~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
-Canonical-
[–]BobbyDropTableUsers 405 points406 points407 points 10 years ago (67 children) | Copy Link
...and if he doesn't pay child support he's also a criminal.
[–]mochacola 321 points322 points323 points 10 years ago (56 children) | Copy Link
... and if she can't financially support her child, she gets financial aid and subsidized housing.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (54 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Lord_ThunderCunt 82 points83 points84 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Well, in all fairness, he gets subsidised government housing if he can't afford it too.
[–]deanat78 38 points39 points40 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Touche... And free food!
[+]JupeJupeSound -23 points-22 points-21 points 10 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy. It was created to help protect users from doxing, stalking, harassment, and profiling for the purposes of censorship.
If you would also like to protect yourself, add the Chrome extension TamperMonkey, or the Firefox extension GreaseMonkey and add this open source script.
Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, scroll down as far as possible (hint:use RES), and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.
[–]deanat78 25 points26 points27 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
No you dummy, men cannot by definition be raped! Geez, read a dictionary! /s
[+]Ruadan -9 points-8 points-7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I know /s but they can. Just not by women love holes
[–]super_franzs 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Food rapes me, since it forces it itself down my throat without consent.
/s
[–]perverted_alt 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I rape food. Figuratively. And literally.
[–]eyephone314 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Not sure if fat man or food fetishist.
[–]perverted_alt 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
they're not mutually exclusive
[–]xmrsmoothx 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Dunno why you're being downvoted. Rape comes with everything else in the American prison system. It's just too bad if people don't like it, it's a fact of the society we made.
[–]nuesuh 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Agreed. Systematic oppression.
[–]quwertie 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Oppression"
[+]cptjmshook -14 points-13 points-12 points 10 years ago* (41 children) | Copy Link
Here's the thing most people don't understand about patriarchies: they don't exclusively benefit men, nor are they exclusively to the detriment of women. Being allowed/expected to wield power and accept responsibility comes with certain advantages and certain disadvantages, just as being expected/allowed to forsake power and eschew responsibility comes with certain advantages and certain disadvantages. So yes, we do live in a patriarchy. It would be foolish to deny it. But it would be equally foolish, not to mention callous, not to recognize and work to remedy the ways in which that fact hurts men.
Here's another thing about patriarchies: just because the system places men in positions of power, and gives them certain privileges while denying those same privileges to women, doesn't mean that only men are to blame. Just as there are many male feminists working alongside female feminists to end the patriarchy, there are many female non-feminists who are just as complicit as their male counterparts in perpetuating it. And it is exceedingly foolish, not to mention hypocritical and self-serving, of feminists to assert that women, simply by virtue of the fact that they are women, can only be victims and must never be criticized or held accountable in that regard.
EDIT: Guys, relax. I'm on your side. I upvoted OP's cartoon because it very pithily and poignantly made a point I agree with, and I too frequently feel frustrated and offended by the way so many feminists seem to claim a monopoly on victimization, and discount the double standards from which they benefit, and trivialize the very real struggles men face, and constantly chastise us and treat us all like potential rapists and abusers. I just don't think the knee-jerk, petulant, and frankly equally myopic response of "Pff, stupid feminists. What patriarchy?!" makes for a particularly compelling or respectable counterargument. At least not if we want our movement to be taken seriously.
EDIT #2: Oh, and for the record, /u/Masamune_, I agree about the wage gap.
[–]Lance_lake 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
gives them certain privileges while denying those same privileges to women
Unless based on biology, please state one privilege that men have that women don't in western society.
[+]cptjmshook -9 points-8 points-7 points 10 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link
We've come a long way since the days when women weren't allowed to vote, or hold public office, or seek divorce--so no, there are no privileges that are officially granted men that are denied women. But patriarchy is about more than policy. It's about cultural tropes and traditions and deeply ingrained ways of thinking, so deeply ingrained that we consider them intuitive if we consider them at all. Indeed, it's in our very language. To say that because women are now legally allowed to do anything a man is allowed to do we live in a post-patriarchal society is as naive and simplistic as saying that because a black man currently occupies the office of the presidency we live in a post-racial society. There are still many systemic biases in place that privilege men over women, because our current society, however evolved it may be compared to a century or two ago, is still founded in that once strict patriarchal system.
[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
Explain why it's socially acceptable for women to hit men if men are the socially preferred gender?
I mean, I know you won't change your mind, but one would think that if only one gender is socially allowed to assault the other, then that gender would be the preferred gender socially.
[–]cptjmshook 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
If you read my comment again carefully, you'll see my whole point was that living in a patriarchy carries both advantages and disadvantages for both genders, not just the (as you put it) socially preferred one. The fact that it is socially acceptable for women to hit men is an example of an advantage that it carries for women. Why is it socially acceptable in a patriarchy for women to hit men? Because in a patriarchy, men are considered as adults and women are considered as children. I agree with you that this is wrong.
Incidentally, what makes you so sure I won't change my mind?
[–]quwertie 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
What kind of patriarchy hurts men? I think when you say patriarchy, you actually mean 'a few sexist individuals."
[–]cptjmshook 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
And I think when you say patriarchy, you think it means "a society exclusively or predominantly made up of misogynists that invariably and exclusively victimizes and oppresses women". That's not what it means. A patriarchy is simply a society that traces descent through male lines and in which men are considered the de facto heads of their families and, by extension, tend to dominate the power structures of the society as a whole. It is entirely possible for such a society to yield double-standards that negatively affect men.
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
The fact that it is socially acceptable for women to hit men is an example of an advantage that it carries for women.
Since when has it been socially acceptable for the socially preferred gender to be assaulted?
Because the patriarchy has never been proven, yet you are sure it exists. That men are the socially preferred gender has never been proven, yet you are sure it is true.
Believing something without proof is indicative of an ideologue, and ideologues are incapable of reevaluating their beliefs.
[–]cptjmshook 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link
That was your claim, not mine.
Because the patriarchy has never been proven, yet you are sure it exists.
What exactly do you think the patriarchy is? Some mysterious force like the Force? Some intangible entity like a god? Feminists didn't invent the word. It's an anthropological term. The definition is a society in which descent is traced through male lines and in which men are considered to be the de facto heads of their families and by extension tend to dominate the power structures of the society as a whole. Does that definition describe Ameirca? Yes? Voila! Patriarchy proved.
That men are the socially preferred gender has never been proven, yet you are sure it is true.
Again, I never said that. You said that. You should go back and read your previous comment, as well as my previous comments, more carefully.
Actually, believing something without evidence is indicative of an ideologue. Reasonable, scientific-minded people believe things that have yet to be proved all the time. We call them theories. In fact, even believing something without evidence isn't quite right. Rather, I would say that believing something despite evidence to the contrary is what's indicative of an ideologue, and I have yet to be presented with any compelling evidence against the patriarchy.
You are losing this debate. You should reconsider your approach.
[–]Sbaker777 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well thought out and mature response. I like you. But I disagree. The first point right after your colon, while true, kinda just shows that there really isn't a patriarchy and that the binary genders each have their own unique advantages and disadvantages that basically equal out. In other words, for nearly every de facto privilege or anti-privilege one gender has, the other has another. So by my reasoning there really is no system of oppression against men or women exclusively. However it would be hard to deny that this does not hold true when you consider the intersections of race, gender, religion, and sexual identity.
[–]cptjmshook -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Well thought out and mature response. I like you.
Likewise! Thank god there's at least one other reasonable person in this sub.
But I disagree.
I'm afraid I must say "likewise" to this, too. Thanks to the way third wave feminism has appropriated and popularized the term, there now seems to be a misconception among both sides of the debate that "patriarchy" means a society that is invariably and exclusively injurious and oppressive toward women. But that's not what it means. All it means is a society in which descent is traced through male lines and men are considered the de facto heads of their families and, by extension, tend to dominate the power structures of the society as a whole. America, along with most of the world, is unarguably such a society. True, women are now legally allowed to vote and hold public office, but the fact remains that we began as a society in which they were not, and the effects of that foundation are still being felt (not to mention that our culture is positively permeated by a religion that explicitly preaches the superiority of men over women). To what degree do those effects continue to inform each gender's perception and treatment of the other? And is that really such a bad thing if, indeed, as you put it, each has its own unique privileges and anti-privileges that basically balance out? Those are questions worthy of debate. But whether or not we live in a patriarchy is not. We do.
[–]Kinbaku_enthusiast 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So why is a woman running for president if women can't hold places of power?
The idea of "the patriarchy" rests upon the idea that men in power would build society to benefit their gender, whereas as both men and women have a pro-women bias.
[–]cptjmshook 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
For my thoughts on the first sentence of your comment, see my response to Lance_lake's comment above.
As for the rest, in a strict patriarchy women are denied positions of power and treated as children. From a certain perspective, couldn't being freed of the burdens of power and responsibility and being indulged and protected and provided for the way children are be viewed as benefits? Not only is the claim that in order for a society to qualify as a patriarchy it must be structured in such a way that it exclusively benefits men incredibly simplistic, but to structure a society in such a way would be downright impossible, as what constitutes a benefit and what does not is so often so irreconcilably subjective.
For the record, I agree that the assumption so many feminists seem to be operating under--namely, that the fact that we live in a patriarchy means nothing but advantages for men and disadvantages for women--is equally if not more simplistic and counterproductive.
[–]bougabouga 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link
Here's the thing most people don't understand about patriarchies: they don't exclusively benefit men, nor are they exclusively to the detriment of women.
