posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 12:00 PM
He participated in forcing 'life' on that child.
He chose to make that child a link in his family tree.
He acknowledged parenthood within the child's birth certificate.
He knew that child would carry his own and his ancestor's DNA into the future.
He was aware that child would be an extension of himself.
And to give him credit, he felt a connection to the child, to the extent he wished the child to regard him as 'Dad'.
Perhaps he was aware the child might take comfort from and be reassured to know that out there somewhere, he had a father, just like other kids.
Perhaps once the child was born, the biological father began to appreciate the enormity of what he'd been party to. So he didn't walk away from or
close the door on his child.
Perhaps the biological father was torn between feelings of obligation and connectedness re: his child ... and an equal sense of obligation to his
child's lesbian parents.
Whatever the case, he is the child's biological father and when the publicity has ceased, he may regard it as a blessing that he can, belatedly,
contribute to his child's future.
It's the child who's been done a disservice here. He had a right to know his biological father. He may feel he had a right to be raised by his
biological father. Confronting that 18 year old right now are three adults who, between them, undertook to play god. They regarded him as an object.
They continue to do so.
At no time, obviously, did those three adults take the child's rights into consideration. Nope. Two lesbians wanted to play at happy families.
Rather than get a dog, they decided their lives ... THEIR lives .. would be fulfilled, enriched, by the addition of a child.
And the biological father had sperm to burn so tossed a bit in the lesbians' direction: ' There you go, girls ... here's what you need for that
kid you want. Have fun. Be happy.'
The three adults simply assumed the child would be happy being raised in a lesbian household. The child had no say in this decision. The adults
assumed the child would happily accept -- as an adult -- that he was the product of an arrangement between some guy and one of his lesbian parents.
Did any of the adults consider the child may wish to meet his biological father .... or did those adults decide the child had no right to this ?
Did they consider the impact their decisions would have upon the child at various stages in his life ? Did they consider that the child would
undoubtedly stare at his reflection in the bathroom mirror and wonder where his colouring and physique and idosyncrasies derived ? Did they consider
he would wonder if his father was good or poor at particular sports ? Did they consider that as that child grew towards manhood, he would very
probably seek to identify with his biological father? Did the lesbians decide they were good 'father' role-models for a developing man? Or did
they tell themselves he'd happily identify with menstruation and menapause and breasts and hot-flashes ?
Now or in ten or twenty years time, the child ..the product of an 'arrangement' ... will judge those three people who took it upon themselves to
regard him as an object.
What could he feel for his lesbian parents, other than scorn ? They failed even to honour the arrangement which brought him into being. They
humiliated and exposed him before the world, revealed him as an 'object' in order to chase money and hold his biological father to ransom. They
betrayed their claimed ideals. They failed to protect him from public scrutiny. How could he respect them after all they've done to him and all
they denied him throughout his childhood ?
And what will be his feelings towards his biological father .. someone who reduced him in value to a few drops of semen .. someone who 'gave him
away' and then went on to sire other children who'd been provided everything that was denied himself ?
Damn the biological father and the lesbians ! Damn their ego and pride and arrogance !
[edit on 5-12-2007 by Dock6]