Laws to protect men from paying child support for children that aren't theirs is now "slut shaming" and "punishing women"

omegaphallic · 2016-09-02T10:44:43+00:00

This is a misuse of the term slut shaming. Nothing in any of this is saying women have fuck who ever they want, only that men are entitled to know who the real father is and that a guy who isn't the father isn't stuck with the bill.

rektHav0k · 2016-09-02T13:36:42+00:00

From cruel schoolyard taunts to a child about his mother, to the possible threat of abuse a mother might be exposed to if her past is revealed in such a heated situation (from either male partner), it is not hard to imagine how the shock waves of a law like this may affect lives for the worse. And if these relationships have been violent, abusive or involved drug and alcohol misuse, then the potential is far worse.

LMAO. But the indentured servitude of the man is fine? For a child that's NOT HIS? Laws like this can't be written fast enough.

BDMR_lurker · 2016-09-02T09:53:20+00:00

Women (some women) really need to process that DNA paternity testing is very affordable, and will become cheaper as time goes by.

The days of 'no harm, no foul' are over.

.

such a law would only harm women and their children.

True in a way.

What harms men in these cases is simultaneously discovering that your wife is a lying slut, and that one of/all your kids are not biologically yours. This law would bring no further grief to men, but little relief.

Of course, to add insult to injury, men are made to keep on paying for a wife that never was faithful, and kids they may or may not want to consider theirs.

Kids in these situations, they are fucked, law or not.

So yeah, some women have a lot to lose with such a law, and the underlying idea that men are entitled to a modicum of respect.

Then again, laws are meant to be detrimental to crime, it's the big idea.

.

This draft is far from perfect. What if the woman refuses to divulge? What if the biological father doesn't know about the kid?

Frankly, I think it's stupid, and the only sane approach is to mandate paternity testing at birth, no support owed if negative. But this would be costly for the State.

But at least it puts some (abysmally small) amount of responsability on women's shoulders: in this age of readily available contraception and abortion, there is no excuse for their behaviour.

.

Edit: spelling

Edit2: I was too elliptic on my take of the 'cost for the state' part. So there.

"paternity testing at birth" is not the costly part. "No support owed if negative" is.

Let's be real, we ain't gonna drown the kid like some unwanted kitten. Little critter has to be fed. And dressed. And educated. Overall provided for.

.

Now the usual way the state provides for a child is to pin the cost on the parents. You do have a legal, opposable obligation to feed and care for your kids.

"No support owed" cuts the man out of this little scheme. I'm assuming he's not sticking around. And that he won't be the custodial parent.

Which leaves the mother. Who, by all count, may not be the most upstanding person. She cheated on her spouse. And tried to stick him with a kid. Knowing there would be a DNA test. Probably not too bright.

Odds that she can feed the kid: not good.

Odds that the state has to extend welfare: high.

So, costly.

.

Still, you could expect that the guarantee of being caught would curb down on 'paternal discrepancies'.

Counting on people to have a modicum of sense: not a safe strategy.

unbelievablepeople · 2016-09-02T10:45:33+00:00

I despise this term "slut shaming," which is being used to deprive men of the ability to defend themselves.

If you're sued for paternity and you demand a DNA test because the woman had multiple partners, the comeback is "Slut shaming!"

If you're accused of rape and your defense is that the sex was consensual, the comeback is "Slut shaming!" How dare you claim she wanted it!?!

I don't like the word "slut" and I don't think anyone, man or woman, should be "shamed" for any sex that's between consenting adults. But I absolutely believe men accused of rape or sued for child support have the right to present evidence that the woman consented to the sex or that the woman had sex with someone else. If we deprive men of that right, we're saying men don't deserve fair trials when they're accused by women.

mundayz · 2016-09-02T14:19:06+00:00

So, forcing a man to pay child support for someone else's kid is okay but searching for the real father is "putting women on the scaffolds"? What a joke.

jmg83 · 2016-09-02T13:49:25+00:00

If "making women take responsibility for their actions" = "slut shaming", then so be it.

