TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Parents of dead man who's testes were removed by fiancé will oppose any attempt by fiancé to use his sperm.

actingverystrangely

May 31, 2016
51 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-31/dead-man's-parents-to-oppose-any-bid-by-fiance-to-use-sperm/7461464
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Parents of dead man who's testes were removed by fiancé will oppose any attempt by fiancé to use his sperm.
Author

actingverystrangely

Upvotes 51
Comments 22
Date May 31, 2016 2:34 AM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4lt0i4/parents_of_dead_man_whos_testes_were_removed_by/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/parents-of-dead-man-whos-testes-were-removed-by.948488
https://theredarchive.com/post/948488
Top posts by actingverystrangely

Man posts one star Google review of feminist-run cafe that charges men 18% 'man tax' premium.

1617 upvotes
June 13, 2018
/r/MensRights

A rare victory; Australian charity bows to public pressure and does not proceed with event featuring Clementine Ford

979 upvotes
May 14, 2018
/r/MensRights

Gillette handles sold at half price in a supermarket in Australia

478 upvotes
February 4, 2019
/r/MensRights

"Men still represent four out of five suicides, but this is a major increase in women taking their own lives that needs urgent attention"

437 upvotes
May 31, 2015
/r/MensRights

Analysis of a tantrum: Serena Williams

124 upvotes
September 8, 2018
/r/MensRights

Photographs from today's March for Men in Melbourne

116 upvotes
August 25, 2018
/r/MensRights

False rape allegation? Well, err, state broadcaster doesn't actually use those terms, but...

115 upvotes
September 16, 2015
/r/MensRights

Intergenerational equity; "because women didn't have the vote for x years, men today should be punished". Straw man, fair, or bonkers?

81 upvotes
February 17, 2019
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]fengpi 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A WOMAN SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING SHE WANTS WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S BODY.

/s (obv)

[–]actingverystrangely[S] 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

At last some modicum of common sense.

""The uncertainty associated with it has caused them significant distress and both the parents are receiving ongoing counselling in New Zealand in order to assist them to cope with this very stressful time of their lives," he said. He said Ms Patteson's application took them by surprise. "There was very little time for anyone to consider their position at all," he said.

Does this imply they regret not opposing her wish?

"My client was only aware of the fact that the application was being made within a few hours prior to the courts actually being convened to hear the decision."

[–]FFXIV_Machinist 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

that was what i took from the article. that she requested his testicles be removed postmortem, mere hours after he died, and the family had no idea until the courts were almost ready to talk about it, giving them no real time to consider, or hire a lawyer.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Who would be responsible to pay her child support in such a situation?

The government, I'm guessing. Then again, she's already taken his testicles, so why not shoot for gold and sue a dead man for child support as well?

[–]pvtshoebox 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Child support is not paid because it is the child's right. If this were the case, the government or someone else would owe non-needs-based payments to any single custodial parent, like widowers or those who use artificial insemination. These payments are not made, though, indicating that their lack of payment does not disenfranchise the child's rights.

Despite the "official stated reason," child support payments, it seems, are not owed to the child, but obligated by the father. If he exists, he must pay (out of fairness to other fathers or in retribution for his non-custodial status). If he does not exists, there is no lesson to be taught, no unfairness to other fathers, hence, the child is owed nothing.

[–]omegaphallic 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is an excellent point.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Child support is not paid because it is the child's right. If this were the case, the government or someone else would owe non-needs-based payments to any single custodial parent, like widowers or those who use artificial insemination. These payments are not made, though, indicating that their lack of payment does not disenfranchise the child's rights.

This is from the Queensland government's web page on family payments and support. There are a number of flat fee or X weeks pay benefits on the page, and there are further income-based benefits that this woman could also take advantage of.

