now? Yet they are not. It may be a deterrent in small percentage of cases where a woman has fallen pregnant to trap a man, but again, maybe not. It's the attitudes that need to be changed.

Bringing in shows that celebrate the dregs of our society and holding them up as a model for all that come after, trying to encourage people to believe that this is how society as a whole is, that this is how women are in general, does this help or hinder our goals to foster intelligence, morality, loyalty and honesty?


----------



## Adeline (Jan 24, 2014)

I can't really comment on the video as I can't get it to open, so i'll just comment on the topic of women getting purposely pregnant without the partner knowing. I have a friend who did this. But at the time she was not married. She kept meeting great guys and then they'd dump her within a few months. And she'd be so heartbroken because she was really into them. She desperately wanted to be married and have a family. So, she started trying to get pregnant once she'd find a guy that she was into. I'm talking just a few months in to the relationship, without children even being on the guys' radar. She'd have pregnancy "scares" and she'd take frequent tests, but always negative. And soon after the relationship would end. She just wouldn't take her birth control, but would say she was. She did this with 2 guys unsuccessfully, and then by the 3rd guy she had a "scare" early on like clockwork, but it was negative, and this time the guy still stayed around... so a couple months beyond that she had another "scare" and this time she was actually pregnant! Only known each other for 5 months, and cites that her birth control "failed." Continuously, apparently.

They ended up getting married down the road and they do actually seem happy together, though I'm not as close of friends with her anymore so I'm not sure. So in her mind, her plan worked, unfortunately. She got pregnant and had her happily ever after. I just couldn't imagine trying to get pregnant to tie someone down that I didn't know very well and without their knowledge, simply because they seemed like a good guy. She just was tired of waiting. Anyways, I know it's not the same as the OP situation as they seemed to be married and whatnot, but some people were wondering if women actually did do this thing of tricking their men into getting pregnant. And I'm here to say that yes they do, I know of one personally.


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

I don't remember anyone questioning the possibility that a woman would/could trick a man into getting her pregnant; though I'm not going to read through every post again. The question is, did you applaud her efforts? Did you tell her, 'you go girl!'. Do you believe that a majority of women in our society would tell her this?


----------



## Adeline (Jan 24, 2014)

breeze said:


> I don't remember anyone questioning the possibility that a woman would/could trick a man into getting her pregnant; though I'm not going to read through every post again. The question is, did you applaud her efforts? Did you tell her, 'you go girl!'. Do you believe that a majority of women in our society would tell her this?


oh, I think I may have formed that notion myself as people were talking about the audience agreeing or not and being an accurate sample population statistically... and the thought just popped in my head, hey! I know somebody who would agree. Sort of a roundabout conclusion now that I think about it. Sorry!

No, she was somewhat coy about it with me. The first 2 guys were several years ago. She would express her disdain to me of really liking a guy and them bailing. She'd tell me she wasn't very consistent on taking her birth control and would skip entire months a lot but "oh well, a baby would be amazing." Then she'd tell me it ran out but she didn't want to tell them. She would buy birth control tests even before her "scares." She'd be thoroughly disappointed and cry when they were negative. We were much younger then, and I guess her vague logic kept my concern at bay for a while. Finally though, with the 3rd guy (now her husband) and she had a pregnancy scare just 2 months after meeting him, I did say something. I told her she needed to be more diligent in taking her birth control, because I was scared for her (I hadn't even met this guy as we were no longer living in the same state). That is when she was more clear with me, telling me she knew this was the guy and would not be scared starting a family with him. At first I took this to mean that he was all about this baby thing, and she told me no... but he'll come around. That's when I realized this all... I told her to be careful, please date this guy for longer... but she didn't listen. I guess I didn't chastise her, but I did feel scared for her. Somehow, it turned out all right for her I suppose. 

I should hope the majority of women would not support this. But I know that a lot of people do. "Have a baby and he'll stay." "Having a baby will make everything better." I even have a different friend telling me this. She doesn't tell me to trick my husband, but she has told me to have a baby since it changed her marriage for the better apparently.


----------



## alphaomega (Nov 7, 2010)

What's really amazing is that there's 13 pages of posts arguing on a topic represented by a Jerry springer type television show.

I'm going to go watch "the ghost adventurers" now because we all know that's actually real stuff there! They even have a little device that beeps when a ghost comes in the room, so it has to be real...