Saintmyname · 2016-09-02T11:38:17+00:00

I was at the Reddit feminist forum and could not believe their reaction to this law. They were all like, is this really a problem? Or, fatherhood doesn't need to be biological for bonding to occur. I could not fucking believe it. MRA and MGTOW did way less to upset me than the feminists have. They don't want equality over there. They're winning a war.

DoItLive247 · 2016-09-02T14:06:21+00:00

Prevent the mess in the first place. Make testing mandatory as part of the battery of tests that are already done after birth!

redditorriot · 2016-09-02T09:07:58+00:00

Jo Fox is a former ALP political advisor, including on the status of women.

Jo Fox is a dangerous, misandrist cunt.

Meistermalkav · 2016-09-02T13:23:51+00:00

Great fucking law. a+. would law again.
slut shaming: as opposed to fiscal stability shaming? I mean, lets watrch it like adults, right? what was the reason these men were good enough to pay for your kid, but not good enough to make it?
Endangers women. Nope. It endangers men.
My personal law that I would do if I were king of germany for a day? It is 100 % within the rights of the woman to not immediatelly alert the biological father, because a situation can be more complicated then a law can ever imagine. BUT, if there are demands levied against the father, like alimony, child support, or so forth, they can only be levied against the biologoical father. So, before such a request becomes just, the father is nentitled to a paternity test, performed by state certified labs. If everything checks out, the father has to pay for the test, if nothing checks out, the state will pay for the test. That leaves the woman with an option: either, forego the demands, and live off of state assistance or other means, or place the demands against the actual father. But the law protecting demands against a complete stranger the woman may have had sex with, shit, no juidical protection at all. Plus, what I absolutely recognise, the woman has the right to not reveal the identity of the real father, as the fake father now has a right to not pay.

lostapwbm · 2016-09-02T12:51:42+00:00

But, writes Jo Fox, such a law would only harm women and their children.

While the situation that the law is intended to remedy only harms men. But Feminism means EQUALITY, amirite?

Its purpose, according to Justice Minister Heiko Maas is "to offer more legal protection for 'sham fathers' to seek recourse".

Recourse against the biological father, not against the lying bitch. How again does this "harm" women?

And while Hester Prynne refused to divulge the father to the Puritan society she lived in to protect him...

Her cuckolded doctor husband figured it out anyway and slowly killed Dimmesdale anyway. If Prynne had named Dimmesdale, rather than allowing him to stew in his own remorse and guilt, he might have survived.

But Jo Fox, like most feminists, would rather climb a tree to tell a lie than stay on the ground and tell the truth.

Sexual profligacy is a trait that labels a woman a tart but celebrates the potency of a man.

You dumbass. In your own example, sexual profligacy was not celebrated in any respect, which is why neither Prynne nor Dimmesdale nor Chillingsworth would come clean with the fucking truth!

No-one wants to be lied to about their status as a parent or taken for a financial ride, but it's hard to see how a court-required, sexual witch-hunt doesn't put a woman and her child on the scaffolds...

Woman's right to defraud > Man's right to not be defrauded.

BUT

Feminism = Equality.

This math doesn't look right.

-_-I-_-I-_- · 2016-09-02T11:17:07+00:00

'Legislative slut-shaming': How the German 'Cuckoo Kids' Law' punishes women

Good. They deserve to be punished.

That said, whores really don't care where the money comes from.

Temperfuelmma · 2016-09-02T16:03:27+00:00

You know what? Turn her argument against her.

This law doesn't harm women, it harm fraudsters. It's quite insulting and misogynistic for you to equivocate women with fraudsters. Please stop hating women

Jordioa18 · 2016-09-02T14:21:55+00:00

Anyone who calls men defending themselves from women "slut shaming" should delete themselves

tomdarch · 2016-09-02T14:29:38+00:00

The column is obtusely written: The objection is specifically to a requirement that a woman disclose ("state for the record") the names of the men she had sex with. The accusation of "slut shaming" is that requiring the woman to state the names of those other men is unnecessary.

PitaSteve · 2016-09-02T14:39:35+00:00

Seems like everything is "Rights For Women"....."Responsibilities For Men"

ImHereAtLast · 2016-09-02T15:44:16+00:00

"...would only harm women and their children."

No, it would only harm women who cheat and the innocent victims they hide behind and use as human shields.