The definition of patriarchy appears to be different with every feminist and keeps evolving every year. Is there a single feminist out there that actually knows exactly what the patriarchy is?
Being allowed/expected to wield power and accept responsibility comes with certain advantages and certain disadvantages, just as being expected/allowed to forsake power and eschew responsibility comes with certain advantages and certain disadvantages.
Also known as being an adult.
So yes, we do live in a patriarchy. It would be foolish to deny it.But it would be equally foolish, not to mention callous, not to recognize and work to remedy the ways in which that fact hurts men.
That's not evidence for the existence of a patriarchy, it's just evidence that with power comes responsibility. Which is a universal truth. What hurts men are laws, which can be re written. You don't need to come up with some elaborate conspiracy with a ever changing definition is order to explain it.
Here's another thing about patriarchies: just because the system places men in positions of power
also known as democracy.
and gives them certain privileges while denying those same privileges to women doesn't mean that only men are to blame. there are many female non-feminists who are just as complicit as their male counterparts in perpetuating it.
Ah yes, the internalized misogyny thing, the term used to describe women who have committed the sacrilege of not believing in feminist conspiracies. Also known as critical thinking.
And it is exceedingly foolish, not to mention hypocritical and self-serving, of feminists to assert that women, simply by virtue of the fact that they are women, can only be victims and must never be criticized or held accountable in that regard.
You cannot be serious, you cannot actually believe that feminism isn't the main group pushing that idea.
I want you to provide undeniable evidence for this patriarchy, I don't want some feminist literature as evidence, that's like using the bible to prove the existence of the devil. The source can't be written by a feminist, again for the same reasons. I want you to prove without any doubt that the sex of an individual is the ONLY POSSIBLE FACTOR why they are leaders.
I want a clear and detailed definition is the patriarchy and I want you to explain why the definition changes from one feminist to another and why it changes with time.
Because from where I stand, the patriarchy is to feminism what the devil is to Christianity.
I'll wait for your answer while I read why air conditioning is sexist towards women and keeping them down.
[–]cptjmshook 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
I wasn't offering a definition of patriarchy. I was merely pointing out a misconception about its implications. For the record, the definition is:
a society in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line.
a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it.
With that, I assume you are referring to only the first part of the sentence you quoted: "Being allowed/expected to wield power and accept responsibility comes with certain advantages and certain disadvantages". So yes, fine, we can call that "being an adult", although I don't see how whether or not that constitutes being an adult has anything to do with the point I'm trying to make about patriarchy. As long as we're trying to connect the two topics, however, I will make this observation, with which I am sure you'll agree: our society seems to expect men to act like adults, and to ridicule and penalize them when they don't, much more than it does women. Incidentally, I would consider that characteristic of a patriarchy.
Here you've lost me. Nothing I said was meant to be evidence of our living in a patriarchy, nor do I consider it to be evidence that with power comes responsibility. Indeed, it was not my intention to prove either one of those claims. I agree that there are many laws that hurt men, and that they should be rewritten. I don't, however, agree that anything I said constitutes a conspiracy theory, elaborate or otherwise--nor, again, was I attempting to define anything.
also known as democracy
Yes, we elect our leaders, and yes, women now have the right to vote in those elections. But the effects of patriarchy extend beyond written policy. The tropes and traditions of the strict patriarchy that once prohibited women from voting or holding public office will take a longer time to completely die out than any law.
I actually did not have the phrase "internalized misogyny", nor the phenomenon it describes, in mind when I wrote the bit you were responding to, but in this case I can see how you'd make that connection. I don't believe it's sacrilege for a woman not to subscribe to every feminist claim or narrative (although I don't think your word, "conspiracy", is any more appropriate in this context than it was the last time you used it). Indeed, I consider many of those claims and narratives to be sensationalized, politicized, disingenuous, paranoid, hypocritical bullshit myself. But let's remember that there is feminism, and there is third wave feminism. Most of the aforementioned bullshit is produced by the latter. The former simply asserts that men and women should be considered and treated as equals, which is patently impossible in a patriarchy. Frankly, I'm surprised you took issue with this point. I was criticizing feminists! I'd have thought you'd be pleased! Also, I too am a fan of critical thinking. Hence my offering a more thoughtful and nuanced response to the claim that we live in a patriarchy than either "Yeah! Fuck the patriarchy!" or "The patriarchy is a myth! Fuck feminism!"
You'll be happy to know that I do not, in fact, believe that feminism isn't the main group pushing that idea. In fact I said just the opposite: "And it is exceedingly foolish ... of feminists to assert that women ... can only be victims and must never be criticized or held accountable in that regard." I can see how you got confused, though. My sentences tend to be overlong and broken up into many clauses. My bad.
I want you to provide undeniable evidence for this patriarchy
Once again, it was never my aim to prove the patriarchy, so no. If you want evidence so badly, it should be easy enough for you to find it on your own, expert critical thinker that you are.
I don't want some feminist literature as evidence
I also tend to find most feminist literature tiresome, but to be fair, what document arguing the existence of the patriarchy could not fairly be called feminist literature?
that's like using the bible to prove the existence of the devil.
Ridiculous and fallacious, I agree.
I want you to prove without any doubt that the sex of an individual is the ONLY POSSIBLE FACTOR why they are leaders.
Again, no. But you should know that a leader's sex does not need to be the ONLY POSSIBLE FACTOR as to why they were elected for their having been elected to be evidence, or a manifestation, of the patriarchy. It merely has to have been a factor. Life lesson: things are never so simple that they can be attributed to just one factor.
I want a clear and detailed definition is the patriarchy
See item 1.
and I want you to explain why the definition changes from one feminist to another
Sorry, I cannot speak for all feminists. I am not a psychic.
and why it changes with time.
Language! ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Kind of a faulty analogy. I mean, patriarchies actually exist.
You seem to be implying that I must be one of those hysterical morons who agrees with that story. I assure you I am not. Another life lesson: the world is not divided into black and white. Accordingly, everyone you meet is not either an air conditioner-vilifying third wave feminist or a patriarchy-denying MRA. There are shades of gray.
[–]bougabouga 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
a society in which the father or eldest male is head of the family
So wait, when I was raised by my mother, I was the one actually in charge?
descent is traced through the male line.
TIL family trees are tools of the patriarchy.
Well we have democracy now so I am happy that you and I both agree that this patriarchy thing no longer exists, and therefore anyone bringing it up to describe modern western society is failing to understand both democracy and patriarchy.
As long as we're trying to connect the two topics, however, I will make this observation, with which I am sure you'll agree: our society seems to expect men to act like adults, and to ridicule and penalize them when they don't, much more than it does women. Incidentally, I would consider that characteristic of a patriarchy.
You don't see men starting campaigns to have fat men represented in modeling, you don't see men asking for safe spaces from different opinions, you don't see men being offended at stupid protein supplement ads. You see feminists do that, who claim to represent women. How can a movement claim at the very same time, that women are capable leaders and also claim that women are oppressed by other women in bikinis.
If the patriarchy is a system claiming that women can't be leaders, then feminism is by far the most efficient patriarchal tool.
No it won't.
But let's remember that there is feminism, and there is third wave feminism.
third wave feminism = feminism.
Most of the aforementioned bullshit is produced by the latter
By feminism.
The former simply asserts that men and women should be considered and treated as equals, which is patently impossible in a patriarchy.
Well considering the definition you have given, modern western nations don't live in it anymore so hurray! No longer will the patriarchy be used to explain person failures!
Frankly, I'm surprised you took issue with this point. I was criticizing feminists! I'd have thought you'd be pleased!
You are not critical of feminism, you are critical of third wave feminism which you described as not being feminism. The whole "well they aren't REAL feminists like me!" is used by every feminists to describe other feminists.
"If you want evidence of the devil so badly, it should be easy enough for you to find it on your own"
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
what document arguing the existence of the patriarchy could not fairly be called feminist literature?
the same kind of documents that argue for the existence of the devil. Literature attempting to explain the real world using fiction and calling it science.
a leader's sex does not need to be the ONLY POSSIBLE FACTOR as to why they were elected for their having been elected to be evidence, or a manifestation, of the patriarchy. It merely has to have been a factor.
Again, I want solid evidence that this system exists, no fairy tales, no baseless opinions/arguments. Hard science.
Life lesson: things are never so simple that they can be attributed to just one factor. The former simply asserts that men and women should be considered and treated as equals, which is patently impossible in a patriarchy.
Life lesson: things are never so simple that they can be attributed to just one factor.
.
Kind of a faulty analogy. I mean, patriarchies actually exist. a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it.
Nobody who lives in a western nation can claim they live in a patriarchy. I used that analogy to compare how Christians have created this thing to blame for all the evils in the world, and when asked for evidence, fail miserably to deliver. This mighty evil thing that apparently is all around us and controls everything is just nowhere to be found.
You seem to be implying that I must be one of those hysterical morons who agrees with that story.
Claiming something exists when it doesn't will leave that impression on others.
patriarchy-denying MRA
All I ever wanted was undeniable evidence that western nations live in a patriarchal system. That's all you ever need to do to end this conversation, I don't know why you are refusing to do this.
Your movement claims that they live in a system that denies them leadership because of their gender and then refuses to provide evidence, the burden of proof is on your side.
Can you really blame all the men and women who refuse to blindly believe in your faith?
[–]cptjmshook -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You have become combative and incoherent. You are responding to my arguments with straw men, sarcasm, and non sequiturs. You seem to fundamentally misunderstand how logic and science work, and what faith is. I am not going to bother debating you anymore.
[–]bougabouga 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Have a nice day.