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Dreald said:


> The only change I'd make to this is that the State would require DNA testing to prove validity of the father who is signing the birth certificate.


I’m ok with DNA testing. But I think it should be voluntary, not a requirement. If a man does not trust his wife, then he can get the test. If he does not get the test then he accepts the age-old law that says that a man is the legal father of all children born to his wife. 


Dreald said:


> If the test proves not to be his, she receives no alimony and limited child support for a certain duration. But like that's ever gonna happen -- government might be on the hook for the kid even more than they are now, if they made it 'fair'.


There are already court cases in the USA and Europe in which men are able to relinquish paternity if DNA test prove that the child born to his wife is not his biological child. With reliable DNA tests the laws and the courts are starting to change.

I’m all for making changes in the laws, though this will have to be very carefully considered since the person who will be hurt the most is the child.

In a case when the baby is not her husband’s… the baby could be the result of a rape. Most married men will divorce their wife if she is raped. Rape is a marriage killer… lots of reasons but won’t go into that here. It’s very hard to 100% prove that most rapes were indeed rapes. Usually the victim of a rape is blamed by those around her. So should a woman who gets pregnant from a rape, and then loses her marriage over it be further punished with no financial help if she needs it to get back into the work force?

There is another scenario, the one where the husband gets his affair partner pregnant. In the case of women like myself and many of those I know, we earn a lot more than our husbands. Would we still need to pay alimony, or will alimony be cut off to the husband when he gets his affair partner knocked up?



Dreald said:


> And let's not forget legal precedence established by the courts, where even if you are NOT the biological Dad, the fact that you acted like one (even under fraud), you are now financially and legally responsible for the bastard child...


You know, if a man found out that he was not the bio dad in the first year of a child’s life, I can understand him walking away from the child. I have no respect whatsoever for a man who would raise a child and then years later be willing to throw that child away and disown the child. It’s generally not in the best interest of the child.



Dreald said:


> Unfortunately I can't find the article where an underage boy, (who was technically and legally 'raped' by a 32 yo woman), is later sued for back child support once he turned 18. Did the woman serve time? No. Was he required to pay child support for a kid that was conceived through a rape? Yes
> 
> Tell me again why a man nowadays wants the State to 'bless' his marriage through a legal contract that usually works against him and in one direction?


What does the rape of an underage boy have to do with that state blessing marriage? This particular case is about rape laws, not marriage. I think that the court made many wrong decisions in this case… all related the fact that it’s almost impossible to prosecute a rape case and even when it is prosecuted the rapist has rights to the child.

Laws in most states do not protect female rape victims when they get pregnant from the rape. It’s not uncommon for a rapist to get visitation and even shared custody of the child from a rape.
Teen Embroiled in Horrifying Joint Custody Battle With Her Rapist

Many States Grant Convicted Rapists Custody Rights; Not Missouri and Arkansas, Due to New Laws | KSMU


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

alphaomega said:


> What's really amazing is that there's 13 pages of posts arguing on a topic represented by a Jerry springer type television show.
> 
> I'm going to go watch "the ghost adventurers" now because we all know that's actually real stuff there! They even have a little device that beeps when a ghost comes in the room, so it has to be real...


:iagree: no kidding... :scratchhead:


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Adeline said:


> I can't really comment on the video as I can't get it to open, so i'll just comment on the topic of women getting purposely pregnant without the partner knowing. I have a friend who did this. But at the time she was not married. She kept meeting great guys and then they'd dump her within a few months. And she'd be so heartbroken because she was really into them. She desperately wanted to be married and have a family. So, she started trying to get pregnant once she'd find a guy that she was into. I'm talking just a few months in to the relationship, without children even being on the guys' radar. She'd have pregnancy "scares" and she'd take frequent tests, but always negative. And soon after the relationship would end. She just wouldn't take her birth control, but would say she was. She did this with 2 guys unsuccessfully, and then by the 3rd guy she had a "scare" early on like clockwork, but it was negative, and this time the guy still stayed around... so a couple months beyond that she had another "scare" and this time she was actually pregnant! Only known each other for 5 months, and cites that her birth control "failed." Continuously, apparently.
> 
> They ended up getting married down the road and they do actually seem happy together, though I'm not as close of friends with her anymore so I'm not sure. So in her mind, her plan worked, unfortunately. She got pregnant and had her happily ever after. I just couldn't imagine trying to get pregnant to tie someone down that I didn't know very well and without their knowledge, simply because they seemed like a good guy. She just was tired of waiting. Anyways, I know it's not the same as the OP situation as they seemed to be married and whatnot, but some people were wondering if women actually did do this thing of tricking their men into getting pregnant. And I'm here to say that yes they do, I know of one personally.



