Why is pro choice only a women decision?

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Helious
Very simply, I have been in two committed relationships where the women has had a pre determined mental condition I was not informed of, I involved myself and progressed the relationship to the point we lived together.

During a committed relationship when your significant other assures you she is on birth control, what man would continue to buy and wear condoms? Most people who either suffer from Bi polar disorder or Borderline personality disorder all feel the same way, they think the more they sink themselves into the relationship, the more they control and can manipulate the situation.

Having been lied too outright, manipulated and ultimately abused by my significant other, I now have the state telling me, it is this crazy girls decisions alone that rules the day and I am powerless to make any decision. I guess I should of wore a condom with the girl I have been with for 2 years, that I live with, who told me she was on birth control............ So my fault.

So now, I guess I will have the state telling me how much and how often I need to pay this women, not based on how much it actually costs to raise a child but by how much I make? Huh? This seems like a bad dream or a bad joke but it's not, it happens every day in America and millions upon millions of tax dollars are spent on jailing beat dead dads whose only crime was being duped by a mentally defective girl who thought it would fix all there problems.

Debtors prison is alive and well and it comes in the form of contempt of court for child support and alimony. Don't get me wrong, I take care of my kids, but I don't need my government telling me how much of a percentage basis it takes to do so.

I make 36k dollars a year and I pay a percentage on that but if I made 20 million a year Id pay the same percentage and guess what....... Doesn't cost that much to raise a kid........
edit on 6-4-2011 by Helious because: (no reason given)



Very simply, I have been in two committed relationships where the women has had a pre determined mental condition I was not informed of, I involved myself and progressed the relationship to the point we lived together.

Right here is where you probably should have re-read what you were writing and figured that maybe, just maybe "you" missed something. As not being "informed" is not an excuse, it just means that you either failed to see, doesn't mean that you were intentionally lied to. Just that "you" missed it.


During a committed relationship when your significant other assures you she is on birth control, what man would continue to buy and wear condoms?

Again, you are clearly not making a case against her, but against yourself. There are plenty of men that make sure of these things, thats why they are not going through it. You cannot make this about being trusting towards another, but trusting in yourself. You can not base statistics that women are "getting away" with this, as you can make a case that mean are just not paying attention, are to trusting, or just dont care.


I guess I should of wore a condom with the girl I have been with for 2 years, that I live with, who told me she was on birth control............ So my fault.

Whether you meant that literally or sarcastically, it happened, and the faster you get past being upset over something that you cannot control, you can really think this through and make things work in your favor... if you choose.



Don't get me wrong, I take care of my kids, but I don't need my government telling me how much of a percentage basis it takes to do so.

I think its great you take care of your kids, as all parents should, but the gov tells you what percentage because they get a cut. Court fees, paper work, attorneys, its all a game to them. Your life and the life of a child at no fault, have now become a part of a screwed up system.

I am almost 100% sure that you will make sure this never happens again, even if you have to get the next women your with evaluated by a doctor, or even get a vasectomy (I know men hate that work) but it doesn't get more 100% then that, and of course you are then in control, no matter how manipulative a women is.

Peace, NRE.




posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 02:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by kaleshchand
reply to post by elouina
 


I think when a woman says she is on birth control, get it WRITTEN, and make that paper a legal document by whatever means necessary, then and only then stop wearing condoms.


How about just always wearing a condom. And assume if not, a child will result. Why put your pleasure above birth control? Which is more important to you? Maybe she should have had you sign a paper that says that you will always wear a condom?

Birth control is not fool proof. There is a chance of pregnancy. Say even if it is only 2%, that means 2 out of a hundred will get pregnant. It happens. Any person with half a brain knows this. So by not wearing a condom also, you accepted the responsability.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by elouina

Originally posted by kaleshchand
reply to post by elouina
 


I think when a woman says she is on birth control, get it WRITTEN, and make that paper a legal document by whatever means necessary, then and only then stop wearing condoms.


How about just always wearing a condom. And assume if not, a child will result. Why put your pleasure above birth control? Which is more important to you? Maybe she should have had you sign a paper that says that you will always wear a condom?

Birth control is not fool proof. There is a chance of pregnancy. Say even if it is only 2%, that means 2 out of a hundred will get pregnant. It happens. Any person with half a brain knows this. So by not wearing a condom also, you accepted the responsability.