[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Women hold 55% of the vote. Ergo, according to your definition, we cannot be in a patriarchy.
[–]cptjmshook 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Meaning positions of power, not the accumulative power of the vote. Look at how many more men there are and have always been in public office than women.
EDIT: Also, did you miss this part?
[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Meaning positions of power, not the accumulative power of the vote.
But those positions of power answer to women's suffrage. That's why the US government has grown 2000% relative to GDP since women's suffrage.
Look at how many more men there are and have always been in public office than women.
Of course there will be. Of those qualified, there are more men than women. Simply put, males are more diverse than females. When you are looking for the best at anything, you will find more men than women.
The tropes and traditions of the strict patriarchy that once prohibited women from voting or holding public office will take a longer time to completely die out than any law.
Bullshit. It didn't take long at all. It started changing within 2 election cycles.
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~iversen/PDFfiles/LottKenny.pdf
The facts do not support your claims.
[–]ChimneyMonkey 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
No long spiel here - but really, men are more diverse and "the best at anything?" Do you hear yourself? You better check yourself before your wreck yourself, as Mr. Cube would put it.
For the record, I'm a man and I scoffed quite loudly at your statement. Where are your supporting facts, not including pointing to the circular argument that men hold more positions of authority and power?
[–]cptjmshook -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
The men and women who vote--and indeed, who run--have all nevertheless been raised in, and conditioned by, a society that is still foundationally patriarchal. Therefore, whether or not they vote, and how they vote, and whether or not they run, and how they run, and how they are perceived when they run, and how they perform once in office, and how they are perceived while in office, and so on and so forth, are all still, to admittedly varying degrees, subject to the lingering effects of that foundation.
The reason there are more men than women who are qualified for public office, as well as certain other jobs (although I disagree with your assertion that men will always be the best at anything), is that, again, we are still experiencing the lingering effects of our foundation as a strictly patriarchal society. When feminists rail against the patriarchy, it is not merely the basic power structure at its foundation they object to, it is also the myriad ways that basic power structure has informed our social rituals, our language, our perceptions of beauty, our perceptions of emotional displays, etc. To say that because women now hold positions of public office means we live in a post-patriarchal society is as naive and simplistic as saying that because a black man currently occupies the office of the presidency we live in a post-racial society.
I didn't say it took a long time for the effects to begin to die out. I said it will take a long time for the effects to die out completely. So your evaluation of my claim as "bullshit" may be a bit harsh.
Before making such statements, first make sure you fully and correctly understand the claims you are attempting to disprove.
[–]Masamune_ 11 points12 points13 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No. The patriarchy is just propaganda. Just like the wage gap.
[–]mochacola 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Dude, patriarchy does not exist in North America.
[–]GreasedLightning 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The 1920's ladies and gents! Wait... That's today?
[–]perverted_alt 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
And if he were to "destroy" the "fetus" without her permission on the same day she was going to have an abortion of a "non-living non-human being" it would still be the capital crime of murder.
Equal application of the law is such an antiquated idea right?
[–]jul14nn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
well that would also cause physical pain to her, wouldn't it? that's battery.
[–]perverted_alt 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Is battery a capital crime also sometimes called murder?
I'm confused.
[–]jul14nn -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm not saying it deserves the punishment of capital murder, I'm saying it does have effects on the mother of the child if she doesn't also consent or knowledge about what's happening.
[–]perverted_alt 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't think anyone is suggesting it shouldn't be illegal. You are arguing against something that's not even being discussed. :-/
[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]jul14nn 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I disagree. I think it's different because you're giving her something that could also cause her harm without her permission. It's still her body that your effecting. I agree it's not a perfect system but there are places where sex is more important. This is one of those cases that will always be a losing battle for men. It's not fair but that's life. We also have a lot of opportunities that women don't have and some they never will.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]jul14nn 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm a troll because I'm giving you a logical answer? I'm all for mens right's but not if it impedes on someone else's.
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Also he's probably not going to be able to get a paternity test in many places to prove that it is his, like in France.
[–]benzinow 215 points216 points217 points 10 years ago* (26 children) | Copy Link
I think men should have the right to choose as much as a woman but the stigma is stronger because if your choosing not to be a dad there is still a human walking around. If a woman chooses not to be a mom through abortion there isn't any living evidence.
edit: I am NOT saying men should be able to stop me or any woman from having an abortion. I am saying that men should be able to opt out of parenthood just like a woman can.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Fgame 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Heh. The only people that have called my ex-wife out are friends of mine. None of her family or friends have said shit, except her parents being 'disappointed in the situation'
[–]i_like_honeydew 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
When I was 10 my parents divorced. My dad suffered a heart attack which lead to having surgery. The judge ruled my dad's health too severe to grant custody so my mom was awarded custody. She told the judge she didn't want me (it would interfere with her new life and boyfriend) then signed away her rights. I spent 7 years in different foster homes and group homes. I wish she would have been shamed.
[–]Rex9 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Incredibly rare scenario.
[–]Fgame 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Quite possibly, but one that I'm in. Mother left to be with her new boyfriend who makes enough money that she can leech off him and not work. I've got both the kids and despite how much she LOVES them and MISSES them, she hasn't made time to see them since July.
In any case, her direct family is more disappointed that their 'good' daughter (the only one who hasn't been in jail) did this than angry about it. From what I see, people in her friends circles still talk to her, her extended family doesn't seem to really care about the situation. I'm sure she's fed them some sob story, especially since she dropped a 'you're emotiablly abusive' afterwards (nothing I'd heard of during the marriage, and I'd assume you wouldn't leave your kids with an abusive father). Oh well. Her loss.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]carolnuts 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
There was a lot of shaming with a woman I knew that did it. she was treated as the impersonation of the devil. She ended up being a shitty mom cuz she didn't have a choice.
[–]AkaTujh 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well, i asked question based on my experience (at least 3 women i personally know), got downvotes and 1 answer/example in return (also based on personal experience) as counter point. Something is missing here... logic maybe?
[–]tomsix 69 points70 points71 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Adoption.
And in some US states, she could just drop the baby at a fire station, no questions asked.
[–]Thibbledorf_Pwent 75 points76 points77 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
That's really easy to say for someone that won't have to be pregnant for nine months and then have to part with a baby that they inevitably bond with. People are so quick to casually mention adoption like it's this super easy process. Not to mention childbirth does all kinds of fucky things to a woman's body. That being said, I do think it's bullshit that they both messed up to cause the pregnancy but the woman gets to decide if the dude is on the hook for the rest of his life. It's a shitty and complicated situation no matter what you do.
[–]LooneyDubs -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Sounds like an easy situation to exploit. I'm not talking about the first child... I'm talking about the 4th.
[–]Tgunner192 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I thought that was a federal thing, all 50 states, no?
[–]Demonspawn 21 points22 points23 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
It's at the State level, but it's all but three or four. Within the last 5 years a woman did drop off a child in a non-save-haven State and she was not charged (that popped up here IIRC).
[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Actually, every state (+DC & PR) has a "Safe Haven"/"Baby Moses" law.
https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/safehaven.pdf#page=2&view=Who%20May%20Leave%20a%20Baby%20at%20Safe%20Haven
[–]Demonspawn 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
My information was outdated. Thanks for the update.
[+]Grasshopper21 -12 points-11 points-10 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Your info is outdated by almost a decade?
[–]koji8123 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They can. But as you say, there's stigma.
[–]Bayerrc 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Haha why the hell would a man get ANY say in it?
[–]1forthethumb 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Okay, are you all for real right now? It's not about fucking choosing whether or not to be a parent, it's about sovereignty over your own body - a foundational pillar of any free society. I can't lay a finger on your without your permission.
This is not a moral issue, it's a legal one. We respect this basic fact of free societies so much that we respect your sovereignty ever after you have died and are no longer using that body. We burn and bury corpses with perfectly good organs while people waiting for transplants die we respect this so much. Imagine, just fucking imagine the can of worms that would be opened if the gov't could tell you what you can and can't do with your own body.
[–]HalfysReddit 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Imagine, just fucking imagine the can of worms that would be opened if the gov't could tell you what you can and can't do with your own body.
Devil's advocate - they do. But I'm not going to get into that, because this isn't a pissing contest.
No one is arguing that the right to an abortion isn't about bodily autonomy - it is. However, the right to choose when one becomes a parent is delegated only to women. Yes, men can abstain from sex, and yes men can use condoms, but barring the prevention of pregnancy there are no rights. Let's say a guy is taken advantage of when he's in a drunken stupor, let's say the condom breaks, let's say whatever unfortunate event happens and despite taking every precaution available to him - he becomes involved in a pregnancy. At this point in time, he is legally obligated to be responsible for that child. And should he fail to uphold those responsibilities, he is treated as a criminal.
Honestly, you don't see why that might not seem fair? Can you imagine if every time you had sex, the guy you had sex with had a chance of developing a medical condition, one that would legally obligate you to pay him money for the next eighteen years? And you had no chance for recourse? That wouldn't seem a little messed up to you?
I'm not going to argue that I have all the answers to a better setup for this system, because I don't. It's complicated and it's going to take a lot of intelligent people a lot of research and a lot of testing to come up with a better solution. But the system as it stands is simply unequal, and certainly there must be some way to fix that.
That's why this is posted here. Not because anyone wants to take any rights away from women, because they want some of those same rights to be extended to men.
[–]jgzman 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No one (here, anyway) is suggesting that women be forced to have an abortion. We just want the same right to walk away that the woman gets.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So if sovereignty over your own body is so important, then why is it acceptable for a man who doesn't want to be a parent to be forced to pay child support for a child he didn't want with money earned via hours of labor with his body.
