Women see children as just another product

[LionOnTheLooseParticipant 1315]

Here in the UK, 90% of pregnant women who get a positive result from a test for Down’s syndrome go on to abort. In Iceland and Denmark, which have almost universal screening, almost all Down’s syndrome babies are aborted and it’s quite possible that Down’s syndrome will be eliminated in those countries. There are fears that the UK could go the same way with a new non-invasive test.

I think this is yet more evidence that the idea of women being “caring”, “nurturing” and “loving” is largely a myth nowadays. Women generally see children as just another commodity and, if they think it’s “faulty”, they’ll “send it back” without a second thought.

I’ve worked with people with Down’s syndrome and those people have brought great joy to many people’s lives, and have made valuable contributions to their community. The idea that they should be killed off because they are somehow defective just sickens me.

There aren't holes in your pockets. It's called marriage.

[Anonymous 42]

But I thought we were a bunch of Chads that would favor flushing a kid down the toilet rather than have any responsibility or compassion for it?

They don’t say too many nice things about us even though we’re some of the nicest guys you’d ever meet!

Must be something convicting their souls about the things we bring up! Like the TRUTH!

[AwakenedParticipant 35216]

That’s a tough one.

CHOOSING to take on a Child that has a ton of issues from the outset that will make your life, and that of your spouse and potentially other siblings a whole lot more demanding/challenging/difficult is NOT an easy choice to make either way.

I prefer to look at the women that readily tear apart their families and destroy the Men as well as damage their children because they’re “unhappy”, and they wish to cash in and jump on the carousel. Now, those are truly Selfish Evil Bitches.

In a World of Justin Beibers Be a Johnny Cash

[Jan SobieskiParticipant 28791]

Eliminated is a poor description. You can’t remove it by breeding.

It is a form of genetic damage that typically comes from the parents being older.

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

[LionOnTheLooseParticipant 1315]

Anonymous wrote:

But I thought we were a bunch of Chads that would favor flushing a kid down the toilet rather than have any responsibility or compassion for it?

They don’t say too many nice things about us even though we’re some of the nicest guys you’d ever meet!

Must be something convicting their souls about the things we bring up! Like the TRUTH!

Quite! The chaps on here are some of the most thoughtful, compassionate and amusing people I know.

Awakened wrote:

That’s a tough one.

CHOOSING to take on a Child that has a ton of issues from the outset that will make your life, and that of your spouse and potentially other siblings a whole lot more demanding/challenging/difficult is NOT an easy choice to make either way.

I prefer to look at the women that readily tear apart their families and destroy the Men as well as damage their children because they’re “unhappy”, and they wish to cash in and jump on the carousel. Now, those are truly Selfish Evil Bitches.

I totally see what you’re saying in that it IS a huge commitment. My own view is that, if you’re prepared to have sex, you should be prepared to love any resulting child, no matter what. I’m not prepared to devote my life to caring for someone else, but that’s one of the reasons I’m monk.

There aren't holes in your pockets. It's called marriage.

[NerevarParticipant 8040]

Honestly, I’m okay with abortion if the baby has Down Syndrome, or lots of other disabilities. It would live a very harsh life and such a child puts tons of burdens on the parents. It is not a selfish act by the parents in my book if they (both!) choose to abort.

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

[AussieParticipant 2509]

Yep, I agree totally with Nerevar.
In the past these kids died young anyway but with modern medicine they live a lot longer than they used to.

Now if only they could devise a test to identify embryos who suffer from the feminism defect….

" I feel threatened "

[Remove me!Participant]

This is a very good point. Women use children as means of income, either from the father or government. If that child has Down’s Syndrome, it will take more work to raise that child, thus making said child not very valuable monetarily.

Women use their own children as pawns, and I have seen this happen with so many men. These “mothers” would eat their own children if the father or government were not willing to give them money for having the child.

Like a bird on the wire, like a drunk midnight choir, I have tried in my way to be free.

[It’sallbsParticipant]

Ever seen a dog with a female owner…

Watch next time how the dog seems you’ll see what I mean.

Anyone ever tells you TUNA are not capable of harming a kid due to their mother and caring instincts just remind any one from the UK of that evil bitch Myra Hindley.

Of course for donkeys years they tried to say Brady had forced her into it-bulls~~~. Evil bitch filmed brady doing what he was doing when it wasn’t her turn -fcuking evil bitch wouldnt tell them where on the moors they were buried police searched for over 40 years they never found poor Keith Bennets remains.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

Maybe if women weren’t waiting until they 55 to get prego there would be less incidents.

I’m a little troubled by the position of nerevar and aussie. If quality of life is the determining factor in whether to abort or not are you willing to limit it only to downs syndrome? What about those with exposed spine syndrome?, or blindness, deafness, what about too short—too tall, too fat? What if its a heart valve issue. How about a hang-nail. And why stop there if indeed the quality of life is the deciding issue how about the aged? Folks in nursing homes, people with cancer? Can’t your rationale apply to all the above. What factor limits it only to the unborn and those with downs?

[HermitParticipant]

PistolPete wrote:

Maybe if women weren’t waiting until they 55 to get prego there would be less incidents.

I’m a little troubled by the position of nerevar and aussie. If quality of life is the determining factor in whether to abort or not are you willing to limit it only to downs syndrome? What about those with exposed spine syndrome?, or blindness, deafness, what about too short—too tall, too fat? What if its a heart valve issue. How about a hang-nail. And why stop there if indeed the quality of life is the deciding issue how about the aged? Folks in nursing homes, people with cancer? Can’t your rationale apply to all the above. What factor limits it only to the unborn and those with downs?

