Tagged: ABC, Australia, chad, chadspawn, Child Support, entrapment, Feminist, Financial abortion, gynocracy, Jane Caro, Nanny State, should men be able to opt out of parenthood, single mothers, welfare
- 2016-12-04 at 5:20 PM#362859+9
Interesting article on the ABC – Financial abortion: Should men be able to ‘opt out’ of parenthood?
The proposal is that men have the option to cut all financial obligations and father’s rights in instances of unplanned (or entrapment?) pregnancy.
I am of two-minds on this.
1) Half of my mind supports the end of financial slavery (via child-support) of men who are duped into fatherhood by women who lie about using contraceptives, are flippant in their use, poke holes in condoms, collect a man’s used condom for DIY artificial insemination, f~~~ the whole college football team at a frat-party and try and pin the kid on the gullible beta boyfriend etc. We know the type.
2) The other half of mind sees this as Vagina Magnetization Scam 2.0 (VMS VS2.0). With men increasingly wise to VMS 1.0, the birth-rate is dropping in many first-world countries and women are having a harder time finding walking wallets to fertilize their eggs.
Feminism is backfiring. Women now have all the tools they need to extract resources from men with the welfare Nanny state, the Family Court System, the Child Support agencies etc. – BUT the major catch is getting a man to fertilize those eggs. Without a baby, the VMS in a non-starter without impregnation of the Golden Uterus. Plenty of PUA players out there, but too many are ‘drinking the milk without buying the cow’ (no marriage, no kids, no commitment).
In desperation, the gynocracy are now proposing a system where men are given the illusion of an ‘option’ not to pay for unwanted children, leaving the State (ie MEN) to pick up the tab via welfare.
But we all know this is a lie – men, including fatherless men like me, pay for children every day through our taxes which fund the Nanny State welfare system. We already know women pay no tax, so this proposal would effectively shift an even greater taxpayer burden to working men like me and away from all the Chad Thunderc~~~s who will execute ‘Financial Abortion’ at the first opportunity. F~~~ and forget, rinse-and-repeat. Good for Chad, but not good for my bottom line.
This leaves me paying f~~~loads more tax to raise unwanted Chadspawn under a system that the feminist author Jane Caro describes as “more empowering for women”.
To quote the article –
“I have recently come to the conclusion that, as a feminist, I support men being able to opt out of fatherhood early in a pregnancy via what is known as a financial abortion.
I believe a woman should not be forced to become a mother any more than a man should be forced to become a father. If a man has not said, “I want to have a child with you now-ish”, it is fair to assume he doesn’t, and therefore should be able to legally withdraw from becoming a parent.
It would also be less traumatic for children, and more empowering for women.
There is an unspoken assumption that a woman has no responsibility to consider the practicality or financial viability of having a child because it’s “the man’s job” to provide for his family. But this kind of thinking is founded in oppressive heteronormative values and belongs in the 1950s.
The word “responsible” comes up whenever fatherhood does — the idea that men should “step up” and “do the right thing” and support their own flesh and blood. But surely the best thing for men to do is be honest up front if they don’t wholeheartedly want to become a father?
If a child is born to a sole parent in this country, they are, along with the mother, a vulnerable Australian citizen who deserves to be supported by our government if need be.
Unfortunately, there is still an expectation in society that men should provide for women; indeed, many women and men prefer and expect it.”
#ManOut2016-12-04 at 5:52 PM#362869+5
I believe a woman should not be forced to become a mother any more than a man should be forced to become a father
who can FORCE a woman to be a mother ?
but a man can be TRAPPED in to it.
i am therefore pro opt out.2016-12-04 at 9:18 PM#362976+2
The husband probably figured he’s better off in jail.
“Somebody needs to PAY, for AAAAAALLLLL my children”
I’m not even gonna go there.2016-12-05 at 12:32 AM#363027+2
Wait for the law to be actually be implemented before wasting brain cells on it.
There is no magic in MGTOW, just recognition of the truth and logical decision how to avoid dangers. The red pill is but the truth, it is no magical potion. Do not think in this modern world men have no longer have natural enemies, men are prey to women and government.2016-12-05 at 4:24 AM#363081+1
The husband probably figured he’s better off in jail.
That’s my conclusion. I’d let the state pay my room and board, if that same state raped me of my family, home, money, and any chance of getting a good job ever again.
Besides, the company is morally superior to the types I’ve met in the corporate world.
Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?2016-12-06 at 9:03 PM#364591+1
If this law gets passed its a big win for mgtow.
no more baby trapping, c~~~s who do that will find themselves quickly dropped.2016-12-16 at 10:08 AM#371605
Just because I am a cynical old bastard.
The Government will figure out a way, based on an obscure interpretation of what ever they write to place the financial burden back on the father/assumed father.
Any legislation drawn up will be worded in such a fashion that the “spirit” of the idea can and will be easily over ridden by “interpretation” of the written word, and/or based solely in public opinion, in which only women will be “polled” of course.
Unless cultural, societal, parental, moral, ethical, and financial obligations are legally disassociated from the pregnancy/child/mother, and are all inclusive, there will always be an open back door for the financial rape of the unintended father.
Again, women, society, and the Governments have yet to “offer” choice or custody of a child (wanted or not) first to the father (usually, not always, but usually the best person to financially support a child).
Financial obligation does not remove parental obligations < big bet on that line being used.
There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it2017-11-17 at 1:31 PM#666834+1
“Someone needs to be held accountable”??!! How about YOU be held accountable for popping out kids one after the other like a damn fool! Look at the age of those kids! This garbage woman had to have been consecutively pregnant for 14 years straight!
UGH!I feel sorry for the kids. They had no say.. but DAMN. Why should the burden of the irresponsible always fall on the responsible???