DepressMode · 2016-09-02T18:04:20+00:00

There's a big fucking difference in slut and adultery.

Since when did cheating become defended in the same breath as promiscuity?

danorkin1 · 2016-09-02T12:36:38+00:00

Interesting... look at the Reddit feminist forum and could not fucking believe it.

mateybuoy · 2016-09-02T16:28:09+00:00

Good on you Germany!

His_little_pet · 2016-09-02T19:13:43+00:00

Unfortunately, I think I'm in the minority on this (at least among women), but if I accidentally got pregnant and decided to keep the kid, I wouldn't even try to get child support if the biological father didn't want to be a father. My thought process is this: neither me nor the biological father intended to have a kid and I had a choice on whether to keep the kid or not (via abortion or adoption), so the biological father should get that choice as well (he should be paying or staying if he wants to be a father, shouldn't be forced to do either if he doesn't).

OzNimbus · 2016-09-02T13:13:05+00:00

It's "slut shaming" because fuck men. Now shut up about it & open your wallet. Any wallet will do.

ThePigmanAgain · 2016-09-02T10:24:22+00:00

More evidence that the ABC is, indeed, turning into The Guardian. And Australians actually pay for this shit, you know!

10J18R1A · 2016-09-02T14:25:00+00:00

This is also why they're vehemently against male birth control. Now, I'm not against women having sexual agency and responsibility. It's their choice. But their choices are , quite honestly, profitable. They are going to react violently against anything that takes that profit, whether it be pregnancy decision or even getting the right guy.

Equality is misogynistic.

ElefantPharts · 2016-09-02T14:33:28+00:00

I'm so confused here, we have paternity tests, why isn't that done at the get go if there's any question? Wouldn't that negate the need for this? Or am I misreading the article? It just seems like we have a medical way to determine if you are or are not the father (Maury anyone?) so why would we leave it up to anyone to "tell the truth" when it can be proven quite easily...again, there must be something I'm missing

ilovepumpkin · 2016-09-02T14:37:57+00:00

I don't get it. If it is his kid then what are they (she) afraid of? Ill tell you what they're afraid of -- to be scientifically proven a slut. And in that case the man should NOT have to pay. Pass the bill.

Edit: I mean NOT pay. Why should a guy pay for something he has nothing to do with?

Root176400 · 2016-09-02T14:58:17+00:00

What kind of witch can live with herself knowing she's charging child support for a dude who's not the father? Disgusting.

herewegoaga1n · 2016-09-02T14:00:45+00:00

I prefer to think of it as "royal cunt shaming" and "punishing pieces-of-shits that conspire to defraud".

Warpfrenzy · 2016-09-02T14:42:26+00:00

They just need to make a law requiring DNA testing before that birth cert is signed. Simple.

double-happiness · 2016-09-02T14:54:09+00:00

From cruel schoolyard taunts to a child about his mother, to the possible threat of abuse a mother might be exposed to if her past is revealed in such a heated situation (from either male partner), it is not hard to imagine how the shock waves of a law like this may affect lives for the worse.

And if these relationships have been violent, abusive or involved drug and alcohol misuse, then the potential is far worse.

http://i.imgur.com/x2v8crH.jpg

BITCRUSHERRRR · 2016-09-02T15:13:13+00:00

Are you FUCKING kidding me!?!? This shit needs to stop. This is literal oppression here. I hate using these stupid buzzwords but there's nothing else to call it. Men are being force farther and farther down in the western world while women keep going up. Equality is a fucking myth, this is a clear example.

Saclicious · 2016-09-02T16:12:32+00:00

At the bottom of the article it says that men in Germany can't be forced to take paternity tests, does that mean the real father can just deny its his and never pay child support?

JonnyRichter · 2016-09-02T17:09:15+00:00

How ironic that the writer accuses the government of trying to control something complicated they don't understand, meanwhile having no idea they're defending child support, which is government mandated.

"It's messy when government peeks into a bedroom."

Yeah no shit, but they're already doing that.

Thatskindamessedup · 2016-09-02T17:26:29+00:00

For more rage, check out https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/50slbu/cmv_a_negative_paternity_test_should_exclude_a/

Basically, a woman is responsible enough to get pregnant. She's responsible enough to have sole discretion on whether or not to keep the child. She's also responsible enough to have complete custody and say in the child's life.