Of course those men who she tried to trick were stupid enough to sleep with a woman who they did not know and trust that she was not some wacked out nutcase who lied about the birth control she was supposed to be taking. I have 2 sons. What I tell them is that they have responsibility too.. it's not all up to women to protect them from having children that they do not want.

Yes there are some women who do lie about being on birth control with the intent of getting pregnant.

However, the point of this thread is that ALL women support tricking men into getting them prego or support the idea when other women do it.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Dreald said:


> We also don't hold Black or White females for their role in bringing in a child into this out-of-wedlock.


What do you suggest we do to hold women accountable for having children out of wedlock? 


Dreald said:


> Typically it's rationalized that he should have worn a condom or stay abstinent. There are over 9 birth control methods for women, all of which may now be obtained without parental consent.


All of the birth control methods available to women, except getting tube tied, can fail. 

A good number of them mess up a woman’s hormones and cause her physical and even emotional problems. Thus many women cannot even take them. I’m one who could not take birth control pills and similar chemical concoctions.


Dreald said:


> It's not working out like we had hoped when the man is always held accountable and she is not. Thus the rising rates of out-of-wedlock births. Women are largely the gatekeepers of sex; Men of commitment.


Why do you think that women are not held accountable when they get pregnant? Seems to me that they are being held accountable in that they generally raise the children.

It sounds like what you want is that a man only be held accountable for a child when he wants to be accountable and that he has the choice of ending any accountability at any time of his choosing.



Dreald said:


> But like the hypocrisy that I've addressed in this thread, there are still a majority of folks who've responded in similar ways as how we've responded to The KnockOut Game. It's either dismissed as an 'exception', shaming/personal attack (i.e. 'racist' in the above example), ignored completely or otherwise rationalized because of some prior injustice served on them.


You started this thread with saying that ALL women (yes you said All I have that quoted in one of my posts) will trick a man into getting her pregnant and/or support this.

To use your knockout game analogy… it would be the same as you saying that all black people either engage in the knockout game or support those who engage in the knockout game. We all know that this is just not the truth. We know that it would be a HUGE insult to most black people to actually mean that allegation.

In the same way, it’s an insult to most women to make the allegations you did about all women and that stupid video. It’s a stupid video with a Jerry Springer kind of audience. And you want to use it to brand all women. 



Dreald said:


> Trying to stifle discussion through shaming tactics, personal attacks or perspective only through one's own experience and unwilling to entertain others, IMO is harmful for society.


Attempting to start a discussion by using shaming tactics (all women are agreement with and/or will trick a man into pregnancy) and saying things like women don’t’ bring anything to marriage (except what was it beauty and fertility) is pretty shoddy. 

There is NOT ONE woman on this thread who support the idea that women should trick men into pregnancy. There is not one woman here who thinks that a man should be forced to support a child born of his wife’s infidelity. NOT ONE. We all would support laws that allowed a man to terminate his paternal rights in this case. ALL OF US. But you do not accept that… why? Because it does not fit with your men are all victims and women are all (whatever … liars who use men?) way of looking at the world.


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

> All of the birth control methods available to women, except getting tube tied, can fail.
> 
> A good number of them mess up a woman’s hormones and cause her physical and even emotional problem. Thus many women cannot even take them. I’m one who could not take birth control pills and similar chemical concoctions.


Well or you stay on them anyway and ride the storm because he feels BC is your problem. (Many a man has posted here on TAM that getting married means he refuses to use condoms, and that he'd rather not have sex than use them.) He then comes to a place like TAM and complains about how you've gained weight and are emotional - and people will instruct him how you've abandoned your martial duties, are in a love affair with food, how you are obviously BPD and a "raging psycho" and he should divorce you ASAP. 

It's just more convenient for the woman to worry about birth control because there are more ways for her to gain weight, lose her hair, get adult acne, and get emotional and get labeled a harpy hag.


----------



## Openminded (Feb 21, 2013)

Many, probably most, males have traditionally felt birth control was a female's responsibility because we are the ones who get pregnant. In the days before DNA testing, males could just deny paternity if they felt like it and walk away. 