It's less direct but directly applicable.
If women are afforded abortions because forcing them to carry a child for 9 months and give birth in a day or two with their bodies violates their bodily autonomy, then why aren't men given the option to forgo working for 18 years to have a significant chunk of their money, earned with their bodies, paid to someone else?
Forcing an abortion on a woman would be a violation of her bodily autonomy based on the choices of others.
Child support is a violation of a person's autonomy based directly on the choices of others.
How did you miss that this isn't about forcing abortions, it's about giving men more options? Nowhere in the history of the MRM have forced abortions been part of the agenda, and it's only mentioned in the form of rhetorical questions.
[–]Stackman23 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah instead of not getting support payments we just kill them instead.
[–]dewse 65 points66 points67 points 10 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link
In one case, there is no child. In the other, there is one, but with a missing parent. I'm all for analogies, but this one doesn't seem like a great one, or a clear one. Is it trying to say that men should also get the say if he wants the woman to get an abortion? If so, I agree with this. Pardon me, English isn't my first language, so maybe that's why it doesn't sound clear to me.
[–]flyafar 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I definitely don't have all the answers. this is a stream of consciousness:
I don't think a man should have any (legal) say in whether a woman has an abortion or not. Obviously they should talk about it in ideal circumstances, but there is no compromise to be had between abortion or carrying the baby to term. It is always the woman's sole right to abort or not, since she alone has to carry the pregnancy to term.
On the flip side, the woman should have no say legally on the father's "financial abortion". This should only be allowed before the birth of the child. The father waves all parental rights, if he so chooses. Once he does, there is absolutely no going back, unless the child wishes to contact the father later in life, and the father will have no legal responsibility, unless he adopts the child, with the consent of both the mother and the child, or solely the child if over 18.
Both of these situations are shitty if you are an unwilling party. For instance a couple decides to have a child but the man or woman decides later to change their mind... it can be devastating, but it is their right, imo.
No easy answers, unfortunately, and I see a ton of ways the financial abortion situation could be abused by both sides. The mother keeping the pregnancy a secret, which can only be solved by ensuring the father is aware of the child before it's born, which is unenforceable, which means, what, allowing financial abortions after birth? Then the father holds all the cards, so to speak... So fucking messy.
[–]tylamarre -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Perhaps a universal basic income could alleviate the burden on fathers to support the child.
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
No it's trying to say he should be able to sign his rights away which he can. No rights no visitation no worries
[–]perverted_alt 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
which he can
Oh yeah? Where?
no worries
No child support?
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
http://thelawdictionary.org/article/giving-up-a-fathers-parental-rights/
[–]perverted_alt 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Neat. Free online dictionary to the concept of giving up rights.
Did you really think I needed help knowing what giving up rights meant??
I wanted to know if there was a place where it was a legal option.
So, yeah...no I guess? :-/
[–]HazMat68W 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's extremely hard in any state. And typically the mother has to request it because of issues like abuse and then a judge has to approve it. That last part is even trickier than getting the mother to comply because the state doesn't ever want to be responsible for the wellbeing of the child.
So if you're a normal dude who isn't abusive, don't get your hopes up.
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Texas
[–]perverted_alt 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
this has been fun.
[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I think this is wrong.
A quick google search showed me examples of people saying they still had to pay child support and even an example of how a woman was willing to stop receiving child support because the child didn't want to see the father and the court wouldn't do it even if he gave up his rights.
I'll take a link now to any actual source that says you legally get out of child support by giving up rights.
[–]lhxtx 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That doesn't actually happen unless there is a new father willing to simultaneously adopt.
[–]RelevantAnecdotes -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Exactly. Just like mom can not pay child support and she faces the same consequences. Both parents have equal access to the kid after its born, but only the one who has to carry that child gets to decide to continue the pregnancy or not.
[+]JackBond1234 -13 points-12 points-11 points 10 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link
In one case a murder is committed, in the other case arguably a discourtesy.
[–]dewse 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link
I see that I'm not the only one that has issues with English words. Murder is when you unlawfully kill someone.
[–]jeepdave 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link
Legal doesn't equal moral. Abortion is murder. Don't let legalities try and make you feel otherwise. Do what ya want, just don't sugar coat it.
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
Abortion is only murder if you consider a foetus to be a living, sentient being.
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
I do.
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
I struggle to understand that position. At what point do you believe they become conscious? Because you can only have an abortion up to 24 weeks and according to Scientific American
Consciousness requires a sophisticated network of highly interconnected components, nerve cells. Its physical substrate, the thalamo-cortical complex that provides consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place between the 24th and 28th week of gestation. Roughly two months later synchrony of the electroencephalographic (EEG) rhythm across both cortical hemispheres signals the onset of global neuronal integration. Thus, many of the circuit elements necessary for consciousness are in place by the third trimester.
I feel like people confuse potential for conscious and living, for conscious and living.
[–]JackBond1234 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
I think people confuse consciousness and value for life.
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
That's not confusion or equating two different things, that's difference of opinion.
[–]JackBond1234 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Maybe if your opinion is the denial of dictionary definitions for words.
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
I believe life begins upon conception. That's my stance.
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
But do you accept that the term murder doesn't apply as it isn't unlawful? By the dictionary definition it is you who is in denial.
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I do not accept that. The law isn't what defines my worldview. Morality does.
[–]dewse -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
That all depends on if you're affected by a religious ideology. Each to their opinions though.
Doesn't need religion. I believe unique life begins at conception.
[–]dewse 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You put a small mass of cell in the same basket as a complex life form that can ponder its own mortality? Putting aside later abortions, it's just not the same thing. I meant religion in the broad sense; not organized religion.
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Yet the only difference from it being cells vs a human is time.
[–]dewse 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Not if it gets killed before it becomes one. Do you think that mass of cell has a soul or something? If not, then why are you bothered that it could be a human in time?
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't like the taking of innocent life.
[–]TranceIsLove -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Do you eat meat?
[–]jeepdave 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Does it matter?
[–]TranceIsLove -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm just curious if you consider it murder or not
[–]jeepdave 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I do not.
[–][deleted] 54 points55 points56 points 10 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link
I always find it funny when people who are pro-choice use pro-life rhetoric as soon as the conversation is about male reproductive rights e.g. "if you don't want kids get it snipped", "men do get a choice, it's called a condom", "consent to sex is consent to fatherhood". It's a really bizarre standard that society holds men to, where your options are: a potentially non-reversible surgery (chance gets worse with time) that you may have difficulty in getting a doctor to agree to if you're young/childless, hoping that you don't succumb to the 2% chance of pregnancy per year from using condoms perfectly (for reference the typical failure rate per year is 18%), or celibacy.
But men already have all the rights, right?
Failure rates source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_birth_control_methods
[–]VarsityPhysicist 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
OR, you could just have sex with a partner who shares a similar view and understanding of having kids and the responsibilities they entail
My gf and I may want kids some day but know we would not be able to care and provide for one now and would terminate a pregnancy instead of giving the 3 of us a crappier life
Though, it sounds like everyone here has a problem understanding the difference between rights and responsibilities
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Two potential pitfalls here:
1) Having the same views on children and an understanding as to how an unplanned pregnancy would be handled is ideal, sure, and there are plenty of guys who are in a similar boat to you. However, should an unplanned pregnancy occur, there is nothing stopping someone from changing their mind with regard to having an abortion. Whether or not a guy becomes a father in these situations is 100% down to the decision made by their partner. Now I'm not suggesting that women in long-term relationships who have agreed to abort unplanned pregnancies, and then go back on their word, is a common occurrence. But it absolutely does happen.
2) You don't address single men who are having one-night stands/casual relationships. There is obviously less trust and commitment involved here. Would you agree that men in this camp get shafted due to the reasons I've outlined in my OP? Do you think they should build a decent level of trust and understanding with someone before they have sex, even if they're not looking for something serious? I'm just curious to hear your thoughts.
[–]JimBobDwayne 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I always get a chuckle reading posts like this because it it makes it obvious how young and naive the commenter is.
Son, I know you probably trust your girlfriend but if she were to actually get pregnant your verbal agreement carries the legal weight of toilet paper, and rightfully so it's her body. She will be the sole decider of whether or not you become a Father and even if you don't want a relationship with her (probably not because she violated your trust) and she moves across the country to keep you out of the child's life, you're on the hook for child support.
[+]VarsityPhysicist -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You have provided me with no new information. I may be young (you have no idea of my age, however), but you are over assuming of my naivety, while you know nothing about the people that myself and SO are, so you don't know that I am not some dumbass that sleeps around with no regard to the consequences, be those children or STDs
It did give me a laugh that you believe yourself to be so wise that it was necessary to share this useless bit of information
[–]JimBobDwayne 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
I'm a lawyer, I'm cynical and I'm curt, my knowledge is not from wisdom but experience. I see lots of 'smart' people make mistakes they thought would never happen to them. I'm sure your gf is very special and you both have bond no one else can understand so I wish you the best. I hope you never need someone like me one day.
[–]VarsityPhysicist -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm sure your gf is very special and you both have bond no one else can understand
I'm not a teenager you moron. Christ, you must be a terribly annoying person irl. People need lawyers for plenty of matters, but I don't plan on needing one for divorce or custody affairs
[–]JimBobDwayne 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't plan on needing one for divorce or custody affairs
No one does.
[–]mochacola 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I don't understand why IUD is not popular.
