Consequences for Single Mothers

[Jan SobieskiParticipant 28791]

So some cousin I haven’t seen in 30 years can list me on the birth certificate and make me pay just cause she thinks I got money.

Love is just alimony waiting to happen. Visit mgtow.com.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22591]

Jan Sobieski wrote:

So some cousin I haven’t seen in 30 years can list me on the birth certificate and make me pay just cause she thinks I got money.

If that bill becomes law, in the way it is likely worded, within that state. Then, I believe so. It will make for an interesting court and family reunion. I wonder who among the family with side with whom. And I wonder what twisted logic the women of the family will use to make the male family member pay.

[narwhalParticipant]

It looks to me like the father’s consent is required.

Unless otherwise provided in this Act, if the mother
was not married to the father of the child at either the time
of conception or the time of birth, the name of the father
shall be entered on the child’s birth certificate only if the
mother and the person to be named as the father have signed an
acknowledgment of parentage in accordance with subsection (5).

The alternative seems unconstitutional and utterly ridiculous. The ‘accused’ must be given the opportunity to prove his not the father through a paternity test. A husband should get the same opportunity.

I am mixed about this, but since it really is fair, I would be for it, but it should not be the end. As a tax payer, I don’t want to pay welfare to a single mom when there is a Dad out there to take financial responsibility. I also think mom needs to have financial responsibility in this, and this done nothing for that. I want it to be required for the father to be notified, but it looks like she can get a family member to take legal responsibility and get around that. I also think there needs to be some sort of penalty for having a child when you have no financial means of taking care of the child (in a way that won’t hurt the child).

Overall though, I think this would save tax payer money, reduce the number of unwanted births, and probably put a few more men on the child support game.

Ok. Then do it.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22591]

narwhal wrote:

It looks to me like the father’s consent is required.

A few posts up, on the first page of this thread, someone states that part of the bill was removed.

[OldBillParticipant]

narwhal wrote:

The alternative seems unconstitutional and utterly ridiculous.

That “alternative” is how it works now.

The ‘accused’ must be given the opportunity to prove his not the father through a paternity test.

They’re given an “opportunity” alright. A notification is mailed, but no effort is put into verifying the mailing address. A period is allowed to contest paternity too, except it’s measured in weeks and it begins when the notification is mailed out.

A husband should get the same opportunity.

They don’t. It’s been part of common law for centuries. If you’re married to her when she s~~~s out a child the child it is your child. Advances in technology have changed the playing field but, as usual, laws and customs have not caught up. Doctors won’t even notify husbands when their wives give birth to children whose blood type means the husband cannot have been the father.

I am mixed about this, but since it really is fair, I would be for it, but it should not be the end.

We don’t know if it’s fair because we don’t know anything about the notification or testing processes. It could be fair or it could be another trap.

As a tax payer, I don’t want to pay welfare to a single mom when there is a Dad out there to take financial responsibility.

There aren’t any immaculate conceptions so all those fathers are already out there. The trouble arises when we try to round up the candidates and determine responsibility.

As an aside, the comments on the article are laughable. I didn’t read a single one which wasn’t whining about the mother and child while ignoring the men falsely accused of paternity.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[Big BossParticipant 4496]

Keymaster wrote:

<iframe width=”500″ height=”375″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/RBqjZ0KZCa0?feature=oembed” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen=””></iframe>

Holy… s~~~….

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Prefer Peace to Piece wrote:

Dumb question- Is it possible that a man could be named financially responsible without his consent?

Yes it’s called paternity fraud (as one example) — and — there are men in prison RIGHT NOW for being ordered to pay child support for kids that everyone knows are not even his.

This is unconstitutional and forced slavery.

The reason you don’t date single mothers is not because you just don’t date single mothers. You don’t date single mothers, because the second you “act like a father” or take her and her kid to the petting zoo on a weekend, BOOM!! you’re “the father”, you pay — OR you go to jail.

And you wonder why dating sites are filled to the hilt with single Moms.
They’re all looking for a wallet.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[AscendedParticipant 698]

Keymaster wrote:

They’re all looking for a wallet.

Something I noticed since going to school.
It’s obvious, isn’t it?

"We are free to follow our own path. There are those who will take that freedom from us, and too many of you gladly give it. But it is our ability to choose – whatever you think is true – that makes us human. There is no book or teacher to give you the answers, to show you the path. Choose your own way! Do not follow me, or anyone else."