I chose to have my tubes tied at 30 because I didn't want more children. My husband was opposed to having a vasectomy and I felt something needed to be done. I didn't like the pill, although I was on it for years, and I had had a miscarriage after getting pregnant while using an IUD. So, since I was the one who had to risk getting pregnant, I went through an invasive procedure to permanently take care of it. Yes, it would have been easier had my husband gotten a vasectomy but he wasn't going to.


----------



## larry.gray (Feb 21, 2011)

GusPolinski said:


> Wow. This is actually pretty impressive.


I'm not sure which is the more impressive - the success rate or the willingness to use them that long. We both hate them, and they definitely reduce the enjoyment for us. I'm betting that wifey and I have used them maybe 50 times tops in our relationship. We've only used them when other forms of BC are questionable.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Starstarfish said:


> Well or you stay on them anyway and ride the storm because he feels BC is your problem. (Many a man has posted here on TAM that getting married means he refuses to use condoms, and that he'd rather not have sex than use them.) He then comes to a place like TAM and complains about how you've gained weight and are emotional - and people will instruct him how you've abandoned your martial duties, are in a love affair with food, how you are obviously BPD and a "raging psycho" and he should divorce you ASAP.
> 
> It's just more convenient for the woman to worry about birth control because there are more ways for her to gain weight, lose her hair, get adult acne, and get emotional and get labeled a harpy hag.


Yep, that sounds like what the pill does to many woman... plus it pill usually seriously reduces a woman’s sex drive. So the guys complain about that as well. 

Then there is the IUD. I got a infection from. The stupid male doc told me that the infection was not a problem since it would ensure that I could never have children. I made that stupid man remove it. But the damage was done. This infection was probably at least part of the reason that was never able to carry a pregnancy to term. 

Birth control should be a shared responsibility.. not something just put off on the woman.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> There is NOT ONE woman on this thread who support the idea that women should trick men into pregnancy. *There is not one woman here who thinks that a man should be forced to support a child born of his wife’s infidelity. NOT ONE*. We all would support laws that allowed a man to terminate his paternal rights in this case. ALL OF US. But you do not accept that… why? Because it does not fit with your men are all victims and women are all (whatever … liars who use men?) way of looking at the world.


Um...not to disagree too much, but we have at least TWO who are quite happy to shame a man into supporting his wife's little bastard...and probably wouldn't lose a bit of sweat if the court ordered the man to pay for the little bastard...and would even thing this was a meritorious judgment.

They, however, are VERY MUCH the exception.


----------



## Created2Write (Aug 25, 2011)

AnnieAsh said:


> The day that trifling, ratchet Wendy Williams represents ALL women is the day I build a rocket ship and move to Mars. I abhor her and the fact that people seem to think she embodies what a black woman is.
> 
> Tricking a SPOUSE into a pregnancy (men do it too) is disgusting and low and undermines what a marriage is. I think a vast majority of women would agree. We aren't evil succubi sent to drain men of their money and self-respect.
> 
> ...


Just have to quote this post again! VERY well said!


----------



## Created2Write (Aug 25, 2011)

AnnieAsh said:


> JCD, the only sisters I have are the ones from my mother. And since I only have a brother, I HAVE NO SISTERS. I refuse to be held responsible for what crazy biotches do. I am raising my daughters to be good, moral, HONEST women, the way my mother beat it into me. She was a single mother who taught me that a woman stands up and takes care of her own and does not point fingers at other people for her screw-ups.
> 
> I will not unilaterally support bad behavior of a few women because we happen to have the same plumbing. I absolutely refute that crap that is spread across the internet about women and their so-called devilish ways.


And this one!


----------



## Created2Write (Aug 25, 2011)

I'm prefacing this post, which will be my only further contribution to the thread, with this: deceit on any scale in a marriage is horrible, but especially when it involves the innocent life of a child, is made even more abhorrent. I am firmly against women _and men_ tricking their spouse into having a kid, whether they wanted kids before or not, whether they agreed to have kids or not. Either get yourselves into MC, or just divorce and find someone who wants kids. Why make the kid suffer by forcing them on a man or woman who won't cherish them? 

That said....