Guess what, I will happily sign it and honor it, I will wear it always even if she just asks me to, and my always will really be ALWAYS, even when she wants a child.

Believe me things like these have happened a lot in my social circle, where the girl was BRAGGING that she did this on purpose and this fact even reached the court but did NOT I repeat, did NOT affect the courts decision.

Now I know not every women is like this, but hearing about it every 6 months really makes me confused and sad.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by kaleshchand
reply to post by Dock9
 


My concern and I guess the Op's concern is the fact (or stated fact) that he was assured by his significant other that she was on birth control. That means that the fact that she got pregnant was her own fault (and possibly was done intentionally). If I was the OP I would take the custody of the child, and tell my SO to get the hell out of there, for I will not trust a person who has lied to me for one second in my house.



When I read the OP, I saw he claimed he'd been in two relationships where the women had mental conditions

He claims he was unaware of this, despite being in lengthy relationships with them

How does that work ?

(1) if the OP claims he was unaware of the women's mental conditions, what does that say about his powers of observation ? Did he fail throughout each of the relationships to realise the women suffered from what he describes as 'pre-determined mental conditions' ? Is he claiming that he only realised they had mental conditions once they became pregnant ? How does that work ? Do you believe the OP's various claims ?

(2) * IF * the OP realised during the relationships that each of the women suffered one or more 'mental conditions' then WHY did he have unprotected sex with them ?

Did the OP say to himself something along the lines of : I'll have sex with her and I'm in a committed relationship (i.e. monogamous, permanent) with her. I'll just take the risk that my mentally-disturbed partner can be relied upon to safeguard me against becoming the father to a child I don't want which may ALSO inherit mental problems. So I won't wear a condom, even though it would be prudent to do so. I'll just trust that this mentally disturbed woman won't make a father of me to a child with a mental condition '

Edited to Add -- I forgot to include earlier my next question, which is : If the OP knew during the relationship that the two women each suffered ' pre-existing mental conditions' --- it's yet another reason for him to have exercised extreme caution as regards birth-control. OR -- was he fine with the thought of women with 'pre-existing mental conditions' raising HIS children safely to adulthood ?
edit on 7-4-2011 by Dock9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


No I do not believe everything the OP claims, and I have no idea how the events came to be, that is why I said "stated fact" that is giving him the benefit of the doubt.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


Right, because everyone is capable of noticing someone is some kind of mental case.... How many times do we hear from psycho killers' significant others, friends and relatives that they had no idea they were a psycho killer? Most women have mood swings that borderline on bipolar at one point or another in my experience



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:24 AM
link   
This is smelling too much like a rant and a personal vendetta. Which will not get you anywhere. Pay up, move on, and be a father.
edit on 7-4-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Dock9
 


Right, because everyone is capable of noticing someone is some kind of mental case.... How many times do we hear from psycho killers' significant others, friends and relatives that they had no idea they were a psycho killer? Most women have mood swings that borderline on bipolar at one point or another in my experience



(1) So you advertise your misogyny and ignorance in public by statting that ' most women have mood swings that border on bi-polar at one point or another ' in your experience

--- despite that the 'psycho killers' you mention have been predominantly MALE


(2) You claim ' most women have mood swings that border on bi-polar at one point or another ' in your experience

--- aren't you therefore telling males to use birth-control without FAIL -- for fear of impregnating all those potential
'borderline bi-polar ' and potential 'psycho killer ' females they choose to have sex with ?

Or are you the ultimate risk taker who --- despite believing and stating publicly that 'most women are borderline bi-polar psycho killers ' -- still chooses to make these same women the mothers of your children ?
edit on 7-4-2011 by Dock9 because: correction



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


Im a mysogonist because I notice women tend to have mood swings? Maybe you just aren't very observant, woman are highly emotional creatures....

And your point about how many psycho killers are male? The whole point was to show how most people can't diagnose even the worst mental illnesses, so it is understandable that a bipolar or two might not be noticed...