HOWEVER, there is no way in hell to think that she's responsible enough to financially care for the child. Without some poor suckers money, the child will quickly wither away, and we can't have that.

THINK OF THE CHILDREN! Unlike the irresponsible mother that could have thought of her child's well-being every step of the way, but chose not to.

thenitefox · 2016-09-02T16:52:43+00:00

Woman: Judge I slept with that man and gave birth to a child afterwards. He owes me child support!

Judge: Ok as long as the DNA test can prove it is his, along with your statement..

Woman: Why are you bringing up what happened 9 months ago?! What does that have to do with today?! Stop oppressing me!!

tonster181 · 2016-09-02T15:39:41+00:00

I honestly don't understand how the 90% of humanity that disagrees with men being duped into paying for another man's child has changed this already. I don't know any women that agree with making a man pay for a child that isn't his.

The only ones that want this are the feminazis and the courts. This saves the courts untold time and money when you can just look at the birth certificate and send out bills. Also, think of all the issues it would cause for Child Services if they had to pay back the duped men and try to collect from the bio dad. For them, the policy is perfect already.

Propaganda4Lunch · 2016-09-02T16:05:32+00:00

If a feminist won't support this, then that particular feminist is openly against equality.

Glassclose · 2016-09-02T16:21:25+00:00

"Sometimes children get caught up in the mess, but generally policy makers and the courts try to shield them from any fallout in relationship breakdown by putting their interests first."
These laws and laws like them do not protect the 'children' it makes it so the state/country has someone on the hook to legally provide care and whatever the else the state says, all due to what another person says is the truth. it's to make certain that if a woman comes in looking for aid for her and her child, they have someone to send the bill to.

WantJeremy · 2016-09-02T16:22:28+00:00

When I went to court for support and allocation of parental responsibility, they court ordered me to take a paternity test to proceed any further in the case. They even paid for it too. I'm in Colorado and this was only two years ago. The judge asked me if I had any doubts that she was mine. And though it did hurt to have doubts, I did find out my daughter was indeed mine which made everything so much easier.

The times are changing, just slowly.

Fuckenjames · 2016-09-02T17:24:44+00:00

Slut-shaming is a thing? Is that like liar-shaming or murderer-shaming?

Jointherevolutionly · 2016-09-02T18:17:47+00:00

Amazing how once again women do not want to be responsible for the repercussions of their past.

JakeDC · 2016-09-02T13:23:47+00:00

I am not defending, just confused. Why are they not just doing DNA testing. If a DNA test can solve the issue, I don't see any reason for the courts to have any additional process, uncomfortable or not.

Rayhann · 2016-09-02T15:33:50+00:00

Why be shamed for being a slut? Sluts are great. But infidelity is something else

syzmcs · 2016-09-02T14:55:17+00:00

I work in child maintenance. I also grew up in a house with my mother where my father funded her lavish lifestyle while he worked his ass off.

While my dad is almost certainly my dad, anything to make the system more balanced I'd welcome.

ChaosOpen · 2016-09-02T16:10:42+00:00

Couple tumblr posts, a handful of youtube videos=public outcry

Imthere · 2016-09-02T16:54:24+00:00

From cruel schoolyard taunts to a child about his mother, to the possible threat of abuse a mother might be exposed to if her past is revealed in such a heated situation (from either male partner), it is not hard to imagine how the shock waves of a law like this may affect lives for the worse.

i.e. we cannot possibly hold women responsible for their decisions.

And if these relationships have been violent, abusive or involved drug and alcohol misuse, then the potential is far worse.

"if". And there are already systems in place to protect women in these situations.

No-one wants to be lied to about their status as a parent or taken for a financial ride, but it's hard to see how a court-required, sexual witch-hunt doesn't put a woman and her child on the scaffolds, as Hester was.

That's 100% female supremacy. It completely ignores the fathers life. His right to raise his child. And to not raise a child who isn't his.

This article is proposing government-supported cuckoldry. Women can cheat, in the full knowledge that no matter what, they will never be held accountable for their decisions.