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I guess the majority of women would weigh up the options and think "I'd rather just take some pills than have this weird thing shoved in me". I can understand that position, even though when you just look at the figures the IUD clearly takes the majority of potential human error out of the equation. If men also had an implant and pill with similar success rates, I suspect most guys would choose the pill over the implant as well.
[–]milkypsych 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Put simply the 'copper coil' often causes heavy, painful periods and sometimes can't be fitted in women that haven't already have children. Some people won't want to take the hormonal coil because they don't want hormonal birth control. With the pill you can try different ones to see which hormone level works best for you, whereas with the IUD you're pretty stuck. Another reason is that people might still be scared from cases where IUDs have caused miscarriage, birth defects and infertility (Dalkon shield). Finally, there's research being carried out at the minute following on from evidence that some IUDs make work as 'abortive'. This hasn't been confirmed but I know that some doctors in the UK are holding off from recommending IUDs at the minute until this becomes more clear.
I think that IUDs can be a very effective method of birth control, but I can see why some people choose to avoid them.
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Debilitating cramps and months of spot bleeding tend to put us off. The painful insertion, risk of it perforating the uterus, risk of infection traveling quickly up the string, the expense...
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Doctors wont do it for women who have not yet had a child.
Source: my wife
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Source.
Perfect Use:
Among couples who initiate use of a method (not necessarily for the first time) and who use it perfectly (both consistently and correctly), the percentage who experience an accidental pregnancy during the first year if they do not stop use for any other reason. See the text for the derivation of the estimate for each method.
The 2% stat covers mechanical failure (splits/tears etc) over the course of a year, assuming the frequency of sexual intercourse is in line with the average for the study.
You also can't easily prove the kid is even yours. There's a whole minefield around that.
[–]Damadawf 25 points26 points27 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
And as shitty as this double standard is, this is exactly why guys who do not want children should be extremely careful in making sure that they don't accidentally impregnate anyone. "Accidents happen" isn't a good enough excuse because this is an inequality that will probably never go away due to the biological differences between men and women. The baby is inside the woman's body, so ultimately she is given the final say over whether or not she goes through with the pregnancy, and men are forced to pay child support so that the child isn't "disadvantaged" in life.
It's just an all around shitty situation, and that's why you need to seriously think twice about what you're doing when you have sex with a woman because it only takes a split second of letting your guard down for her to get pregnant, and then there's nothing more you can do.
[–]55mph_knuckleball 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
My vasectomy is the best thing I ever had done.
[–]__PETTYOFFICER117__ 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
My dad had a vasectomy... Then a reversal. Neither sounds fun.
[–]55mph_knuckleball 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Healing from a vasectomy is nowhere as bad as you would think. Few days in bed wearing a jock strap and I was good. I dunno about the reversal, I don't think I would ever one.
[–]whitemanrunning 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
You got a few days bed rest? Shit, the navy had me working the next day.
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This is the US Navy right? I'm surprised they didn't burst into the operating room with a bottle of ibuprofen and tell you to stop malingering.
[–]whitemanrunning 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Close. My CPO lived next door and brought me a present of some paperwork to get done that i missed while in surgery. We had a good laugh, he had beer while i did paper work.
[–]55mph_knuckleball 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I probably could have gotten up and done some light duty stuff the next day but my wife made sure that everything around the house/with the kids was taken care of.
[–]Xemnas81 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Rollo would say never let her control the birth.
[–]copper_chicken -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Have a new identity set up and ready. Witness protection program style.
[–]Ssilversmith 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is a comic from the 1970s in opposition to the abortion rights hearings. I uploaded a copy of the very same comic from a book collecting the major political cartoons of the 1970s. Judging from the look and the way it scanned this might be the one I uploaded years ago, but more than likely it's just a coincidence.
Despite it being a prolife comic when applied to the context of the day it was first circulated, it still resonates the same message in debates concerning male reproductive rights.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (45 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lowkeypeepee 20 points21 points22 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
I was about to put a condom on during a drunken romp with my ex she said don't worry about that I can't get pregnant. 7 years and a whole heap of child support later I feel like a fool.
[–]reagan2024 20 points21 points22 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
Never listen to a horny woman when it comes to birth control.
[–]Nick12506 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
If a women lies about birth control they need to face a long time in jail.
[–]Lowkeypeepee 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Even worse she said her insides were all fucked up and she was basically sterile.
[–]Grasshopper21 -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Its basically rape
[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
No, it really isn't.
[–]muchlygrand 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Kind of is. Since you're having sex under false pretenses, where you wouldn't otherwise have consented at all.
I mean I don't think anyone would press charges, but I could understand their feeling violated.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Sex under false pretenses? By that logic, having sex with beer goggles on is "kind of" rape if you wouldn't have slept with them otherwise. I mean, Taylor wouldn't have had sex with Jamie if Taylor was sober and saw what Jamie actually looked like so it was rape? That's something most people on this sub are fucking against!!! It's regret, not "kind of" rape.
[–]muchlygrand 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I can see what you mean - but beer goggles are self induced, someone lying to you is not. I mean I can understand someone feeling hurt and violated if they are tricked into sex. It may not be rape, but its a shitty, immoral to do.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There we go. It's a shitty fucking thing to do but it's not rape, it's not sexual assault, and it shouldn't be illegal because if it were, abuse of said law would be incredibly common and lead to many people in jail who haven't really done anything wrong.
[–]Fgame -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Sex under false pretenses isnt rape tier, but it should be sexual assault in any case. Of course, operating on the assumption you can prove it.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Sorry for the copypaste but I have the same response.
[–]Fgame 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
We're talking about permanent consequences. It IS 100% illegal to knowingly transmit HIV to someone without their consent, right? I'm not sure about other STDs, but many of them can be treated/controlled a lot easier. I don't see how your example with 'beer goggles' even fits this conversation. Unless you feel that 'regretting' contracting HIV from someone isn't a form of sexual assault, in which case I don't know what to say to you. If a guy says he's sterile, a woman says she's infertile, either of them have HIV or another permanent STD, I feel KNOWINGLY deceiving someone for the purpose of sex is sexual assault.
[–]cy1999aek_maik 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Im sorry to hear that.at least are you close to the child?
[–]Xemnas81 -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Never trust a woman [you're hooking up with for 1st time] to use BC (I'd hope you trust your SO!) I've heard about women lying aboit being on the pill so he'll fuck her. Always take precautions. Sorry for your loss. I hope you get to see the kid at least.
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 55 points56 points57 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
The difference is that in one scenario, it's about the woman's right to bodily autonomy and how she can't be forced to share her body to keep a fetus alive and in the other scenario it's the best interests of the child. I do agree that it sucks that there are not more birth control options for men. Y'all need a pill.
[–][deleted] 20 points21 points22 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Yea but even some birth control options fail, which is when abortion would come into play. I think as long as a guy writes off any and all rights to a child (a sort of financial/parental abortion) he should not be penalized if a woman wants to keep the child he wanted to abort. Only seems fair
[–]mrSilkie -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
nobody really adopts cause everybody wants to make their own fucking baby, like the woman who for a uterus transplant
[–]MrTucker3 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Really? Cause it's pretty hard to adopt a baby. Long waiting lists, adoptions fall through, birth moms change their minds, birth fathers want to fight the adoption. It's often years before you get a chance to adopt a baby.
[–]HalfysReddit 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think that's a large part of this issue:
The system for adoption simply sucks. It's expensive and complicated and takes a very long time.
The system for caring for children without homes also simply sucks. It's unhealthy and fosters life-affecting issues in the children involved with it.
[–][deleted] 32 points33 points34 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Sure, no bodily autonomy issues with being forced to toil for decades to sustain another human being, or with being thrown into jail if you fail to do so even for a few months.
[–]Sharkman1231 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Bodily autonomy is literally about self-determination of your own body.
[–]Sharkman1231 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes.
[–]RiPing 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Vasalgel coming soon.
[–]neverXmiss 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I love how the perspective changes. If a woman is pregnant, its not about the child inside, its about her bodily autonomy, but when a man doesn't want a child, its not about his financial autonomy its about the child.
[–]perverted_alt 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"sharing your body" is not so very different from "sharing your labor".
They passed some laws about this after the abolition of slavery. You might find them interesting.
[–]PerniciousOne 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So using the "best interests of the child".
Why are women who utilize safe haven laws, or give up their children for adoption not required to finance the new family, or the state for the maintenance of those children? After all it is in the "best interests of the child"?
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The father can also give the child up for adoption if he wants, if there's someone willing to adopt like a stepparent. If the mother gives the baby up to a save haven the father can claim the baby and the mother would have to pay child support. It already is equal.
[–]RaptorFalcon -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
You missed a man's bodily autonomy. Being forced to pay Child Support is literally being forced to work for someone else's benefit, and a removal of a man's bodily autonomy. These things would be ok if the man chose to do it (eg working to support a family), but to have "no say and still pay."
Well that is the closest thing to slavery these days
[–]jeepdave -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nah. I don't give into this bullshit. Either both parties agree to abortion or the child gets to exist. Both contributed. And it isn't like no one knows what can happen when you bang v
[–]99639 -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Can't the woman drop off the baby and face no child support? We should use the same 'best interests of the child' logic to make mothers pay instead of the state.
Oh, wait, the reason we don't do that is because women murder their children instead. The baby Moses laws are set up to prevent dumpster babies, where women throw their baby into a dumpster to kill it. So shouldn't we give men this same privilege of being able to walk away from the baby, or should men start murdering babies until they get the same rights women have?
