patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,196,697 comments by 14,089 users - gabbar, GNL, richwicks online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 58 - 73 of 73 Search these comments
Dan8267
2016 Feb 22, 4:48pm
http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/france-upholds-the-ban-on-paternity-tests/
Theres no mistake in the title. It is true French men are forbidden by law to attempt to find out whether the child they are paying for is in fact their child or not. In fact, it has been illegal for men to attempt to find out if their child is theirs for many years. But a few days ago, the ban was challenged once again–and the government upheld the ban. Is it really a surprise that a socialist government disagreed that men have human rights too? Whats even more striking is that there is NO mainstream media...
Not only should this ban be overturned, but the state should have to pay for universal paternity tests and any man who was duped should be compensated with high interest at the expense of the personal wealth of the politicians, judges, and lawyers responsible for the ban.
Dan8267
2016 Feb 22, 5:00pm
It is true French men are forbidden by law to attempt to find out whether the child they are paying for is in fact their child or not.
Probably because that would lead to them not having to pay, and then no one would.
That's not even a remotely justifiable reason. One could just as easily pick a random person and make that person pay and it would make as much sense and be as ethical.
In fact, one could argue that it is a human right for a man not to be forced to pay for a child that is not his as doing so is effectively slavery.
Heraclitusstudent
2016 Feb 22, 5:13pm
That's not even a remotely justifiable reason. One could just as easily pick a random person and make that person pay and it would make as much sense and be as ethical.
I agree it's not justifiable. I'm just giving the rationalization: the French state puts kids welfare ahead of a man's right.
Once men were forced to pay for child care, they were deprived of their main leverage within a family cell: that if they don't like it they can leave.
But here it's even worse: they are seen as wallets on legs, and generally, as subhumans with no rights whatsoever.
It would be much better to give taxpayer financed welfare to single women.
Dan8267
2016 Feb 22, 5:21pm
That's not even a remotely justifiable reason. One could just as easily pick a random person and make that person pay and it would make as much sense and be as ethical.
I agree it's not justifiable. I'm just giving the rationalization: the French state puts kids welfare ahead of a man's right.
Actually, that's exactly NOT what the state is doing. The state is putting its own financial interests before both the man's rights and the welfare of the children. The children are gravely hurt by having misinformation about their family's medical history.
If the state were to put the children's welfare ahead of everything else, the state would require paternity testing and knowing exactly who the father is and it would also guarantee state support of the child in the case where the man finds out he is not the father and leaves.
we have divorce courts, we have the concept of "equitable division of assets
--------------
DA PATRIARCHY!!
Dan8267
2016 Feb 22, 5:31pm
It would be much better to give taxpayer financed welfare to single women.
Here's the plan I would propose, and I understand that many people will hate it, but it is both socially just and provides anti-parasitic selection.
The state will pay for anyone's essential needs (food, shelter, education, medical care), but the person must pay the state (society) back in the same real dollars at no interest. Until that happens, the person and all of his or her living descendants must accept temporary chemical sterilization or a physical barrier like a chastity belt. Once the person has paid back the state, this measures ends. However, until then that person can have no more descendants.
Some people will never pay back the state and the taxpayers will have to eat the cost of those people's living expenses. However, the inter-generational dependency on welfare is eliminated and there is an evolutionary incentive not to fail to pay back society. In the worst case scenario, society ends up paying to remove unfit people from the gene pool. Not a bad deal for society, and it makes future generations better off.
There is also an incentive for people to take care of their aging parents and grandparents.
Granted, there are also bad incentives like wanting to off grandma so you can have kids. And some people will try to use the system for eliminating those they find undesirable. However, I do think that such a system could be built while preventing those two things.
There is a moral question as to whether or not human beings have the right to reproduce. However, for men, reproduction has never been a right. It's always been a privilege that they had to earn. Personally, I don't think that reproduction should be a right since many people are incapable or unwilling to take care of the children they produce. But I do appreciate the other side of the argument.
turtledove
2016 Feb 22, 5:31pm
It would be foolish to ignore the incredible influence that gender has on people.
I've done no such thing. Of course a person's sex is an influence. It's just not the only influence. To say that there are only a handful of experiences that shape us is ridiculous. A woman who was molested as a child is going to perceive men differently than a woman who wasn't. A woman who grew up in an all-male family; a woman who grew up in an all-female family; strong/weak male figures in her life; strong/weak female figures in her life... educated/uneducated... those who have more than the normal amount of responsibility at a young age (like a dead mother and the girl fills in as caretaker for her younger brothers/sisters).... Daddy's little girl who was spoiled non-stop.... and so many other possible experiences that can and do affect the way a person acts in adult relationships. Like I said, you seem to want to simplify the issue by saying that "we as a species act like such and such... and therefore, "this" is always the reason why women do x,y,z..." Forgetting for a moment that not all women do x, y,or z and for those who do -- their motivations are influenced by the multitude of individual experiences had throughout their lives.