AlwaysABride · 2016-09-02T17:04:29+00:00

If you insist on using archive.is links, please indicate the source of the article in the title.

InvaderDem · 2016-09-02T17:32:55+00:00

Exactly how many children grow up believing the wrong man is their biological father is difficult to determine, but a 2005 review of studies found the rate was about 4 per cent, or roughly 1 in 25 children

What a scary statistic.

cisco54 · 2016-09-02T18:02:05+00:00

ELI5: Why does she need to disclose who else she slept with to prove the child isn't is? Wouldn't a simple paternity test be sufficient?

allnamesfckintaken · 2016-09-02T18:12:58+00:00

moving away from the courts? wahhhhhhh? the courts ARE the ones protecting women. so are we now also suppose to move away from the courts and towards the courts whenever it benefits women the most? what a feminist thing to demand.

lyraseven · 2016-09-02T18:16:35+00:00

But, writes Jo Fox, such a law would only harm women and their children.

Sure it would, but they can always opt not to sleep around. You can absolutely be harmed by being required not to harm others, but in this case it is on you and you have to accept that consequence.

However, this part is unacceptabe:

his week the German Justice Minster sought cabinet approval for a bill that would force women to divulge past sexual partners.

Women should not be compelled to cause social damage to the men they chose to sleep with, especially as those men may not know that she was cheating. DNA tests can confirm that a man is not a child's father without the mother being required to breach the biological father's privacy.

Of course, that would require mandatory child support to go away and therefore the right for men to be emancipated from legal fatherhood, which is all to the better. The attitude 'well, SOMEONE has to pay for this woman's choices' needs to die and this is a step toward that.

sandmann68 · 2016-09-02T18:42:26+00:00

They are literally using the "it's for the children" reasoning up front in the very first paragraphs. I hate it when you're guilted into whatever point the author wants to make with thought killing garbage like that. we're witnessing the end of intelligent dialogue and debate I swear~

wastingtoomuchthyme · 2016-09-02T18:47:05+00:00

According to some reports there's a significant percentage ( 0.08%-30% depending on study) of Non-paternity events.

In America, if you are married, the man is financially responsible for any children regardless of paternity..

revenjack · 2016-09-02T19:19:42+00:00

How the fuck is that slut shaming ... More like fact checking...

Is the kids dad who you said it was, no? Welp slut checks out.

AtomicBLB · 2016-09-02T19:52:51+00:00

Those are both accurate. It punishes women who sleep around when their partners obviously want to be monogamous, seeing how they are mislead into thinking they are the bio-dads. Which is fine, they deserve the reality check.

DirtyPedro · 2016-09-02T21:33:04+00:00

"Women in Germany could be compelled to reveal acts of infidelity if a new law designed to protect men who believe they've been duped into raising kids who are not biologically theirs is passed."

Then she goes on to say that is a bad thing and that hurts women, as if women are the victims here. Simply unbelieveable.

When someone suffers consequences of their own wrong doing, they are not "victims". The people that they hurt by their wrong doings are the "victims"! She says the law is hurting women, but it's not the law that is hurting women. The law has no negative effects on honest mothers, it is the action of lying and infidelity that is the source of anyone in this situation suffering.

If she is going to use SJW buzz words/phrases, maybe she should remember this one: Victim Blaming

Wolfkrone · 2016-09-02T21:34:29+00:00

Ive read the article carefully and have come to the following conclusion:

SHAME THOSE SLUTS

HotDealsInTexas · 2016-09-02T21:53:00+00:00

But, writes Jo Fox, such a law would only harm women and their children.

"But who cares about the men who are being harmed under the existing state of affairs! Screw them!"

Not all of them, which is a small mercy, just those who she slept with around the time she conceived. This request can be made by a man who is paying child support — and clearly uncertain about his need to do so.

The proposed bill appears silent on what happens if the woman refuses to divulge — or simply doesn't know — who the father is.

I would argue that the burden of proof should be on the mother to demonstrate paternity. If she doesn't know who the father is, or refuses to divulge, then SHE SHOULD NOT GET TO DEMAND CHILD SUPPORT.

Basically, this is nothing more than female entitlement. No more, no less. The author seems to believe that women have the inalienable right to defraud men and steal their possessions, and that they somehow have the right to cheat on men but somehow expect resources from them. For that matter, why do children have a right to child support from a man who is not their father?