[–]Assupoika -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
And don't give me this bullshit of using protection,both genders should responsible for that
And they are. If you don't want child, use protection. If you trust your partner enough, you can trust if he/she says he/she's protected. But you are still responsible for having that trust.
But ultimately, it's up to you to use protection. Why would you fuck someone barebacked that you don't trust?
STDs are more of the male's responsibility, because woman can't use condom (there are some contraptions, but nothing as easy as condom). And they are putting a lot faith on the man to not slip the condom off unnoticed because "it feels better".
Accidents happen and it sucks if you can't get in to an agreement about abortion/adoption and child support. But it's for the good of the kid if you have to pay child support.
[–]cy1999aek_maik 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
You literally gave me the bullshit i asked for you not to give me.im pretty sure women can tell a bare dick and a dick with a condom apart.They do have a say in the matter.Or women could take a pill in advance if they're planning on having sex that day
[–]Assupoika -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link
Well, that settles it. You've never talked with women about sex. No, vagina doesn't have that defined feel that they'd be able to tell if the penis inside her has a condom or not. The condom tends to get the same temperature as penis very fast.
You also have no clue how the contraception pill works, do you?
It's not like a fucking aspirin, you don't take it couple of hours before sex. You got to take it every day in certain order for it to be effective. Miss one day and it might not be effective for days. And when you start using the pill, it's not immediately effective. It takes couple of weeks for them to start to have effect. Could've been even 4 weeks. I don't remember, it's been a long time since my SO started taking them.
And day after pill shouldn't be used as a contraception. It's something you use IF you notice that you don goofed up, or if you notice the condom fail/pessary fail (not that Pessary is very common contraception). It's like a hormone nuclear bomb. It can mess up your menstrual cycle for a while. And it's not fool proof either.
[–]cy1999aek_maik 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Just because the vag cant feel the difference that doesn't mean the rest of the woman can't.You can hear a condom come off,you can see a condom come off and you can feel the penis in other areas of the body without getting too graphic.
As for the pill,my point stands.if a woman is not planning on getting pregnant then why would she stop taking the pill?
[–]Assupoika -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Well, I tried to educate you a bit. I hope that one day you'll face the realities of safe sex and protection.
[–]cy1999aek_maik 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
To be honest im still a virgin but that doesn't mean im not old enough to have a conversation like adults.im 17 im not 10.We can discuss if you want to it's all in a friendly manner
[–]Assupoika 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't know what else we have left to discuss.
I agree on you that both parties are responsible of using a contraception.
But that means both parties, you and her. If you are willing to risk having a child, you can leave out the contraception and agree that the other party uses it. It's ultimately about the trust. If you don't know the other one well enough and you can't trust her/him, use protection of your own.
Also, I still want to point out that:
You can hear a condom come off,you can see a condom come off and you can feel the penis in other areas of the body without getting too graphic.
You can slide it off without pretty much any sound. And I'd wager that you wouldn't be able to feel the difference of hot slimy penis poking your inner thigh, with a hot slimy penis with a condom on poking your inner thigh. Vagina, inner thigh, and that general idea don't have the fine texture feel that fingertips have.
And if you are fucking doggie style, she doesn't see everything that's going on around back there. Or in missionary either necessarily.
Condom isn't 100%, neither is pill. If you want to be sure, both use contraception. If the contraception fails and she wants to keep the child and you don't, that sucks and I agree that there should be some kind of arrangement here. But it's a juridical hell and a lot of she said he said.
What about if the pregnancy is consensual, the woman gets pregnant and suddenly on week 9 the man decides that he doesn't want to be a father after all? Now should the woman lose child support if she wants to keep the baby but the man wants to get abortion? That wouldn't be fair. Should you make a signed document before the pregnancy that "we are now trying to get pregnant consensually"?
[–]cy1999aek_maik 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree on pretty much everything you said so yeah i guess there is nothing to discuss you're right haha.
Idk how well signing a contract before sex would sound but i agree to the fact that men shouldn't be able to "opt out" of parenthood half way through the pregnancy and it anything that should be punished imo.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Mind enlightening me in which way am I the idiot in this debate?
Basically we agree that protection is responsibility of both parties, yet we are somehow in disagreement about it.
For the record i dont think you're an idiot and i dont find this a waste of time.if anything im learning something haha
[–]Applejack244 27 points28 points29 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I am radically pro-choice but this. THIS. This is amazing at illustrating my thoughts on gender inequality and double standards.
[+]gravity013 -11 points-10 points-9 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
A shallow political comic that equivocates the child being born to the child not being born as if they were the same thing?
[–]donthassleme-imlocal 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The point is that one a choice of whether to have a child while the other doesn't.
[–]Applejack244 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
No. The dick-ish tendencies in society being called out in (What I consider) a witty way.
[–]gravity013 -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're not very witty then.
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Look, you see I'm all for being pro-choice, but I also think if the father wants to relinquish parental rights, he should.
[–]VarsityPhysicist 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Sure he can relinquish his parental rights, but he can't do that for his parental responsibilities
[–]I_FART_OUT_MY_BUTT69 -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
he would still be called all of these things
[–]saintmikel 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But yet at 26 my doctor refuses to snip me.... I know I don't want kids. They don't fit in the life plan and I have been single for 8 years and am content that way. I am pro choice but most women I have been with told me if they got pregnant they would keep it. I don't want kids but if I had one I would do my best to be the best dad in the world whether I originally wanted them here or not
I understand men don't have the choice women have but to be fair a lot of people say a lot of things to women who chose not to be mothers. And not generalizing either, to their faces, horrible things, as they are leaving clinics probably feelings extremely vulnerable.
[–]FromTheFarSouth 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Fortunately the youth wing of the Liberal Party of Sweden wants to change this situation in their country.
[+]geniice -11 points-10 points-9 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Sweden though already has a very high level of taxes and an extensive welfare state. The extra cost of children with non contributing fathers is thus less of an issue.
[–]Ultramegasaurus 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Why do feminists keep treating pregnancy like a disease anyway and base their whole argumentation on 9 months of discomfort instead of 18 years of raising a child?
[–]xmrsmoothx 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Well, to be fair, 18 years of raising a child is a lot like a disease as well. It costs a ton of money, requires constant attention, and has detrimental effects on your health.
I totally sympathize with wanting to opt out of that shit.
[–]Ultramegasaurus -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah, but feminists never talk about that. It's "muh body" this, "muh body" that. They only see the 9 months of pregnancy.
Well okay, actually it's logical. The man shares the 18 years of raising a child too. If feminists argued pro-choice because raising a child is hard, men could use that argument too because they raise the child too. So instead they base their whole argumentation on the pregnancy to make sure men are excluded.
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There's a reason AIDS and KIDS is only one letter pff
[–]SEND_ME_YOUR_ASSPICS 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This point would be valid if both men and women can give birth. Unfortunately for MRM, that is not the case.
[–]ILoveToph4Eva 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Assuming the point is "it's not fair" then it's still pretty valid. Logically, it doesn't completely follow as a comparison, but the overall point is quite valid I think.
Man and Woman have sex. Both consent to sex, in having sex they accept the POSSIBILITY of pregnancy.
Woman gets pregnant.
Woman has two options, carry the child to term, or abort.
Man has no options. Wait and see what the woman chooses.
I understand that they face different risks here. But they came into the situation with an understanding and on equal footing, and now the Man has no choice with anything.
It's definitively unfair. And if that's OP's point, then he's not wrong.
Is there a solution that doesn't screw over society as whole? I don't know.
[–]danpilon 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Women have more than two choices, and the other choices are more comparable I think. Women can choose to:
-keep the child and raise it
-keep the child and give it up for adoption
-keep the child and drop it off at a safe haven
-abort the child
The 2nd and 3rd option are comparable to the proposed right for men to "financially abort" a child, because they don't directly involve the pregnancy, but result in the removal of rights and responsibilities for the mother. Sure some people will have some choice names to call women who drop their kid off at a safe haven, but it is legal and is a way for women to get out of the responsibility of motherhood without an abortion. Women already have the right to a "financial abortion", so men should too.
[–]cra4efqwfe45 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If our social safety net was strong enough, we wouldn't need to require not-involved parents to be financially liable.
[–]WeRtheBork 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Missing some important details though.
[–]EFIW1560 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
While I absolutely agree that dads get fucked by the family court/system in general, I think this graphic is comparing 2 different situations. A father who doesn't want to be a dad is stepping away from a living child who still needs care. A mother who gets an abortion (which is implied here by the pro-choice statement) is preventing a child from existing in the first place, this eliminating the need to care for it any further. Again, I agree completely that the way fathers are treated is abhorrent, and I realize that a father can't physically get an abortion himself. In just saying I think this infographic leaves room to be picked apart, and therefore doesn't provide a strong comparison.
[–]PerniciousOne 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
How do you explain "safe haven laws" and adoption? There is now a child which exists.
Should the mother be financially responsible to the state, or the adoptive family because she is stepping away from a living child who still needs care?
[–]EFIW1560 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I agree that's a very good point, and would be a much better example. I just meant that the term pro-choice usually applies to abortion, at least coloquially.
[–]yoshi570 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
This really isn't the same. You have serious issues with basic logics if you think so. And I'm a man, and one that generally agrees with Men Rights' ideas.
[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Well we have unilateral maternal surrender after birth.
Those women aren't tracked down and forced to pay child support or face jail.
[–]yoshi570 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, I said I agree that it is unfair, I said that I am pretty in for the Men's Rights. But that comic is not a comic for Men's Rights, it is one anti-aborption. It compares the refusing to raise a kid to having an aborption. These two aren't near, at all. An embryo is not a kid.