Do I advocate protection? Absolutely I do. I never have gone without, ever. As I said I do not want to bring any kids into this crap world, and I do my part to make sure I don't. I am smart, I buy and use my own rubbers, a HS buddy of mine got trapped by a women that was poking pinholes in rubbers, lieing about taking the pill, so she could pop out a kid and get money from him and uncle sam.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:42 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 



You;ll have to accept that I don't believe a word you've written

I particularly do not believe the nonsense about women poking holes in condoms

Ever been pregnant ?

Even had a baby ?

Ever seen your own life -- your ambitions -- your career aspirations -- all your social opportunities -- all opportunities to travel unrestricted, as a childfree individual -- any hope of having any privacy for 20 or more years -- all opportunity to live free, child-free ................... go down the tubes

Ever had to tell your child it can't have more dinner because there is none because 'daddy' has run and hid in order he won't have to feed his child/ren at the same time he finds money for internet connection and video games and pay-to-view porn and alcohol and drugs and cigarettes and food and entertainment and holidays and travel and vehicles and clothing etc. for himself ?

Ever had to leave your child at home alone while you go to work to put food on the table because your child's 'daddy' refusing to feed it ?

No. Of course you haven't. You haven't a clue. Instead you hide behind anonymity in forums, spreading the perverted misogyny that claims all women are psycho with mental conditions -- yet it's overwhelmingly these very women who sacrifice their lives in order to stick with the kids that apparently mentally-stable, really nice males refuse to support because it might get in the way of their selfish existences



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


You need to work on your reading comprehension, and stop projecting things onto other people.

Bottom line is, the woman gets 100% of the choice in having a kid or not. You choose to have a kid when you can't afford it, why should anyone feel sorry for you?
edit on Thu, 07 Apr 2011 03:50:28 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Save your advice for yourself and we'll get along better


You've made a lot of assertions. When they're queried and criticised, you turn nasty (as if your assertions re: women weren't proof of your nastiness anyway)

You haven't thought it through, have you ?

You've never bothered to do the math

If you had, you'd be forced to the conclusion that women have everything to gain by remaining child-free

For example, a child-free, unattached female can provide herself with everything and more than the average male can

For example, she can buy a home

She can do whatever she likes, whenever she likes, in that home

She can buy her own vehicle -- hers alone

She can attend as many parties, social functions, seminars, travel-opportunities as she likes

She can dress as she likes -- and she can buy whichever clothes she likes, whenever she likes

She can have as many friends as she likes -- no need to dump friends because a man feels inferior to them or her, or because he's jealous of her friends and the time she spends with them

She can further her career as she chooses. Can take courses and gain additional qualifications. Because her time is not being absorbed by a man and children and his friends and his family, etc.

She can accept whichever invitations she chooses too. She's a free agent. She has no children to take into consideration and no man demanding she come home now

She can eat whatever she chooses, when she chooses, with whom she chooses

She can buy herself all the jewellery she wishes. It's her money. She'd independent. She can do as she likes

Starting to get the picture ?

Now compare this with the women you claim puncture holes in condoms in order to fall pregnant to some guy who will invariably desert her and his children at some point, leaving them destitute and reliant on welfare and doomed to poverty, misery, despair, humiliation, mortification, disillusionment (and that's not even taking into account the lives of misery and deprivation suffered by fatherless children, is it ?)

WHY ON EARTH would a woman deliberately choose the latter ?

Only in the minds of misogynists and males desperate to escape supporting their own children do you make any sense ! And men's groups, raging about having to pay for their own children regularly send their members to flood forums with whines about having to support their own children. They try to portray themselves as victims -- as victims of women and the law and of society. When in truth, it all boils down to ONE thing -- money -- and men's anger at having to partially support their own children

You say women live the high life on the pittance which is sometimes paid by their children's fathers and on welfare. But what you conveniently fail to take into account is that money has to cover the food, the housing, the education, the shoes, the underwear, the toothpaste, the bread and spreads, the milk, the few toys, etc. of the CHILDREN

And what you fail UTTERLY to take into account is that the mother of the children WORKS FOR FREE almost her entire life and most certainly through the best years of her life. FOR FREE

Now, get busy and research how much you'd pay for a full-time nanny-carer for those children. No. Make that at least TWO nanny-carers -- because you would NOT get anyone prepared to work 24/7, the way the biological mother does

Because there are millions of single mothers out there who'd jump at the chance to have some free time and would be willing for the absent father to pay for nanny-carers for the children