Dan8267
2016 Feb 22, 5:37pm
I don't agree with what Dan Savage is saying below, but he is a smart and honest guy.
www.youtube.com/embed/w8SOQEitsJI
Seems like lowering one's standards to accept a mate who cheats at all.
Also, I don't think most people believe that because you are in love with and committed to a person, you don't feel lust towards others. You just sacrifice your own selfish interests for the interests of the relationship understanding that what you get out of the relationship is worth far more than what you are sacrificing.
However, Savage is right that humans are not evolved to be completely monogamous. Hell, the shape of the penis is a dead giveaway. It's shaped like a plunger for a reason.
That said, human beings are closer to monogamous than the vast majority of sexually reproducing animals. Monogamy is extremely rare in nature.
There are advantages and disadvantages of monogamy, but you simply don't find a high degree of paternal (father) investment without the females being sexually loyal. Paternal investment requires paternal certainty.
Dan8267
2016 Feb 22, 8:50pm
o be quite frank, sex is mostly an ego boost in middle age.
As expressed in the most honest song ever written.
I bet you $10 when she was in her 20s, she dated older men
alpha males for sure...she still has a good rack though
Dan8267
2016 Feb 22, 11:08pm
Absolutely. Take Naomi Wolf. I bet you $10 when she was in her 20s, she dated older men. Now she is writing about how terrible it is that 30s-50s men are bringing hot young things to parties instead of dating "Wonderful Women" like herself.
From article...
And yet I did not feel the frisson of envy among the men present, nor did I see a bristle of jealousy from any of the stylish, accomplished women in their 40s. In fact, the mood of both genders was tender, almost pitying. The man may have imagined that he was showing off the youth of his date the way he might show off a new Maserati; but parading her around like an acquisition seemed only to make his friends feel sorry for him.
Yeah, that's not what's going on. That's a older woman's fantasy about what she wishes was going on.
Patrick
2016 Feb 23, 8:03am
accomplished women in their 40s
both genders wrongly assume the other gender thinks the same way that they themselves do. this quote is a classic example. there should be a name for this phenomenon, since it's so common.
men tend to assume women are primarily interested in looks, but that's wrong. women mostly want confidence, dominance, and accomplishments and will put up with quite a lot of ugliness to get it. evolutionary theory predicts this, since women needed a protector and provider to raise children historically.
women tend to assume men are interested in their accomplishments, but sexually, accomplishments in women are invisible. men couldn't care less about that. it really is mostly about looks for men, which makes evolutionary sense too, since men were after their fertility historically. accomplishment was largely irrelevant to raising children.
maybe that's not completely true. being a geeky guy, i was impressed that my wife was in the phd program in physics in ann arbor when we met and could help with my engineering homework. though i was definitely more interested in certain other features.
MisdemeanorRebel
2016 Feb 23, 8:46am
alpha males for sure...she still has a good rack though
She looks damn good for 50+, I gotta say.
It has definitely been liberating that men are no longer expected to be exclusive bread winners in the family. The past has brought undue pressure, stress and early death to male gender. The present is bright and the future looks brighter. Enjoy the progress and embrace the change. You are free to believe what you want and live your life accordingly, but if you try to force the "return to 1950's" beliefs on others, you will get justifiably steamrolled.
Ceffer
2016 Feb 23, 10:31am
women tend to assume men are interested in their accomplishments, but sexually, accomplishments in women are invisible. men couldn't care less about that. it really is mostly about looks for men, which makes evolutionary sense too, since men were after their fertility historically. accomplishment was largely irrelevant to raising children.
How about a woman who fits neatly on the plywood pillory, but doesn't have one of those piercing, shrieky, screaming voices. Perhaps just an attractive Sotto Voce.
Women should be rated by how well they can be muffled with pillowcases and linens. Ought there not be a standard?
« First « Previous Comments 58 - 73 of 73 Search these comments
When interviewing at a new company, I alway notice a small flurry of interest in me by all the women who I come into contact with.
The effect seems subtle until once aware of it, but then it's unmistakable and not subtle at all. From the receptionist to the HR woman to potential co-workers, there's a feeling I'm being watched, judged, and talked about. An unlikely number of new random women just happen to walk by and look into the room where I'm being interviewed, no doubt informed explicitly or implicitly by the other women that there is a new man to evaluate. They cannot let the competition get there first! They smile and say hello, as if that were normal on the street. But it's not.
The receptionists and HR women clearly have those jobs partly because it's a way to check out a continuous stream of men for short- or long-term mating potential, and a way to block hot women from getting jobs there through various deliberate accidents and omissions in their application and interviews.
Alas, within a few days or weeks of starting a new job, the women have all had their look or chat, and their attention is back to checking out whatever new man comes in the front door, smiling and saying hello at him now.