Vanriel · 2016-09-02T23:22:09+00:00

I'm not seeing any problem with this idea. Why is it "punishing women"? As far as i can see the only punishment that they get is being forced to be truthful which in my opinion would be the decent and moral thing to do anyway.

Mythandros · 2016-09-02T23:24:05+00:00

Typical feminist tactics. Oppose anything that brings equality to the table, or threatens your privileged status. Feminism is about equality, right feminists? Ha.

Bailie2 · 2016-09-02T23:54:55+00:00

You don't know who the father of your kid is, and can no longer just pick a guy and extort money. I mean it's just calling it what it is. Is it wrong to call some one in prison a prisoner? Trashy words for trashy people.

Drekalo · 2016-09-03T01:09:35+00:00

The real solution is to require DNA testing to put anyone on a birth certificate. There should be biological proof that both parents are linked to the child, and no question about finances/supporting such a child should be allowed unless this biological proof is present.

Swordfish101101 · 2016-09-03T01:34:58+00:00

Why isn't anything being done about this in the U.S.? And everywhere else? Good for Germany, but they've got WAY bigger problems than this.

cilantro540 · 2016-09-03T01:41:03+00:00

Wow, so if the cuckolded father MUST pay. It doesn't matter if it's his kid or not. I never understand why they are so insistent that the biological father not be responsible for his own children. It's literally beyond me.

Grudlann · 2016-09-03T07:16:48+00:00

"Hey, I don't think that my asian child is mine, because I'm German AF, but let me pay that child support forever just because the alternative is making her tell the truth... oh, sorry, slut-shame her..."

Ainianu · 2016-09-03T13:33:02+00:00

I will preface this by saying i am actually in favour of equal rights for both genders and i do not believe they need to be cross-purpose.

I actually do find the law in this article to be quite poor. Mainly because it is simply unnecessary. Women disclosing all sexual partners carries more social stigma than a man doing the same, but at the same time... It is obviously wrong to have a child and have the wrong man paying for it.

My answer would simply have any legal question of paternity 'require' DNA test that is compulsory. This would protect the men and the women.

ballotechnic · 2016-09-03T17:20:47+00:00

Why do any questions of past partners need to be asked at all? If the paternity tests shows you aren't the father, shouldn't you just immediately be free of any responsibility and entitled to compensation if you seek it?

Seems overly complicated.

HillaryLovesSeizures · 2016-09-02T15:14:26+00:00

I would never pay for a kid that's not mine, ever.

Johns_9ft_hamm · 2016-09-02T16:37:45+00:00

Punishing women? How? Forcing a man you pay for a child without having to prove it's his is punishing men. If you don't want to be slut shamed, maybe done act like a hoe. Own up to the fact that you cheated instead of trying to scam someone for child support. That's the difference between being a normal person and being a slut.

Bigcats30 · 2016-09-02T16:55:14+00:00

Weird how they only want equal rights when it suits them eh

lightbot · 2016-09-02T16:23:38+00:00

Referred to by German press as the 'Cuckoo Kids' law', it is designed to protect men who have discovered themselves not to be the biological father of a child and to allow them to reclaim child maintenance for up to two years.

Simple solution. If the women chooses not to reveal the real father then she is liable for repayment of the falsely received payments. Surely this already falls under fraud legislation.

trivialretort · 2016-09-02T18:44:17+00:00

But, writes Jo Fox, such a law would only harm women and their children.

As opposed to normally only harming men.

OK...

zxcsd · 2016-09-02T17:38:24+00:00

found this:

Trisha's Question: I was pregnant with another man's child before my husband and I got married. Since we've been separated, I applied at the CSEA to receive child support. He is going to contest it. I am wondering if I will have to pay the support money back to him once it is determined that he is not the father?