Then, those women could begin to recoup their lives again. They could return to school. They could go to work AND BE PAID FOR IT. They could go out with friends. They could travel. They could regain their lost social lives. They could sleep in on the weekend. They'd have money to buy clothes and get their hair done. They could buy nice homes and apartments. They'd have disposable incomes of their own

--- and their children's fathers would HAVE to pay those nanny-carers, on time, every week and no arguments and no whining in forums

But no. You'd still like to believe that women would choose to wreck their bodies and lives in order to give birth to random guy's children --- in order they and their children could thereafter live on the bread-line. Sure, that makes perfect sense to misogynists, doesn't it ? Women love pain, is that it ? They love poverty, right ? They love seeing their children go to school in rags and become the butt of other kids' jokes, I suppose ?

Ok. You can slink away now. And next time, think about it first

.

.
Edited to add: ----- And by the way, it is MEN who're milking the welfare system by forcing the government to spend taxpayers' money on supporting children whose own fathers refuse to support them. It's MEN who're making society pay for THEIR children
edit on 7-4-2011 by Dock9 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
The choice should be equally between the parents.

But the sad fact is that a lot of men who are the father just don't want to know.

But, for those fathers who do want to know, I agree that they should have an equal say.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 05:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 




Save your advice for yourself and we'll get along better You've made a lot of assertions. When they're queried and criticised, you turn nasty (as if your assertions re: women weren't proof of your nastiness anyway) You haven't thought it through, have you ? You've never bothered to do the math If you had, you'd be forced to the conclusion that women have everything to gain by remaining child-free For example, a child-free, unattached female can provide herself with everything and more than the average male can For example, she can buy a home She can do whatever she likes, whenever she likes, in that home She can buy her own vehicle -- hers alone She can attend as many parties, social functions, seminars, travel-opportunities as she likes She can dress as she likes -- and she can buy whichever clothes she likes, whenever she likes She can have as many friends as she likes -- no need to dump friends because a man feels inferior to them or her, or because he's jealous of her friends and the time she spends with them She can further her career as she chooses. Can take courses and gain additional qualifications. Because her time is not being absorbed by a man and children and his friends and his family, etc. She can accept whichever invitations she chooses too. She's a free agent. She has no children to take into consideration and no man demanding she come home now She can eat whatever she chooses, when she chooses, with whom she chooses She can buy herself all the jewellery she wishes. It's her money. She'd independent. She can do as she likes Starting to get the picture ?


And your point is what? SHE made the choice to have a child, period. Why is that so hard to understand? She alone made the choice, to carry a kid to term, maybe she didn't see the big picture? Damned if I know....




Now compare this with the women you claim puncture holes in condoms in order to fall pregnant to some guy who will invariably desert her and his children at some point, leaving them destitute and reliant on welfare and doomed to poverty, misery, despair, humiliation, mortification, disillusionment (and that's not even taking into account the lives of misery and deprivation suffered by fatherless children, is it ?) WHY ON EARTH would a woman deliberately choose the latter ?


Because she was a raving lunatic I guess. And she is not living in poverty, blah blah blah, she gets to sit on her butt all day, not work at all, now that the guy has a great job. She gets a percentage of his pay, I guess that was the big picture she was thinking about when she was poking holes in rubbers. That he was almost graduated from college with a degree in engineering, and that he would be making money, and she would get a chunk. She admitted to poking the holes by the way, I really don't care if you believe it or not.


Only in the minds of misogynists and males desperate to escape supporting their own children do you make any sense ! And men's groups, raging about having to pay for their own children regularly send their members to flood forums with whines about having to support their own children. They try to portray themselves as victims -- as victims of women and the law and of society. When in truth, it all boils down to ONE thing -- money -- and men's anger at having to partially support their own children


Only in the minds of "feminists", should a women get 100% of the choice, while the guy has 0% of the choice. God forbid men have a say wether or not they have kids, and get equal rights....



But no. You'd still like to believe that women would choose to wreck their bodies and lives in order to give birth to random guy's children --- in order they and their children could thereafter live on the bread-line. Sure, that makes perfect sense to misogynists, doesn't it ? Women love pain, is that it ? They love poverty, right ? They love seeing their children go to school in rags and become the butt of other kids' jokes, I suppose ? Ok. You can slink away now. And next time, think about it first


Its not a belief, it is a fact. I have seen it happen. Nice namecalling BTW, that sure makes you look smart in a debate. And no "slinking away" from me, you must have me mistaken for someone else.