…….and is that testing 100% accurate or is there a chance that a perfectly healthy baby could be aborted?

The evil in women’s hearts leaves them no moral bounds as to inhibit them from descending to the lowest levels of darkness to acquire their self entitled desires.

[AussieParticipant 2509]

You are dead right. WHERE do you draw the line?
To be honest, I can’t answer that myself. It’s all f~~~ed up, we abort healthy foetuses for financial reasons but allow defective ones to live and be born because of ethics and morals. As far as euthanasia goes, that’s another massive headf~~~ and something that is open to abuse but it’s also something I support.
If you ever seen the movie Gattaca, I fear that is where we are all headed.

" I feel threatened "

[It’sallbsParticipant]

I am 100% against abortion as a rule with serious problems oen asks teh question what would their quality of life really be like?

But the decision in that case should not be left to eeh Mother.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[Mr. SpockParticipant 10924]

Nerevar wrote:

Honestly, I’m okay with abortion if the baby has Down Syndrome, or lots of other disabilities. It would live a very harsh life and such a child puts tons of burdens on the parents. It is not a selfish act by the parents in my book if they (both!) choose to abort.

This can be a touchy subject but let’s not forget that the article says that the WOMEN are making these decisions. In the end the WOMEN get the final say in this. It would be easy for me to agree with Nerevar and Aussie because more often than not, the man alone doesn’t have the final say. If I were given the final say, I couldn’t do it. I know what that would entail and others before me dealt with it so I can too.

Remove me! wrote:

This is a very good point. Women use children as means of income, either from the father or government. If that child has Down’s Syndrome, it will take more work to raise that child, thus making said child not very valuable monetarily.

I believe that women see children as utilities….just like they see us men. I’ve seen them use children as pawns too and it’s sickening. They will shame a man who knowingly walks away from his children but wouldn’t give a second thought to sacrificing that child for her own well being.
Women see everything in the world around them as a tool for their betterment. They are truly incapable of love or compassion.

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

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

I wasn’t trying to be a critic but I thought the point should be raised. You’re right Aussie it is a slippery slope and I don’t know if we want to reach bottom. I suspect however women will take us all straight to the bottom. In the future if their “accessory” /child is not perfect—abort, with no more concern than tossing away a handbag that is no longer in style. That is where we are headed.

[It’sallbsParticipant]

I remember when I used to get the boat to Dublin ever 3 months, you could see them all on the boat coming over for abortions. Abortion is illegal in Ireland.

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[It’sallbsParticipant]

I know everyone thinks I’m a hard old bastrad but I found this scene hard to watch.

It shows you tUNA’s true nature-cold as fcuk -AWALT…

http://www.leavemeansleave.eu

[MonkParticipant 17057]

Remove me! wrote:

This is a very good point. Women use children as means of income, either from the father or government. If that child has Down’s Syndrome, it will take more work to raise that child, thus making said child not very valuable monetarily.

Unless you have a welfare system like we have here in the UK, in which case a defective child is a very lucrative proposition indeed.

Women use their own children as pawns, and I have seen this happen with so many men. These “mothers” would eat their own children if the father or government were not willing to give them money for having the child.

So true.

Children are weapons, cash, and fashion accessories. I’ve actually heard a c~~~ say ‘I hope I have a disabled baby, they are so cute’.

Monstrous.

[narwhalParticipant]

LionOnTheLoose wrote:

I totally see what you’re saying in that it IS a huge commitment. My own view is that, if you’re prepared to have sex, you should be prepared to love any resulting child, no matter what. I’m not prepared to devote my life to caring for someone else, but that’s one of the reasons I’m monk.

I agree to an extent, but I’d take it further and say that unexpected responsibilities/consequences is a part of life in general, not just sex. Absolutely, sex comes with risk. Sex without a condom, without a vasectomy, comes with greater risk. But there is risk in any relationship, whether parents or friends. There is the bad with the good.

I have a friend who’s mother is getting rather sick, and asking him to pick out her casket and things like that. She’s basically giving up. He is not fun to be around right now. But that is life.

In general, the idea that life should have no pain it, that anyone who causes you pain or makes you unhappy should be removed from your life…is a very scary thought. The same people that tells women (and men) that they don’t have to deal with a child that won’t be a joy to raise are the same people that will tell a woman to divorce her husband when she’s just not feeling the tingles any more. The result is that those who feel they should never suffer end up dishes out massive amounts of suffering to those they promised to love and protect.

Ok. Then do it.

[Secret Agent MGTOWParticipant 22564]

Hermit wrote:

PistolPete wrote:

Maybe if women weren’t waiting until they 55 to get prego there would be less incidents.

I’m a little troubled by the position of nerevar and aussie. If quality of life is the determining factor in whether to abort or not are you willing to limit it only to downs syndrome? What about those with exposed spine syndrome?, or blindness, deafness, what about too short—too tall, too fat? What if its a heart valve issue. How about a hang-nail. And why stop there if indeed the quality of life is the deciding issue how about the aged? Folks in nursing homes, people with cancer? Can’t your rationale apply to all the above. What factor limits it only to the unborn and those with downs?

…….and is that testing 100% accurate or is there a chance that a perfectly healthy baby could be aborted?

See there is the problem. These tests are not 100% accurate and women have given birth to normal kids when the test has come back positive.

Either that, and/or the doctors are deliberately lying to certain women to persuade them to abort their baby. Which is not to be ruled out in the uk medical system.

Women want everything, but want responsibility and accountability for nothing.

[Author]

Posts