I had an IUD when I first got married. I had consistent and continuous problems with it throughout the three and a half years that I had it, which included _horrible_ cramps 99% of the time, which meant I was taking maximum doses of ibuprofen or tylenol every day. We didn't have medical coverage at the time, so we couldn't afford to go in and get it checked out. Eventually, it fell out. When having it inserted, we were told that 1 out of every 100 women who had an IUD, got pregnant. It's not 100% accurate. 

I was then put on BCP, which effected not only my moods, but my physical comfort. It made intimacy extraordinarily painful. I went off of it and tried yet another BCP, and it made my moods even worse than the first. I can't be on the pill, or anything with a large amount of hormones. When starting the pill we were told that it's not 100% accurate, even when used correctly. Even when coupled with condoms, it's still not 100% accurate at preventing pregnancy. 

The chips inserted into the arm, the shots, the vaginal rings, condoms, spermicides, diaphrams, female condoms....their accuracy is even less. Just because women have these methods available, doesn't mean they will successfully prevent pregnancies. Even coupling more than one together isn't, and can't be, 100%. The only two 100% accurate methods are vasectomy's(assuming the man follows his doctors orders and abstains long enough to ensure the procedure worked) and tubal ligations. I was told that tubal ligations were permanent and couldn't be undone, so this is not a viable option for a woman who wants kids some day. 

What are we left with? _Vasectomies_. If a man doesn't want kids, then he should either take care of his own BC, or be willing to accept the consequences of taking the risk that comes with either unprotected sex, and even protected sex in the cases of any protection that isn't 100%. Assuming that a woman who is on BC and then gets pregnant must have been tricking her husband is massively presumptuous. Unless a woman is willing to give up her chance of having biological children, there is no form of BC _she_ can use that will guarantee no fertilization. So, man up.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

JCD said:


> Um...not to disagree too much, but we have at least TWO who are quite happy to shame a man into supporting his wife's little bastard...and probably wouldn't lose a bit of sweat if the court ordered the man to pay for the little bastard...and would even thing this was a meritorious judgment.
> 
> They, however, are VERY MUCH the exception.



Glad you included the last sentence, because there are a few real misogynistic pieces 'o sh!t on this site and I'd hate to think mankind is judged based on them.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Created2Write said:


> I'm prefacing this post, which will be my only further contribution to the thread, with this: deceit on any scale in a marriage is horrible, but especially when it involves the innocent life of a child, is made even more abhorrent. I am firmly against women _and men_ tricking their spouse into having a kid, whether they wanted kids before or not, whether they agreed to have kids or not. Either get yourselves into MC, or just divorce and find someone who wants kids. Why make the kid suffer by forcing them on a man or woman who won't cherish them?
> 
> That said....
> 
> ...


Yep. Best decision I ever made . After I had my kiddos but being single and having that a non worry is awesome


----------



## Jadiel (Oct 10, 2012)

I haven't read every last post in this thread, but I had a few thoughts of my own on BC...

First, it seems that women in general have more options. Men can have surgery, women can have surgery. There are condoms for both, there's only the pill for women, but mostly, women have the option to opt out with no consequences.

That's the crappiest part. It seems the general attitude is this: "BC is a shared responsibility...MEN ITS ALL YOUR FAULT!"

Also annoying is this conversation I seem to hear from a lot of people:

Woman: I'm pregnant!

Man: Noooooo that's a bad idea. We can't afford a kid, we don't have time for a kid, we don't have room for a kid, we are in no condition to take care of a kid and we honestly don't want a kid.

Woman: Screw that this will be awesome! I can't wait! This will be the best thing ever!

9 months later...

Woman: OMG this horrible! We never have any money or free time or anything and can't sleep and it's horrible! 

Man: <shakes head>


----------



## Diesel_Bomber (Mar 17, 2013)

Wife tried trapping me just this very same way now I have absolutely ZERO trust with the bc end of things. I had one foot out the door on the marriage due to her childish behavior yet still had high hopes she would grow the f&&k up. Then boom I'm pregnant! To this day she doesn't understand the resentment I have for her trying to make life changing decisions for me. 

I wear a glove and she throws a temper tantrum, and I know exactly why..."so how would you feel if there was an oops?" 

Probably as pissed off as your baby daddy was when you tried trapping him with the "oh I didn't know antibiotics cancelled out the pill" excuse. 