Not "slinking away", but I got stuff to do. See yall next time I have time for the madhouse
edit on Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:32:07 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 05:29 AM
link   
I love how all these guys come on here crying...
"She lied to me!!!"
and...
"I don't want to pay!!"

do you wear a condom now??? have you learned anything from your mistake???
trust no one .....or you will get burned!!
it's a sad but true part of american life now days....
I mean, look at all those soon to be seniors out there...
they trusted the gov't, even after the gov't took more and more money from their pockets....to feed all those kids whose daddies were lied to who went to the extremes to get out of supporting the kids, well, they trusted their gov't, there'd be at least a little something for them in their old age....
ummm...we got burned twice!!!
once by those daddies, and then by our fine gov't......
and we can die poor and destitute in our old age, right???

if you don't work to support your kids...
who is???
me, ya think???
because I won't!!

it's a dog eat dog world, and well...it's up to you, and you alone to ensure your future......
if you think that the girls are lying, then well.....take your own measures to ensure no children will be created!!

as far as a women's right to decide weather or not to abort, I am sorry, that little tiny collection of cells happen to be in the women's body, and whichever decision is made is gonna be an intrusion of HER BODY...
not yours, and well, sorry, but human health kind of trumps wallet.
you must be better off than most of the guys I know, since they don't pay much of anything, compared to what it costs to raise a kid, heck, I've known some who have managed to skip out and not pay anything....
they will go to the extremes not to pay. claim a hurt back, get a disability check, whatever....then commence to go and get an under the table job.....so they can keep their money all to themselves, and leave the taxpayers footing the bill.....
what you think I am gonna be working till I am 70 or 80, without anything that even resembles affordable healthcare, and still be paying to support your kids???
get a clue!!
our gov't is broke!!!
if the seniors are gonna be hurt,so isn't the kids!!!
we all are gonna be, if it's not all of us, then I will be sure that lady justice had died in america!
feel the pain yet???



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Lawl what the op is basically saying is he can only get crazy women to sleep with him, this is the funniest post ive seen on ATS in a long time thanks for posting it.


As far as knocking the broads up condoms and birth control are 99% effective so unless you practise abstinence wich is 100% effective you'll always be taking a chance.

So long story short STOP BEING A DEADBEAT AND PAY YOUR CHILD SUPPORT lawl. You got to play now you gotta pay.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Yeah, the "choice" extends to both participants. Men always have the choice of not doing it with somebody who wants a baby, wearing a condom, getting a vasectomy, and so on. Plenty of choices to go around.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 


I felt for you getting piled on by the femenists. A baby is every bit the man's as it is the female's. Every time I hear Leftist women screech, "It's MY perogative!" Well when A THIRD PARTY (I.E. CHILD) becomes involved, it is no longer up to you alone. Just because MY arm is my arm, does that mean I can use my arm and hand to hold a hammer and go clock someone I don't like? "It's MY arm, no one can tell me what to do with it!" Well the police can tell me I don't have a right to use this part of my body, to go clock another party if I want.
Damn socially Liberal SLIMY hypocrites.

By-the-way, I was wondering WHY Lesbians are so pro abortion? They are thee last ones in this whole entire Ufo Universe to become UNwanted'ly preggers. Unless one got raped by a man.



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Surprise! Actions have consequences. If you aren't ready to accept the consequences for your actions, don't act. Sex is a serious thing with many, many serious potential consequences. This is a big reason there are age of consent laws. Of course, there are people over 40 who still aren't mature enough to understand the ramifications of their actions, so age is certainly no guarantee of responsibility. And contraceptives are no guarantee of preventing pregnancy.

There's one way to guarantee there won't be a pregnancy. Don't have sex.

You don't like the rules? Don't play the game.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
edit on 4/7/2011 by yeahright because: Typo



posted on Apr, 7 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 


because it's inside her body...not anyone elses. i'm a man, and if you told me it was against the law to do, or force me to do something that is inside my body, i'd tell you to shove it.





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join