[Mr. SpockParticipant 10932]

I’m wondering how many male relatives are going to get unknowingly burned with this.
Sister; “C’mon Tim, let me put your name on the certificate so that I can get benefits for my kid.”
Brother; “No Way!”
Mother; “Help your sister out!”
Sister; “You won’t have to do anything.”
Brother; “OK”

This legislation tries to give the appearance of being tougher on women when in fact it is making it easier to fluff off their responsibility and accountability.
Great Post.

Feminism isn't about equality with men, it's about leverage over men.

[AFTParticipant 2726]

The fact that Social Marxism and the never ending welfare state, is coming under so much pressure, as to address the issue of entitlements in the first place, is pleasing.

However, I am guilty of naively focusing on the false promise, that some amount of responsibility will finally be placed upon the choices of free strong independent protagonists.

experienced wrote:

It’d be nice if it were “natural consequences for single mothering.”

When faced with “losing” those well earned social benefits…

Keymaster wrote:

that spreading her legs and allowing herself to get pregnant somehow entitles her to state aid

a single mother will have the option of merely naming a father at will.

I failed to consider the very likely consequences, of “fraudulent father naming” and no prizes for guessing who will be at the sharp end of that.

It has been said in the manosphere, especially here at MGTOW that eventually women will be able to just point a finger at a guy and say I want him to pay for all my consequences….

Looks like those prophecies are being fulfilled before our very eyes.

Keymaster wrote:

Holy s~~~. Did you guys catch the way the female author phrased that s~~~.

I suppose that was never intended to be misleading or distracting in any way. Can’t believe I fell for it hook, line and sinker.

When will I ever learn woman can NEVER be held RESPONSIBLE for ANYTHING.

That is unless WE hold them responsible, each and every one of us, independently, autonomously of society and big brother sister.

When the war cemeteries are half full of the corpses of dead conscripted women, only then will women have earned the right to speak of equality. Sidecar “A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do.” - Bob Dylan

[BeerParticipant 11832]

Keymaster wrote:

Holy s~~~. Did you guys catch the way the female author phrased that s~~~. Check it out:

despite this being the year 2016, some lawmakers feel a single mother has to prove she’s somehow deserving of state aid.

That’s what’s wrong with voting women & single mothers out there. Who actually believe – because it’s 2016 – that spreading her legs and allowing herself to get pregnant somehow entitles her to state aid!! Like she doesn’t even have to prove it!

Oh yeah…that stuck out big time to me as well. All I could think is its 2016…with all the sex ed we have growing up and easy availability of various forms of birth control how the f~~~ does anyone have a whoops baby these days and not know who the dad is?

Stargazer wrote:

While I am the first person to encourage a man to shoulder the responsibility for his choices, actions and mistakes, I don’t see how establishing paternity is going to make much difference in the most extreme cases.

It will crack down on cases where baby mama “doesn’t know” who the baby daddy is, even though they live together while he has all his mail sent to a P.O. box or another address to give the dumbass state the illusion she is a single mom so she qualifies for more benefits.

TaxGuy wrote:

I knew a woman years ago that was made fun of by her friends for working. They all went out and got pregnant and got on the dole as they put it. She was shunned for wanting to better herself. Good for her, but the sponges far outweighed the one good one.

Never mind the fact that the “dole” is provided by us.

Yeah we certainly get f~~~ed. Previous generations of women did the same thing, only they had to be a decent wife and keep a husband around, not just be a slut and put a hand out for big daddy government. We end up footing the bill, just the quality of wife we can find these days has decayed tremendously.

[BeerParticipant 11832]

narwhal wrote:

I also think there needs to be some sort of penalty for having a child when you have no financial means of taking care of the child (in a way that won’t hurt the child).

The requirement to get welfare benefits for a child should be 1 woman getting her tubes tied and 1 man getting snipped after a a conclusive DNA test to prove he is the father.

If two people can’t support a kid between them neither of them has any business making any more.

[Robert HallamParticipant 696]

The fact is there are some women don’t know who the father is out of a dozen possible baby dadies. I read one case (and this is the absolute truth) where the woman couldn’t name the father of her child and the excuse (explanation) she used in her application to the CPS was that she was being f~~~ed from behind by several guys while she was puking out a third story window. True story, honest to god. So she names a baby daddy at random, and hopes like hell with a phoney address that CPS will fork over the money to her, and then they go after the putative father when they know they can accidentally on purpose find him to be in default and start garnishing his pay cheque.