So, after a couple of minutes scrolling, this woman could be eligible for:

  • $5,000 if it's her first child, or $3k thereafter
  • 18 weeks paid leave if she has a job
  • Parenting Payment of up to $737.10 per fortnight (based on means)
  • Family Tax Benefits; lots of conditions here, but another $300 per fortnight and a flat fee at the end of financial year are up for grabs
  • Single income family supplement of at least $300, but I would've had to go through Centrelink to work that one out so I didn't bother

Then you keep going down, sections on help with medical costs, help with education costs, rural / remote communities costs, and I didn't read the tax and deceased estates page either.

Not sure what the situation is where you live, but I also live in Queensland, and I can assure you that if a single parent is raising a child, either the other partner will be paying child support, the government will via all the benefits and payments in the link above, or it will be a combination. The only situation where that wouldn't occur is if the single parent doesn't apply for these payments / benefits.

[–]boringcarpets 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, so we can add another thing to the rights men don't have - even when dead the vultures won't leave us alone! Take take take

[–]Rethgil 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Men. Your sperm is not legally yours, your kids are not legally yours, your money is not legally yours. Your home is not yours, your possessions are not yours. THEY ARE WYMMNZ WHENEVER THEY CHOOSE IT TO BE.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They weren't even married. How the fuck could the court allow her the balls?

[–]omegaphallic 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The question is would the dead man be okay with it. If he left everything to her in the will I'd be okay with it. Honestly I'd be okay with it period if it was my son whose balls she took.

If a woman wanted my balls after I'm dead, be my guest, as long as she didn't kill me that is.

I wonder if a male fiance could take his dead fiance woman's ovaries?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think most reasonable people would not interpret "everything" to include someone's testicles.

[–]rg57 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

News has really sunk in quality.

The correct French term for a female engaged to be married is "fiancée". We do not accent English, so the correct term in English is "fiancee". The second "e" is not optional, in either language.

Only a handful of transpeople are the world are capable of being a "fiance" who can bear a child.

Ultimately, I do not care about this case. What happens to a dead person's body (beyond destruction of evidence, or health risk to others) is irrelevant.

[–]actingverystrangely[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

From the point of view of his parents, what happens to their son's body is very relevant. The point about organ donor cards is surely that unless we consent, the body cannot be posthumously mutilated.

As far as we know, he did not consent to posthumous mutilation, so why is his case different?

PS Your point about grammar is well made!

[–]Rethgil 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't care you claim? Yet you cared enough to read the post, the article it referred to, and then post a thought out reply yourself? Um, I call b*llocks.

[–]bgibson8708 -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I don't think there's anything to see here. This seems like a woman who loved her husband to be a lot and now would like to see a part of him carried on. If they were married already I think it would be less of an issue.

[–]actingverystrangely[S] 13 points14 points15 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I would agree with you if:

  • he carried an organ donor card

  • he had consented to posthumous mutilation

  • he had consented to 'his' child being raised without a father

You may wish to reflect upon the fact that your observation is perfectly valid if you consider what his partner wanted, but is somewhat less fulsome in exploring what the man himself might have wanted.

We don't know that he did want be have his sperm harvested, or that he did not want his sperm harvested. But we now know that the only person who's opinion matters was a woman he met 200 days previously.

As ever, can you imagine he reverse situation? No, nor can I. A nuanced problem with no clear answers either way. The court's judgement appears precipitate to me, and creates an unfortunate precedent in which men might be more valuable dead than alive.

[–]rg57 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The dead do not exist, and therefore their consent is (and ought to be) irrelevant in all cases.

[–]Rethgil -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh I see you posted AGAIN, after claiming 'you don't care'?! Are you either a weak whiny teenager, or someone with an obvious biased agenda lamely trying to hide it?

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure, but you can't just turn a blind eye to violations of bodily autonomy when it makes a good story. A hospital cannot use those organs unless he has signed his donor card - PERIOD - but we're going to turn a blind eye for his fiance? She's got no legal standing with his estate, at all. Intent to marry is not married.

[–]dungone 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Fiancé" is not the same as "husband".

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter