I’ve seen the petition being circulated by a lawyer to change alimony laws in California; does anyone know of something similar that would allow men the right to opt out of becoming fathers–AFTER conception?  I know how effed up the laws and more importantly, the interpretation of those laws already is, I’m more concerned with solutions . . .

-H

Some advocate allowing the father to sign off all rights and responsibilities; however, I don’t see that ever happening. If it were allowed, many women would still have the child and become a financial burden on the state. This is clearly not good for a society. From my perspective, the family law that exists today in regard to spousal and child support serves two purposes: 1. ensures mom and the kids have some money, and 2. it doesn’t come from the state.

Wolf wrote:

Some advocate allowing the father to sign off all rights and responsibilities; however, I don’t see that ever happening. If it were allowed, many women would still have the child and become a financial burden on the state. This is clearly not good for a society. From my perspective, the family law that exists today in regard to spousal and child support serves two purposes: 1. ensures mom and the kids have some money, and 2. it doesn’t come from the state.

“Family” and “children” are buzzwords in politics. Politics writes the laws. Therefore, how does allowing a man the right to choose to be a father help families and children? That is the million dollar question.

I don’t disagree with you – no need to roll over on the issue. However, in order to be successful, I believe it has to be more than just about male rights.

I’m more concerned with solutions . . .

Snip’a’doodle-doo, and be on your own merry little way! The solution to a c~~~roach is to crush the c~~~roach before it has little c~~~roaches! Since they can shove abortion down my throat, or child support up my ass , I figure abort women first, before all the molestations are manifested in your life. Snip the woman, or snip little Charley, either way some snipping needs to be done…

To the extent allowing women to terminate (via the morning after pill), kill (via abortion), abandon (via safe baby havens/adoption) helps families and children, is the extent men’s equal right to choose fatherhood should help families/children.  Equality and rights are a bitch, that’s why women want it but don’t seem to want anyone else–including children–to have them (children’s rights ALWAYS come after a woman’s).

I agree with your points re family law/”child” support, however the state (and society) doesn’t seem to take issue with women who use sperm banks, as one example.  These women go into motherhood knowing there will be no man to support their children and usually have the financial means to make that choice.  If this sperm-bank-mother falls into financial straights however, the gov’t has no choice but to support her because there’s no man to go after.

Another scenario gov’t/society seems not to have a problem with is the full support of the gov’t for babies abandoned by mothers at safe baby havens.  There is little clamor for the abandoned child perhaps being “helped” by . . . oh I don’t know . . . being given to its biological father, though there are nothing but stats on biological parents being better than foster care.

Any children born with men having the same choices women have will be wanted children, whether by one or both parents, unlike currently.  Then our issue will become having equal parenting rights, but one thing at a time . . .

-H

Wolf, To the extent allowing women to terminate (via the morning after pill), kill (via abortion), abandon (via safe baby havens/adoption) helps families and children, is the extent men’s equal right to choose fatherhood should help families/children. Equality and rights are a bitch, that’s why women want it but don’t seem to want anyone else–including children–to have them (children’s rights ALWAYS come after a woman’s).

I agree with your points re family law/”child” support, however the state (and society) doesn’t seem to take issue with women who use sperm banks, as one example. These women go into motherhood knowing there will be no man to support their children and usually have the financial means to make that choice. If this sperm-bank-mother falls into financial straights however, the gov’t has no choice but to support her because there’s no man to go after.

Another scenario gov’t/society seems not to have a problem with is the full support of the gov’t for babies abandoned by mothers at safe baby havens. There is little clamor for the abandoned child perhaps being “helped” by . . . oh I don’t know . . . being given to its biological father, though there are nothing but stats on biological parents being better than foster care.

Any children born with men having the same choices women have will be wanted children, whether by one or both parents, unlike currently. Then our issue will become having equal parenting rights, but one thing at a time . . . -H

All valid points; however, I see it as more of an MRA vice MGTOW issue. My decision to GMOW does not involve advocating for MRA. Rather, I’m just not going to involve myself in a situation whereby a woman can unilaterally decide whether or not I become a father.

All valid points; however, I see it as more of an MRA vice MGTOW issue. My decision to GMOW does not involve advocating for MRA. Rather, I’m just not going to involve myself in a situation whereby a woman can unilaterally decide whether or not I become a father.

By paying taxes, you are a father, to millions of kids you didn’t sire(assuming you are living in a society where women have the freedom to have children and you have the freedom to pay for it). The only way you can choose to not be a father is to not pay taxes.