Brette's Answer: It is possible. You should speak with an attorney in your state who can help you with this. One thing to remember is that whoever the biological father is can be ordered by the court to pay you and you could turn this money over to your spouse.

http://www.womansdivorce.com/paternity-and-child-support.html#DOUBLEDIPPING

Jazzeki · 2016-09-02T17:46:03+00:00

in these times of digital hook-ups and later partnerships, not everyone keeps a black book of their sexual partners (nor probably ever did).

well maybe women should learn to be responsible then? is it really that hard to keep track of who the farther of a chiuld might be? is the good of the child enough to ensure it has a parent not worthy anymore? i thought it was a childs undeniable RIGHT to have 2 parents support it but i guess that doesn't count when it's moms responsibility to rember who the second party was.

anothercarguy · 2016-09-02T17:49:51+00:00

Here is a relevant read on it over at /r/changemyview

https://np.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/50slbu/cmv_a_negative_paternity_test_should_exclude_a/

Bearded_Deity · 2016-09-02T19:20:46+00:00

If a girl admits to consentual sex then regrets it the next day she can say she was raped.

If you point out that its NOT rape you're victim shaming.

This is how the world works unfortunately.

Adamtess · 2016-09-02T19:24:39+00:00

She felt the need to explain her Scarlet Letter reference...

mrpbeaar · 2016-09-02T19:25:42+00:00

It seems to me that the reporter is the one calling women with multiple partners sluts.

That's a loaded word the reporter is using. A healthy approach to sex wouldn't be feeling the need to label the acts in a negative emotional way.

There is nothing shameful but thinking makes it so.

WhiteNitro69 · 2016-09-02T20:01:05+00:00

it is not hard to imagine how the shock waves of a law like this may affect lives for the worse.

Yeah, the lives of whores who have children with men who aren't their husband. God I hope this passes.

scramtek · 2016-09-02T20:26:53+00:00

I don't get it? What argument can be proposed against shaming a slut? And what aspect of an individual is being shamed?
Becoming a slut entails disregarding any sense of a moral code. It requires a wanton abandonment of self-discipline. And the physical action of full-blown, no hesitation, instant gratification sexual congress..
If a woman is willing to fuck so many people that she's unable to identify the progenitor of her seed then why is it deemed rude to state that she is, as is plainly evident, a slut? This isn't in and of itself a negative statement. As many people find sluts appealing as those who regard the moniker as a slanderous term. Personally, I love sluts. But I wouldn't expect a healthy relationship with one.
But she is primarily responsible for guarding against pregnancy. She either takes precautions or she doesn't. Pregnancies leading to births are almost never accidental.
However, a successful slut avoids unwanted pregnancies. She is self-empowered and maximises her sexual attraction. She is able to enjoy sexual encounters to a degree that men can only dream about. And more power to her. There is nothing wrong with being a responsible slut. It's a life choice that I endorse, if not encourage c

gvs77 · 2016-09-02T20:37:40+00:00

I couldn't even read the whole thing. It would be much simpler to allow fathers a dna test and if a child is not his, refund him all payed Child support.

After all, we'd never force a woman to pay for a child the man conceived with another woman during Marriage.

Proteus_Marius · 2016-09-02T20:52:27+00:00

That article was basically Jo Fox writing about what Jo Fox wrote.

The entire piece is witness to the perils of cyclic logic, basically from the get go.

Certainly the bar for posting here should be higher than that.

seraph85 · 2016-09-02T21:18:14+00:00

1 in 25 men grew up believing a guy was their father and wasn't. That's really high considering most of the time a paternity test is never even thought to be needed. I wonder how many men end up raising kids that aren't theirs.

Trail_of_Jeers · 2016-09-02T21:19:22+00:00

Well, of course. Women shouldn't be held accountable for their actions. We don't shame a dog..oh, we do shame and punish animals, because they can learn.

This article tells me Jo Fox thinks women are incapable of learning out of bad behavior.

Anzereke · 2016-09-02T21:24:15+00:00

"Man A seeks redress from Man B and everyone carries on as they were"

...Um, what? Why the hell would the redress be from the other guy?

Teh_Slayur · 2016-09-02T21:29:44+00:00

-.- Can't tell if trolling or ridiculously entitled.

stirlingbadge · 2016-09-02T22:06:29+00:00

I'm so glad someone has linked this article here.

