Control Factors
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (26)
sorted by:
The term the MRA guys were calling how to deal with this was a "financial abortion."
Imagine you knock some woman up. She wants to keep the kid, you want to kill it. If a woman can kill your kid or keep it, as she wishes, the moral equivalent to give men power in this situation is the father saying "okay, you can keep it, but I am getting a 'financial abortion' so I don't have to pay child support, because I don't want the kid."
There were TWO r/legaladvice threads where the woman didn't want the baby, and the father did. The women delivered the baby, gave the father the baby, and walked away.
BOTH women were hot up for child support. One woman had to deal with the baby daddy expecting the mother to help raise the baby they walked away from. They paid child support, and walked away just like men.
I'm sure you can find those threads.
I've not been on Reddit since 2017, and even then I was only on The_Donald. I won't give them the clicks.
Just from what you tell me, the guys in these cases were legally in the right, unless the women waived the payments that is. I don't support the "financial abortion" thing, just mentioning it as a comparison. Nature, experience, and reason, tell us that children are best raised by a mother and father, in a marriage.
The men both tricked the women into keeping the babies, and one thought they would be able to manipulate a relationship out of it.
I would like to think I would find the situation wrong if the genders were reversed, but it was absolutely memorable because it happened in the nontradtion manner it did.
Equal rights, equal (legal) fights.
Oh, and two less murdered babies at least.