forced female anti-conception

[Anonymous 2]

Just after the State announced we’ll have to opt-out instead of opt-in to organ donation, a major city in The Netherlands is now trying to legalize forced anticonception upon women that are too “vulnerable” to have children of their own. Women with drinking problems, mental problems, or financial troubles. The main (public) reason is that hundreds of children are born and raised in conditions that are unacceptable to the State. I cannot help but wonder whether male workforce ghosting is contributing to this social shift. When women collectively use more taxmoney then they bring in, and collectively blame the “wage gap” (while in actuality causing a tax gap) the act of men levelling to cater equality (ghosting) will make the State end up with a financial deficient. In order to prevent this from happening, the State must prevent the WEAK and IRRESPONSIBLE to procreate. Off course they are going to trample all over your rights. As a man, I can relate.

Women have brought this on themselves. What do YOU think about forced female anti-conception?

[Anonymous 42]

Anonymous wrote:

Women have brought this on themselves. What do YOU think about forced female anti-conception?

What do I think?

Margret Sanger, American eugenics, planned parenthood, the Nazi Party, racial sterilization, 1984, Soilent Green, smoking chimneys, and just another day on this world I don’t really give a rats ass about!

Someone has to fill the ovens and it’s NOT gonna be ME! No mi problemo!

I’ll just wear a face mask to filter out the ashes!

[Anonymous 2]

It’s not one of my immediate problems either. However, I do think governments forcing this kind of policy is indicative of their growing awareness of female privilege.

[NerevarParticipant 8040]

Another Dutch brother here? Cool!

"One of the best things internet exposed is just how insane women are." - Freeman_K

[uchibenkeiParticipant 7965]

how can a city have that kind of authority? i have a hard time believing that’s true and i would be against it if it were. The state has no business telling anybody who can or can’t have children, at any level of government. The state can decide not to spend tax dollars to support kids but that’s it. Sounds like bulls~~~.

I bathe in the tears of single moms.

[BeerParticipant 11832]

uchibenkei wrote:

how can a city have that kind of authority? i have a hard time believing that’s true and i would be against it if it were. The state has no business telling anybody who can or can’t have children, at any level of government. The state can decide not to spend tax dollars to support kids but that’s it. Sounds like bulls~~~.

But they could easily add stipulations to who gets assistance. I never understood why contraceptive implants to women who have kid(s) on welfare wasn’t mandatory. They last for several years, they aren’t that expensive, they can’t be “forgotten” to be taken like the pill, and they are easily reversible. We have plenty of middle class people only having 1 or 2 kids and stopping because that is all they can afford….why should women on the dole just pop out 4, 5, 6+ kids and not give a s~~~ because they just get more government benefits for every additional kid they pop out?

We don’t have to force abortions or sterilizations…just simply if you want to get on this program, here are the stipulations…if you can’t abide by those stipulations then find another way to get by. Worst case scenario if they can’t take care of the kids they have and refuse to stop having them just hammer them with child abuse/neglect charges to make an example of them and throw them in jail where they can’t have any more kids, and put the kids up for a close adoption.

Basically we are currently rewarding bad behavior. We shouldn’t do that.

[xenonParticipant 2007]

Rewarding bad behavior cuts right to the chase for this problem. Close to home example: my last whore-friend is now pregnant after being on welfare for the last year. Not by me, guys..hahaha…a friend of mine though, poor guy. Amazing timing given that her free ride is up on the first, along comes another. She tried a whoops pregnancy with me. ha. can you say snipped….gotcha. I am all for government getting out of subsidizing the worst that femininity has to offer. My guess is the marriage rate will zero out, then the divorce rate as well a few years later before anything will be done to put father back in family. Too late. Way too late. Probably a more likely scenario will be subsidies for no longer needed divorce lawyers.

[Anonymous 2]

uchibenkei wrote:

how can a city have that kind of authority?

A city doesn’t have the authority itself, but it’s staff can put the idea on the national agenda. In this case, Rotterdam is a city that copes with poverty, so it’s logical that they would be the first to bring this idea forward. This law is in it’s absolute infancy and probably won’t ever be implemented.

I agree with you on the immorality of the idea, enforcing it would require a degree of violence, as well as p~~~ing all over the Dutch constitution. It does show the desperation of the State growing along with the dependent single mommy epidemic.

[AttonParticipant]

Women who receive welfare should be made to use some form of semi permanent birth control. My friends mother has 6 kids by various fathers, she doesn’t work and hasn’t for over a decade. 2 kids is honestly fine as that makes replacement but 6 doesn’t make sense. Honestly after two the goverment has the right to require birth control be used, before benefits are paid. If the mother has half a brain she would use a real form of birth control. If they want our money they should have our morals or get a job. Welfare simply doesn’t have to be unconditional and children honestly deserve better than what they are getting.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[Anonymous 2]

Atton wrote:

Welfare simply doesn’t have to be unconditional

I agree with this as well. There’s just no reason to keep subsidizing irresponsible reproduction.

[anonymousyamParticipant 4605]

Anonymous wrote:

, a major city in The Netherlands is now trying to legalize forced anticonception upon women that are too “vulnerable” to have children of their own. Women with drinking problems, mental problems, or financial troubles. The main (public) reason is that hundreds of children are born and raised in conditions that are unacceptable to the State.

Lemme guess they born and raised in section 8 housing out of wedlock (or relationship) living off of welfare and getting government funded schooling and (or) university?

And the government is finally having enough of this s~~~ and forcing birth control on them?

I don’t actually see how this is all that bad actually unless they are literally tearing a child from the womb and killing it.

Just an east coast asshole who likes to curse, If you get offended by words like fuck, cunt, shit, piss, bitch or any racial slurs then you just scroll down.

[Dr. SableParticipant 1064]

It will never happen.
However, taxing the s~~~ out of male population
will be more than acceptable.

Zero Tolerance

[Author]

Posts