Re: Fertility in Europe: If the woman wants to have a baby and the man disagrees, the likelihood is only about one-third compared to when the couple agrees. If it is the man who wants the baby and the woman disagrees, the probability of having a child is indistinguishable from zero.

(xNOM)
Holy crap. There are a few condom users but I don't really see any other explanation other than at least 1/3 of women lie about birth control.

(TheImpossible1)

If they agree, they agree.

If the woman doesn't want to carry a child to term, I hope we can all agree the chances of her doing so should approach zero.

So is the 1/3 when the man disagrees the problem? And would some sort of paternal opt-out option be an agreeable remedy?

No, a jail sentence for the woman for trapping the man as well as an opt out would be acceptable.

She should also have to pay damages.

Or just be force opted out of taking child support from the father, ever.

Not good enough. They've been abusing the law, we should do it back.

"I as a male am traumatized by the lack of trust and care shown by my partner in doing this to me, it has affected my mental state severely"

I think damages are more than fair considering the mental effects of having this kind of thing happen to you.

If he has an opt-out, he has no basis for "damages." I actually favor that as a legal choice.

What your proposing basically lets men press charges and sue women for getting the women pregnant. That's...got too many problems to even really tackle.

Not really, it brings things back to being equal.

They should pay emotional distress damages equal to child support for 18 years as well as all the other consequences.

It's basically just what happens to men now, but reversed.

I think it's perfect. Everything should just be reversed, let's see how women like the "equality" they promote when they're suffering it.

That's not only obviously unfair, it takes everything people fear about false rape allegations and puts it into the extreme. It's hard for me not to think this is actually just some idea of getting revenge on women for that issue.

Even if we put all of that aside, the nominal purpose of child support is to support the child. You're now putting the kid in a position where they're stuck with a parent whom you're rendering broke by virtue of essentially the same legal mechanism designed to make sure they're provided for.

That you think that's "perfect" kind of makes it seem like you're missing the most important part of the whole equation: the welfare of the kids themselves.

It's funny how much you don't like your hypocrisy pushed back at you.

Feminism thinks "we'll push for as much injustice as we can, if we lose they won't do it back, they'll just make it equal"

It's funny how women selectively care about a child's welfare when it suits them. You sure didn't care when you wrote the Tender Years crap.

"my child needs money for its welfare"

proceeds to buy handbags and makeup

Even now, you divorce good men who've done nothing wrong, and we've all seen how single mother kids turn out :)

If you cared about the child's welfare you wouldn't be supportive of the system as it is now.

Plus how many women actually use the child support money on the child?

What is the "tender years crap"? For that matter, who is the "you" that you're speaking to?

Yeah, it's not like kids cost money or anything. You want to talk about radical change to the system including a more robust public safety net to provide for kids whose parents are dirt poor in exchange for eliminating child support? Sure. I'm down.

But it kind of seems like you're talking to someone else entirely right now.

It's amazing how feminists have a selective memory of what their movement has done.

That would be the idea that women should have full custody of a child during their "tender years" up to 4. This was banned as it contradicted the 14th Amendment but was then rebranded as "best interest of the child" still giving heavy bias to the mother (despite what we know about children raised by only a mother)

You as in feminist lower than dirt "activists" that claim to be doing what's right despite mounting evidence that what you're doing will result in societal collapse when everyone gives up on women.

I don't support any social programs. They're just a way to send men's tax money to women.