Reading it last night I was confused at the substance of the article and it's lack of any real points. Basically the author is making a really weak argument against paternity tests because relationship breakdowns are messy and difficult, kids could get teased at school if it is discovered their paternity is at question and this can all be made even more messy if alcohol and drugs are involved? There is absolutely nothing more said to support the argument?

a678912 · 2016-09-02T22:07:05+00:00

And ofcourse, as it does not fit in their agenda, nothing at all is said about the theft that occurs, and the Emotional Toll as well. But CIS-WHITE MALE!!!..

I hope this bill is passed and that it catches on to other nations as well.

Griever114 · 2016-09-03T00:27:58+00:00

Seriously Germany, you are turning into another America with the bullshit your politicians are pulling.

IShouldNotTalk · 2016-09-03T01:02:52+00:00

Slut shaming not seen since the a character in a work of fiction was shamed. It's so fake a real world analogy can't be found.

Redditwordpolice · 2016-09-03T01:56:10+00:00

"It is not hard to imagine how the shockwaves of a law like this may affect a lives for the worse."

What about the shockwaves to a man's emotional and financial well being when he finds out he is supporting a child that is not his? Does that not fucking matter?!

The writer is incredibly selfish and completely entitled.

MagicTampon · 2016-09-03T03:15:13+00:00

fromhitobye · 2016-09-03T03:26:58+00:00

They're afraid they won't get to milk the cow anymore.

JohnnyH3663 · 2016-09-03T04:01:30+00:00

There was a story here on Reddit about a dude who had to pay child support for a kid that wasn't his and was born after the divorce I think it was in r/personalfinance

theskepticalidealist · 2016-09-03T04:21:00+00:00

How am I still shocked by these insane lunatics?

Sgt_pile · 2016-09-03T09:06:17+00:00

Can somebody explain to me why this is a controversy?

This seems like it holds two people accountable for actions - the mother, and the biological father. The only stipulation is it either has to be mandatory at birth, or the mother cannot know if the test was optioned.

serenader · 2016-09-03T10:01:34+00:00

Add legal grounds for divorce for breach of contract without any alimony, perfect. This will curb production of sluts and result in less slut shaming, fever the sluts less the shaming. problem solved.

MagicTampon · 2016-09-04T03:21:47+00:00

ishamesluts · 2016-09-05T23:32:24+00:00

I'm being legislated out of existence. This is totally unfair.

lemming1607 · 2016-09-02T13:50:06+00:00

It is slut shaming and punishing women.

It's just that women want to have sex with whoever and stick the bill with whoever they want

evPocket · 2016-09-02T17:32:52+00:00

I like how if you remove the O's they are called 'cuck kids,' very appropriate.

alltim · 2016-09-02T17:51:28+00:00

Why not simply pass legislation to require DNA tested evidence in all cases when a man must pay child support? The mother could protect her privacy by collecting DNA samples from all possible fathers. The DNA tests results could remain confidential with respect to how many different tests the mother required, as well as who the other potential biological fathers might have been. The mother would only have to reveal the DNA test results for the actual father.

konoplya · 2016-09-02T22:07:09+00:00

did you expect anything else from Australians?

lamentationsoftheir · 2016-09-02T15:13:58+00:00

Sluts should be shamed. And lying, cheating whores should be shamed as well.

"Slut shaming" is just a control tacit for male behavior and criticism of women.

Rikhart · 2016-09-02T18:51:11+00:00

"Sexual profligacy is a trait that labels a woman a tart but celebrates the potency of a man"

And why this very law is coming into being is exactly why this is the case, dummy.

KEGmaster3000 · 2016-09-02T19:32:34+00:00

stars reading becomes hopeful continues reading terribly depressed

Trail_of_Jeers · 2016-09-02T20:21:57+00:00

[permanently deleted]

ttstte · 2016-09-03T03:54:06+00:00

I was kind of interested in this topic and thought I'd read through the comments. You guys are a bunch of whiney bitches! No disrespect intended.

Title	Laws to protect men from paying child support for children that aren't theirs is now "slut shaming" and "punishing women"
Author	NixonForBreadsident
Upvotes	5385
Comments	425
Date	September 2, 2016 9:00 AM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/50sbsc/laws_to_protect_men_from_paying_child_support_for/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/laws-to-protect-men-from-paying-child-support-for.942425 https://theredarchive.com/post/942425

Comments