I realize that not all women are looking for a phat cs check and using a kid as leverage against the baby daddy....but a man has a lot more to lose. It's Russian roulette in the sack.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Nikita2270 (Mar 22, 2014)

> Notice that Wendy Williams indicates to go ahead and trick him -- that it's okay because he said he wanted a second child. Notice the crowd reaction (almost 100% entirely female) when she asks whether they agree that she's completely justified in deceiving her husband. From the crowd's reaction at least 95% enthusiastically agree. I guess HE doesn't have a right to change his mind, but it's a female's prerogative to do so. She has full rights to abort his baby however. He has no say but financially responsible if she decides to keep it.


Real quality TV show that's definitely representative of the thoughts of all women. Just like Maury Povich is representative of the fact that no woman ever knows who the father of her baby is. (By the way, I actually had no idea who Wendy Williams was until about 2 minutes ago).

Dreald...I actually have to commend you because each post I read from you is actually incrementally more illogical and emotion-driven than the last which must be hard to accomplish given the state of your posts. 

You are the ultimate scorned male....you just LOATHE womenkind. I actually would like to meet your ex...she really did a number on you. I imagine she gets great satisfaction from her work.

So my question for you remains the same as the last time I responded to one of your posts. Since you clearly have such a general disdain and mistrust of all women...why don't you just stick to having relationships with men?


----------



## Nikita2270 (Mar 22, 2014)

> We've all heard of the KnockOut Game where typically young, black males cowardly hit an unsuspecting victim if they are White. It's not that the victims are always White, but more it's the exception rather than the rule that they're not.


Why be just a misogynist when you can be double-down and be a racist too?


----------



## Dredd (Apr 16, 2014)

Recognizing that certain ethnic groups are responsible for a majority of crime doesn't make one a racist.


----------



## larry.gray (Feb 21, 2011)

Created2Write said:


> I had an IUD when I first got married. I had consistent and continuous problems with it throughout the three and a half years that I had it, which included _horrible_ cramps 99% of the time, which meant I was taking maximum doses of ibuprofen or tylenol every day. We didn't have medical coverage at the time, so we couldn't afford to go in and get it checked out. Eventually, it fell out. When having it inserted, we were told that 1 out of every 100 women who had an IUD, got pregnant. It's not 100% accurate.


I hesitate to add C2W, knowing the pain you are in. Your prior IUD use may have contributed to the miscarriages. I presume they didn't talk much about that when you got them. They were presented as a panacea with little risk. The reality is that a fair number of women end up unable to carry children to term because of them. 

I would STRONGLY recommend women who intend to have children later never use them. I also pray that you are eventually able to carry a child. You're going to be a great mother some day!


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

larry.gray said:


> I hesitate to add C2W, knowing the pain you are in. Your prior IUD use may have contributed to the miscarriages. I presume they didn't talk much about that when you got them. They were presented as a panacea with little risk. The reality is that a fair number of women end up unable to carry children to term because of them.
> 
> I would STRONGLY recommend women who intend to have children later never use them. I also pray that you are eventually able to carry a child. You're going to be a great mother some day!


I was told that women who haven't had children shouldn't use them, though the above wasn't stated as a reason. I went with a copper IUD to try and avoid the hormones however I then realised copper toxicity (often misdiagnosed as anaemia) is a very real concern after having one... doh.


----------



## phillybeffandswiss (Jan 20, 2013)

I bit, my bad.


----------



## DoF (Mar 27, 2014)

jld said:


> Well, we've been using condoms for 21 years and have never had an accident.


Sorry to hear


----------



## Starstarfish (Apr 19, 2012)

Dredd said:


> Recognizing that certain ethnic groups are responsible for a majority of crime doesn't make one a racist.


Like how white males love white collar crime? Do you feel better being fleeced by a guy in a suit driving a Massarati stealing your retirement with insider trading?

But seriously, given the talk about slipping standards of humanity, race baiting definitely doesn't show ignorance. Keep being classy.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

Starstarfish said:


> If the husband doesn't want more children, and is firm in that stance, he shouldn't put himself into the position of being tricked. All kinds of jargon filled social commentary are unnecessary. You don't want children, take personal responsibility for your birth control.
> 
> If you want to maintain your reproductive authority, practice it.