[MichaelSpectator 544]

Hi I’m drunk

Not sure. Never read the bill. But in CA the father is “named” by the mother and an additional file is added to the BC record.

Yes they should do DNA testing. Whose going to pay for it?

[sidecarParticipant 35862]

Beer wrote:

The requirement to get welfare benefits for a child should be 1 woman getting her tubes tied and 1 man getting snipped after a a conclusive DNA test to prove he is the father.

The requirement to get welfare benefits for a child should be aeronautical swine. Since Roe v. Wade women have had zero excuses for having children they cannot afford to feed. While there are still occasionally accidental pregnancies, there is no such thing as an accidental birth.

Let me repeat that: There is no such thing as an accidental birth.

Every single birth in the western world is fully intentional. Why the f~~~ are women empowered to intentionally create children for other people to feed? It’s selfishly unfair to the people they thrust the burden of their children on and viciously cruel to the children themselves.

At most they should be given $350 each, which is the price for a first trimester abortion, and nothing more. Ever.

[VarunParticipant 2981]

I have a feeling even MGTOWs aren’t safe anymore. I mean, in a few years, it won’t matter; even if you’re a virgin, they would still make you pay for some child; either directly or indirecty.

God! This is a nightmare!!

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

[sidecarParticipant 35862]

Varun wrote:

they would still make you pay for some child; either directly or indirecty.

They already do make you pay. For millions of children. Every April 15th.

Wouldn’t you much rather pay a woman a simple one time fee of $350 in the form of a voucher (so she can’t decide to spend it on shoes instead) instead of hundreds of dollars monthly for years and years? And then pay even more as the next generation gets pregnant and shoves its hands into your pockets as well. Over and over.

God! This is a nightmare!!

Yes it is. And just wait until it all collapses. This will seem a pleasant dream compared to what’s coming.

[FrankyParticipant 2338]

Varun wrote:

I have a feeling even MGTOWs aren’t safe anymore. I mean, in a few years, it won’t matter; even if you’re a virgin, they would still make you pay for some child; either directly or indirecty.

When that time comes the only thing they’ll “make” me do is blow their f~~~ing heads off.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22591]

Varun wrote:

I have a feeling even MGTOWs aren’t safe anymore. I mean, in a few years, it won’t matter; even if you’re a virgin, they would still make you pay for some child; either directly or indirecty.

God! This is a nightmare!!

Bushido, man. Way of the warrior. You are already dead, you just have not stopped breathing.

Some MGTOW suggest this outlook. And I am one of them.

In other words, get your affairs in order, now. And live you life, now, to the fullest. So, when the s~~~ goes down. You are ready to leave this life.

Now, whether you want to go quietly, or go scorched earth. That is up to you. But, when that point happens. You know you have lived the best you could. You have nothing for those parasites to steal. And you are ready to leave this life for better pastures.

[BoneAshParticipant 109]

The Last Single Mom: A heartfelt and true story about the complexity of single motherhood and what you can do to conquer it (Volume 1)

This book was free to download for a while so I read into it:

http://www.amazon.com/Last-Single-Mom-complexity-motherhood/dp/150895092X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457018107&sr=8-1&keywords=the+last+single+mom

She is keep going and going on pages how hard it is to raise 3 children alone, what it is like to have child puke all over your and how much time does it steals from you to cut 60 little nails of all the children.

This whole book is just shows how selfish and dumb women are. The first obvious question for all men who reading this story would be: why did you s~~~ out 3 kids when you are not ready to handle them? One wouldn’t be enough? hell no let’s just keep on s~~~ting them then feel sorry for it later.

I only managed to skim through this crap till page 60 but she never mentions in the book why did her boyfriend leave her.

Women should better get this into their heads (like this Annika) that they lose their value in the eye of men after they are single parents and not specifically because they lose their beauty or men having a problem with raising someone elses kid (all women want their own kid) but because then men missing out even more freedom from the relationship.

What most of the dummies out there are doing: find a girlfriend, get married, have family, divorce, grow old and die.
In this the only fun is the first couple of years while you can f~~~ the girl while she is pretty and wet.
Who would need a women at stage 4.

[Author]

Posts