[–]ILoveToph4Eva -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'd like to hope that he isn't suggesting that they're the same, but that the situation as whole disadvantages the man.
It's a situation which cannot by definition be called fair. The repercussions and autonomy are all in women's favor.
The artist behind the comic is not even defending men's rights. He's anti-aborption. The rethorics aren't the same, at all. And it's not even fair for women either !
You got pregnant accidently and have the child ? How dare you raise a kid you were not prepared for, did not have the wealth for ?
You got pregnant accidently and have an abortion ? How dare you end the precious life ?
If you wanted to make the comic one for men's right, the second panel should be:
This is a woman who got pregnant and decided to raise the kid without telling the father. She's a parangon of virtue, an example of motherhood.
Because yes, it is as bad for a father to refuse to raise a kid than it is for a mother to have childs in secrets. Having a children is a decision that should only happen when the two parents are okay for it. It only needs one of them not to be up for it to be enough to go for an aborption.
In the case of the man on the left, the child was born, so there's a human to care for. In the case of the woman on the right, she aborted, so there's no baby to care for. If a woman gave birth to a child and then divorced her husband and forced him to take care of the child it would be fair to call her selfish just like the hypothetical selfish man in this cartoon who left his woman with the child.
[–]seymorezipcode -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
/r/shitpost
[+]dzamir -7 points-6 points-5 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
There was a time when this was an interesting subreddit and shits like this were criticized and downvoted. Now it's just a circlejerk
[–]AloysiusC 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So what's your criticism of it?
[+]atred -17 points-16 points-15 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
Things are not equal, a man ejaculates sperm and that's it, that's a bit different than caring a child for 9 month inside your body and giving birth.
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm sure we know where babies come from. That's not the point.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]iLeo 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It comes off as one. Another user even pointed out this is a pro-life comic.
[+]atred -20 points-19 points-18 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
sure, would it be nice to just tell women "I changed my mind, or, that was a mistake, you are on your own"
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]atred -19 points-18 points-17 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Men can very easily decide not be parents, the only thing they cannot "decide" is to give up the financial obligation that comes from the conception, if the woman decides to keep the baby. That's unfortunate, but I don't see that changing.
Personally, I think that if the woman gives birth and then she gives up the baby she should pay child support if the father decides to raise the child (or until the child is adopted).
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]atred 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Maybe, I don't pretend to know how things should be.
To me it looks like the issue is practicality, if a woman (or man for that matter) is the only parent, then somebody needs to help to provide for the kid. And who else than the other person responsible for bringing the kid into the world?
[–]atred 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, that's stupid, I don't agree with that since the man is not responsible for the pregnancy in such instances. But that's a different case from the false equivalence presented in this post.
[–]xmrsmoothx -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
And who else than the other person responsible for bringing the kid into the world?
The mother? After all, in the end, the choice to abort the fetus is hers and hers alone. The final responsibility lies with her.
[–]atred -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Only that's not that simple, about half of the people in US believe that abortion is murder, so that means that for many pregnant women the choice is made when the child was conceived. Even if they don't think it's murder it's still not an easy choice for many reasons.
[–]AloysiusC 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But if she aborts, she is not carrying the child for 9 months and giving birth. She can take the pill the next day and her inconvenience is only marginally greater than the man's.
[+][deleted] -24 points-23 points-22 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
This post gave me fucking cancer..
[–]Canileaveyet 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Good, I hope you die soon.
[–]-Canonical- 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And why, exactly?
[–]x7Hogan7x -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They're both assholes...
[–]episode11 -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Or he could just wear a condom/get a vasectomy etc.
[–]kasperkakoala 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And she could get her tubes tied or take birth control
[+]thegeekprophet -38 points-37 points-36 points 10 years ago* (65 children) | Copy Link
I'm a dad, a non custodial fuckin guy that gets screwed by the ex. But I don't like this pic if it means a Dad bailed on his kid because he doesn't want to be a Dad. Fuck that kinda guy.
Edit: looks like deadbeat dad's hang out here, judging by the downvotes.
[+][deleted] 10 years ago (61 children) | Copy Link
[–]adamsfan42 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It depends, this is a complicated issue. lets say a couple is trying to conceive and the dad just decides at the last minute to bail. in that case there is a double standard for a reason. we don't have to bear children and most reasonable people would say the man has to a least pay child support. i think that is a fair trade off. Its true however, that their is an unfair double standard in other cases. for example if a woman gives a kid up for adoption she is seen as brave or a wounded victim, but if the guy does essentially the same thing, well as the comic says he is seen as a dead beat etc.. in my opinion both are deadbeats in this case, but the woman is more at fault because she should have had an abortion.
[–]diphiminaids -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
If the kid is born, both parents abandon, they are both shitheads. If no child is born, they are both fine tho
[–]zer0t3ch 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The problem is, the dad doesn't have the final say on whether or not the child is born, the woman does. Personally, I believe fathers should be allowed to void all of their parental rights and obligations at least until the second trimester, similarly to the range that women are allowed to abort in many countries.
[–]gravity013 -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
But it's pretty fucking easy to say this, drunk on some sort of "equality" principle as if the world ran on perfect morality. The reality of the situation is that an "equality" such as this would be abused drastically, leaving many women with no support by mere fact they are the default child bearers of our species.
Come on guys, it's not this simple and you know it.
[–]derpylord143 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
its why i advocate a sign out option before pregnancy that you and the mother both sign, that way if she goes ahead and has sex knowing there wouldn't be a father then she bears the responsibility (though its worth noting, it puts the responsibility on the father to try and avoid pregnancy...) the contract can last one night or an entire relationship but the entire point is, they went in knowing that the father wasn't going to bear the responsibilities put on them.
[–]zer0t3ch -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
leaving many women with no support
What are you not understanding? The woman is never left with a child that she doesn't want to care for, she always has the choice. (Until the third trimester, I guess) Yes, men would be leaving women, but it's not like those women are trapped with the children. Even if they choose to go through with birth on either moral/religious obligations, they can still put the child up for adoption, or simply leave it at a fire-station.
This is not meant as a "world ran on perfect morality", but some semblance of equality would be nice. As of right now, the scales of equality in regards to offspring are so drastically tipped that it's not even funny.
[–]kihadat -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (53 children) | Copy Link
If you live in a conservative state, women don't really even have that right, and politicians are working hard to take it away completely.
[–]Onithyr 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
Which states are trying to take away safe haven laws?
[–]kihadat 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
Safe haven is not what is being discussed here, though it is certainly an issue for women that there are not many safe spaces for those with infants.
[–]Onithyr 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
I think you misunderstand. Safe haven laws allow women to abandon their infants.
[–]kihadat -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I know what safe haven laws are! I'm talking about this:
Mothers who abandon their children tend to be judged far more harshly by society, and by their children, than fathers who do the same -- though not because of outcome.
source
[–]Onithyr 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
-Canonical-'s full post:
The point of the image is to illustrate the blatant double standard of reproductive rights. All parents should have the right to abandon parenthood - not just half of them
To which you replied:
What right are you talking about other than the right to abandon parenthood? And if you are talking about the right to abandon parenthood, wouldn't the abolishment of safe haven laws be required to achieve the complete removal of said right?
[–]kihadat 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I'm talking about abortion rights.
[–]JupeJupeSound 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]k9centipede -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Can you point to where safe haven laws don't allow a father to also drop a baby off?
[–]Onithyr 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Where did I say otherwise?
[–]k9centipede 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Then why are safe haven laws being brought up in these threads as an example of the unfair balance of women's ability to abandon their responsibilities as a parent and not men?
[–]derpylord143 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Ironically the current state regarding adoption in the US doesn't seem too bad, so long as you can establish you had a relationship with the child (or the mother had prevented you from doing so, through not telling you about the child or keep moving about and not telling you the location etc. anything to impair your relationship with the child) then you are entitled to be notified about the adoptions (including safe haven ones) under your 14th amendment (of due process) - the issue with them is the anonymity present in safe haven laws make it incredibly hard to find out who the father is.
[–]Onithyr 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They were being brought up in response to the claim that some states are trying to completely take away the ability for a woman to abandon motherhood.
[–]JimBobDwayne 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Safe haven laws apply to the custodial parent. The mother of a new born child is the de facto custodial parent. If the couple is unmarried and the father of child (again the non custodial parent) were to try and drop the child off without her permission he would be charged with kidnapping, and rightfully so. The mother on the other hand could do so with or without the Father's permission unless he's already suing to establish paternity.
[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link
Killing a child is not really a right that one should have.
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Pretend you need blood. I'm O-, you're O-. You're bleeding out, the hospital is out of blood, and I'm the only O- in the hospital. I don't have to share my body with you even if you're going to die. That is bodily autonomy. I have that right. A woman doesn't have to share her body with a fetus even if kicking the fetus out kills it. Abortion is legal until the point of viability, when the fetus can theoretically survive without the mother. Abortion is legal because no one has the right to use another's body without their continued consent.
[–]xmrsmoothx 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Excellent post. This is the absolute most important point in favor of abortion.
[–]jubbergun -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
I'm completely in favor of abortion with reasonable restrictions, but this is a nonsense argument. My being in the hospital doesn't invite someone to take my blood. Two people engaging in sex does invite pregnancy, even when methods are used to lessen the possibility of pregnancy. Much like landlord/tenant law, you can't just give someone the boot without due process if you've invited them in, which is exactly what a woman has done with the fetus by engaging in sexual intercourse.
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
She consented to sex, not to pregnancy. The pregnancy was a risk, that doesn't mean she loses rights to her body because she had sex.