:iagree:


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

what an interesting thread based on a vapid talk show. It's a real shame to see people in the audience clapping for this sort of thing. The world is just crap anymore.It seems the good people are fading away and letting the dishonest ignorant a**holes take over.The examples of good women and good men are getting harder and harder to find when googling statistics for behaviors. 
It's really sad


----------



## DoF (Mar 27, 2014)

ScarletBegonias said:


> what an interesting thread based on a vapid talk show. It's a real shame to see people in the audience clapping for this sort of thing. The world is just crap anymore.It seems the good people are fading away and letting the dishonest ignorant a**holes take over.The examples of good women and good men are getting harder and harder to find when googling statistics for behaviors.
> It's really sad


It's been like this for centuries.....


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

DoF said:


> It's been like this for centuries.....


There seemed to be a higher number of honest people who wanted to do the right thing. Yes,we hear about all the horrible folks of the past bc it's easier to dwell on the negative people but there just seems to be something different inside of people now that wasn't as prevalent before.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

Dredd said:


> Recognizing that certain ethnic groups are responsible for a majority of crime doesn't make one a racist.


Are those certain ethnic groups truly responsible for the majority of crime or do other ethnic groups simply get off easier? Could the statistics get muddled by higher rates of reporting the crimes done by certain ethnic groups and harsher/higher rates of prosecuting the perpetrators of certain a ethnicity possibly?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

DoF said:


> Sorry to hear


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

ScarletBegonias said:


> Are those certain ethnic groups truly responsible for the majority of crime or do other ethnic groups simply get off easier? Could the statistics get muddled by higher rates of reporting the crimes done by certain ethnic groups and harsher/higher rates of prosecuting the perpetrators of certain a ethnicity possibly?


All ethnic groups have their dirtbags that commit crime. The differences can be in the types of crime...one of the funniest discussions I had with my high school students when I was still teaching was about this. I'm white and most of them were inner city blacks and country boy type whites. It was around the time the Asian kid shot up Virginia Tech and the students were expressing surprise that an Asian had done this. It led to a great discussion on the crimes committed by different groups; I remember saying that pedophiles are usually white (at least in the us) and one of my black students spoke up with "yeah, and we do the drug crimes". We all had a good laugh and while I don't think it's universally true that one ethnicity has a lock on a particular type of crime it was good for the atmosphere between us.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Created2Write (Aug 25, 2011)

larry.gray said:


> I hesitate to add C2W, knowing the pain you are in. Your prior IUD use may have contributed to the miscarriages. I presume they didn't talk much about that when you got them. They were presented as a panacea with little risk. The reality is that a fair number of women end up unable to carry children to term because of them.
> 
> I would STRONGLY recommend women who intend to have children later never use them. I also pray that you are eventually able to carry a child. You're going to be a great mother some day!


Thanks larry. That means a lot.  I've actually thought a lot about the IUD lately, and wondering if that's what has caused my two losses. I want to go in and get an examination or have a test done to determine whether or not the IUD did contribute, but I'm not sure if my hospital will allow that, or if they'd even admit to it if they did. I didn't have really severe issues, like some women have. I didn't have to have it surgically removed, for instance, but scarring my cervix or uterus would be enough to effect carrying a pregnancy to full term, and I sometimes wonder if I have one of those side effects. I wish I had never done the IUD. It was such an ignorant decision I made based on the word of one woman I barely knew, and the fact that it was free while I was under my parents medical coverage.


----------



## Created2Write (Aug 25, 2011)

breeze said:


> I was told that women who haven't had children shouldn't use them, though the above wasn't stated as a reason. I went with a copper IUD to try and avoid the hormones however I then realised copper toxicity (often misdiagnosed as anaemia) is a very real concern after having one... doh.


I didn't think they'd allow me to get an IUD when they found out I'd never had kids, because I read that women who'd never had children weren't supposed to get them. I asked anyway on the off chance that they made an exception, and they didn't even ask if I'd had kids before signing off on it. When I asked them, "Will it matter that I've never had kids?", they said, "Nope. Not at all." and that was the end of it. And, of course, I wasn't told at all about the long term consequences of using it, and how it could effect a woman's chances of having a healthy pregnancy.


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

Hey C2W--you should be able to request a pelvic ultrasound from your OB/GYN. I would imagine that it would be pretty difficult at this point to say that an IUD that has been out for quite some time (it sounds like) was specifically responsible for anything, but they could take a look and see if there was any scarring that might indicate a problem. 

I had a pelvic ultrasound a couple of weeks ago and it was pretty amazing all the stuff they could get a look at and that they found... It could at the very least bring you some peace of mind about what's going on down there.


----------