I have ONE child with ONE woman and I decided HELL NO to having anymore. She on the other hand has decided to have THREE MORE children with another dude (her husband after we broke up) who cant keep a job and makes almost zero money to support them especially now because shes on disability. It maddening! My kid will be 18 in 5.5 months…. Im counting down!!!
#ICETHEMOUT!!! #MANOUT!!! #HIDEYOURWEALTH #VAGINAISWORTHLESS2017-12-14 at 5:10 PM#691699+2
I don’t believe we will ever see a law like that passed. Why? Because it goes against the female imperative.
Most of us here at MGTOW are quite aware of the gynocentric system in which we live, and the power that system gives to women because of their supposed victimhood. Taking away a woman’s right to force a man into parenthood (and subsequent financial obligation to her) would be a significant blow her hypergamous nature, and would be viciously opposed by feminists.
Think about it…why is there no male birth control similar to the female birth control pill? Imagine what western society would look like today if a male birth control pill was created in the 60s. I suspect MGTOW wouldn’t even exist. If women lacked the unilateral ability to trap men with children, we would be living in a significantly different world – one that does not serve the female imperative.2018-01-07 at 5:39 PM#710608+1
The ramifications of this are 2 fold.
1. It helps poor women with guys they can’t snag
2. Allows them to continue the welfare system
3. Gives men the illusion of freedom, and therefore combats men leaving the plantation.
4. Absolves women of parental responsibility. Rewarding them for bad choices and shielding them from public scrutiny.
5. It allows women better options to cheat, use men, and not be held accountable.
6. In reality, the nation will say no, but every province can say yes. Or smaller cities, etc.
7. Gives women MORE JOBS IN THE STATE so they can keep their jobs since the current system is going to be phased out with no children to pump into the system.
8. Drugs addicts and those that benefit from all OUR hard work will be happy to take advantage of this. THis allows foreign and other men to have all the power in YOUR family, while you still get stuck taking care of her.
9. SINGLE HIGHSCHOOL MOMS. THIS IS WHO IT DIRECTLY BENEFITS!
10. Women in the future are going to have to start paying child support since the kids will not want to stay there. Women who have sons are LEAVING their moms house in DROVES and so are daughters when they turn 13. THIS IS DIRECTLY SO THAT WOMEN DON’T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR KIDS.
11. It allows men to feel safe, and get back to the plantation again. But knowing the government, the deal is not going to be as sweet as you think.
12. The country is changing, and the old judges are going to be forced the f~~~ out. THESE WOMEN KNOW WHAT IS COMING THEY READ MGTOW.com as well.
13. THese women who have druged their kids and f~~~ed them up are going to extended the child support to age 26 or higher so that they can have a longer time on welfare. SInce many children or to f~~~ed up to even leave home, or have been “diagnosed” with a disability, this allows these women to still live high on the hog.
14. It gives who want to have a DOwny Baby Child SUpport. So IVF can be a thing in the future, and can be paid by the state overtime with payments from the state. This increases single moms.
15. This allows further female control of the state.
16. Women like my ex’s daughter will be able to live with the guy they want, and not have to worry about him staying around and supporting her. Since the kids child support will be paid by the rest of us.
17. Encourages child abuse.
18. Gives women more financial power over men.
19. THe BLACK community will continue to thrive with crime while f~~~ing over every black kid that wanted a way out. THIS REASON ALONE should be enough to say F~~~ THAT. All black men and women who let this slide should be CASTRATED ON SITE. SO many of these young minds got killed or are f~~~ed over for life at the abuse they suffered from the welfare state.
20. Drug addicts have now a life long way to get money for their drugs. Both men and women just got to get pregnant to have drug money.
This whole idea is f~~~ed. Nothing in it benefits men. We guys still pay out of our asses. Hell all that child support money almost never goes to the kid.
I know this cuz on my sons birthday, his mother sent him over in WOMENS CLOTHES. I AM NOT KIDDING. for my just turned 11 year old kid.
Lastly, this benefits men who want to have large families, and not be accountable for them. This will Benefit mormons, but there at least a good part of scotity.
THe people who you have to worry about is the Immigrants THIS OPENS UP THE FLOOD GATES TO WELFARE FOR THESE WOMEN. END OF STORY.
THIS IS NOT FOR YOU. NOT FOR WOMEN ITS TO FURTHER ROB MEN AND MAKE US RESPONSIBLE FOR OTHER MEN AND WOMENS CHILDREN.
THis again is ALL FOR THE STATE. And I guarantee you that those paying child support are still going to pay. And all those men put in jail for it are not going to get their pay back either.
I am the last one to tell others to care about other children. The betterment of the world is my business. But if you have boys, this is going to FURTHER f~~~ over their futures.
However, I do see more men leaving these states that do this. But again. How many men like us abandon our children. WE DON’T. SO WE PAY THE PRICE.
Be careful. Every law they pass is NEVER for our benefit. BEsides, the family courts still have all their power, so NOTHING WILL CHANGE.
You are all alone. If you have been falsely accused of RAPE, DV, PLEASE let all men know about the people who did this. http://register-her.net/web/guest/home2018-06-06 at 3:51 PM#821156+1
I’ll put my stance as simply as i can since it’s quite long.
A couple can decide to give up a child for adoption.
A woman can decide to abort.
If the woman decides not to do either of those, the man is instantly enslaved according to the choice of the female.
In no other facet of society can someone else choose to enslave a person.
The court justifies it using the original act of sex as an unbreakable agreement to support a child. This is archaic and needs to be undone.
Murph ~ There is nothing brave or manly about entering into a contract with somebody which allows them to take your money, assets, children, and decades of your future income on a mere whim.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.