[–]jubbergun 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
She consented to sex, not to pregnancy.
In which case the same applies to her partner. You can't have it both ways.
[–]flyafar 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Right, which is why the woman can (and should be able to) choose to abort, and the man should be able to financially/parentally abort.
Except the difference is here, you are the one who stabbed me.
[–]kihadat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link
So, women should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term against their will by the state?
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 10 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link
In place of a life being taken, absolutely, 100% yes.
[–]kihadat -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link
Yet, you're one of those "am I being detained" people? How ironic.
[–]SomeOrdinaryCanadian 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Wow, that's fucking pathetic dude
[–]kihadat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Explain.
[–]SomeOrdinaryCanadian 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Stalking someone's Reddit profile to find a unrelated incident to use it as an insult. Seriously, grow up.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link
No, I'm not, and that was over a year ago. I was asking on behalf of my brother, struggling to get to work because he was afraid to drive his car and get in a lot of trouble.
But hey you can just go ahead and dig and dig and dig into me personally since you have nothing else to say.
[–]kihadat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link
True, your comment and post history is a shit show, to say the least. But none of it is too surprising coming from someone who would have the government force a raped woman to carry the birth to term.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
Do you take the definition of Ad Hominem seriously at all?
Your debate practice seems to be looking for character flaws in a person sufficient enough to write them off without a discussion.
You're a loser. But none too surprising coming from someone who would let a human being die because it was more comfortable.
[–]Furah 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
To say a man loses control over whether or not he is a father, in the sense that he is involved in the child's life (even if it's only financial involvement), the moment the woman is pregnant is wrong.
That's your choice. The point here is choice.
[–]_kartoffel_salat_ -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A man has different ways to prevent a pregnancy: condom, vasectomy, pulling out, ect. If he doesn't use one of these, and even if he does but it fails and a baby is born, he should be responsible for that baby. A woman has different ways to prevent a pregnancy: the pill, female condoms, the patch, the ring, hormone shots/implants, abortion, ect. If she doesn't use one of these, and even if she does but it fails and a baby is born, she should be responsible for that baby. Basically if a child is born, whether you like it or not, you're responsible. Yes, a woman can take more steps than a man can, but a man can take steps that are a shit ton easier (like pulling out). If he really didn't want to be responsible for a kid, he could have done something as simple as that. If he doesn't take those measures, than whether or not the woman has an abortion or not is irrelevant, because he took the risk, and he's responsible for his actions, just as a woman is responsible for her actions if she gets an abortion or not. Could the actions of the women affect the man? Most definitely. But could the actions of the man affect the woman and make it so none of that would ever happen? Yes.
[–]Scaarr -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Dear god this is retarded.
[–]HaryTheLizard -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Aren't laws that give the right to the "dad" to legally abort in the first weeks and refuse all rights and reseponsabilities to parenthood? I mean I know there will still be a child, but he would not have to pay anything or be responsible for anything.. I thought there already was something like that no?
[–]jasonhoblin -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
i'm still shaking...
[+]SmoothMooves -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That dress is discolored in all the right places.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]BobbyDropTableUsers 405 points406 points407 points (67 children) | Copy Link
[–]mochacola 321 points322 points323 points (56 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (54 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Lord_ThunderCunt 82 points83 points84 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]deanat78 38 points39 points40 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+]JupeJupeSound -23 points-22 points-21 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]deanat78 25 points26 points27 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]Ruadan -9 points-8 points-7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]super_franzs 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]eyephone314 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xmrsmoothx 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nuesuh 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]quwertie 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]cptjmshook -14 points-13 points-12 points (41 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lance_lake 14 points15 points16 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[+]cptjmshook -9 points-8 points-7 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 5 points6 points7 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook 5 points6 points7 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]quwertie 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook 2 points3 points4 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sbaker777 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kinbaku_enthusiast 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]bougabouga 8 points9 points10 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook 6 points7 points8 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]bougabouga 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bougabouga 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook 1 point2 points3 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]ChimneyMonkey 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]cptjmshook -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Masamune_ 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mochacola 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]GreasedLightning 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 19 points20 points21 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]jul14nn 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]jul14nn -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (3 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]jul14nn 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]jul14nn 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]benzinow 215 points216 points217 points (26 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Fgame 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]i_like_honeydew 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rex9 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Fgame 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]carolnuts 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AkaTujh 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tomsix 69 points70 points71 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Thibbledorf_Pwent 75 points76 points77 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]LooneyDubs -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Tgunner192 7 points8 points9 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Demonspawn 21 points22 points23 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Demonspawn 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]Grasshopper21 -12 points-11 points-10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]koji8123 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Bayerrc 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1forthethumb 3 points4 points5 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]HalfysReddit 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jgzman 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Stackman23 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dewse 65 points66 points67 points (46 children) | Copy Link
[–]flyafar 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]tylamarre -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 6 points7 points8 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 12 points13 points14 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]HazMat68W 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]lhxtx 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RelevantAnecdotes -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]JackBond1234 -13 points-12 points-11 points (31 children) | Copy Link
[–]dewse 7 points8 points9 points (30 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 1 point2 points3 points (29 children) | Copy Link
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]JackBond1234 0 points1 point2 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]JackBond1234 -1 points0 points1 point (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]BoxOfNothing 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]dewse -1 points0 points1 point (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]dewse 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]dewse 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TranceIsLove -2 points-1 points0 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]TranceIsLove -3 points-2 points-1 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 54 points55 points56 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–]VarsityPhysicist 5 points6 points7 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JimBobDwayne 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]VarsityPhysicist -6 points-5 points-4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]JimBobDwayne 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]VarsityPhysicist -4 points-3 points-2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]JimBobDwayne 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mochacola 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]milkypsych 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Damadawf 25 points26 points27 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]55mph_knuckleball 5 points6 points7 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]__PETTYOFFICER117__ 4 points5 points6 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]55mph_knuckleball 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]whitemanrunning 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]whitemanrunning 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]55mph_knuckleball 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Xemnas81 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]copper_chicken -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ssilversmith 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (45 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Lowkeypeepee 20 points21 points22 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]reagan2024 20 points21 points22 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]Nick12506 14 points15 points16 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lowkeypeepee 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Grasshopper21 -3 points-2 points-1 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]muchlygrand 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]muchlygrand 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Fgame -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Fgame 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]cy1999aek_maik 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Xemnas81 -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 55 points56 points57 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 20 points21 points22 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]mrSilkie -3 points-2 points-1 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]MrTucker3 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]HalfysReddit 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 32 points33 points34 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sharkman1231 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Sharkman1231 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RiPing 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]neverXmiss 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]perverted_alt 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PerniciousOne 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RaptorFalcon -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jeepdave -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]99639 -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Assupoika -3 points-2 points-1 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]cy1999aek_maik 1 point2 points3 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]Assupoika -3 points-2 points-1 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]cy1999aek_maik 2 points3 points4 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Assupoika -2 points-1 points0 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]cy1999aek_maik 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Assupoika 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]cy1999aek_maik 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]Assupoika 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]cy1999aek_maik 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Applejack244 27 points28 points29 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]gravity013 -11 points-10 points-9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]donthassleme-imlocal 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Applejack244 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]gravity013 -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]VarsityPhysicist 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]I_FART_OUT_MY_BUTT69 -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]saintmikel 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]FromTheFarSouth 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+]geniice -11 points-10 points-9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ultramegasaurus 3 points4 points5 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]xmrsmoothx 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ultramegasaurus -3 points-2 points-1 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SEND_ME_YOUR_ASSPICS 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]ILoveToph4Eva 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]danpilon 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]cra4efqwfe45 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]WeRtheBork 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]EFIW1560 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PerniciousOne 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]EFIW1560 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]yoshi570 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]yoshi570 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ILoveToph4Eva -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]yoshi570 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]seymorezipcode -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]dzamir -7 points-6 points-5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]atred -17 points-16 points-15 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (10 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]iLeo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]atred -20 points-19 points-18 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (7 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[+]atred -19 points-18 points-17 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (5 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]atred 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]atred 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xmrsmoothx -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]atred -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AloysiusC 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -24 points-23 points-22 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Canileaveyet 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]-Canonical- 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]x7Hogan7x -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]episode11 -3 points-2 points-1 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]kasperkakoala 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]thegeekprophet -38 points-37 points-36 points (65 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (61 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]adamsfan42 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]diphiminaids -1 points0 points1 point (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]zer0t3ch 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]gravity013 -3 points-2 points-1 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]derpylord143 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]zer0t3ch -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat -4 points-3 points-2 points (53 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onithyr 4 points5 points6 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat 2 points3 points4 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onithyr 6 points7 points8 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onithyr 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]JupeJupeSound 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]k9centipede -1 points0 points1 point (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onithyr 0 points1 point2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]k9centipede 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]derpylord143 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Onithyr 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JimBobDwayne 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points (36 children) | Copy Link
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 2 points3 points4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]xmrsmoothx 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jubbergun -1 points0 points1 point (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]RelevantAnecdotes 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]jubbergun 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]flyafar 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat 0 points1 point2 points (28 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points (27 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat -4 points-3 points-2 points (26 children) | Copy Link
[–]SomeOrdinaryCanadian 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]SomeOrdinaryCanadian 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (19 children) | Copy Link
[–]kihadat 0 points1 point2 points (18 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]Furah 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]_kartoffel_salat_ -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Scaarr -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HaryTheLizard -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jasonhoblin -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]SmoothMooves -6 points-5 points-4 points (0 children) | Copy Link