women get more rights in relation tto kids (1 Viewer)

[Serius]

i got the idea for this thread from the virtues thread, basically it seems in todays society, in regards to fathers men get bullshitted

we seriously get the harsh end of the stick, like why does a woman get the choice wether to keep the baby or not, sure if its a medical thing or her life is in risk but in a normal situation why can the mother kill the fathers baby? its the fathers child aswell so why isnt it equal say and equal rights, i sure as hell hope that if i get a girl pregnant and i want her to keep the baby she doesnt just kill it that would leave me devestated knowning my baby was killed

and another thing, in divorces, women tend to get the good deal and fathers end up with some 1 weekend every month bullshit visitation right... its a load of crap really

e.g one of our close family friends, his wife cheated on him so they got a divorce and now he only gets to see 3 of his 5 children like once a month or some shit [ the other 2 of his children were old enough to choose to live with him] and he is a totally nice guy, the best father anyone could hope for and now his life is ruined cause of some cheating bitch who took his kids away when they got a divorce SHE is i nthe wrong, not him

and in rape [ yes i know rape isnt cool just hear me out] there seem to be alot of cases these days where the woman lies, i mean i agree with prosecuting rapists to the full exstent of the law, but then some women lie about rape to get men in trouble and its always the mans word in doubt and if he cant prove he didnt rape her then he will probably be found guilty .... its situations like this where i hate society and how messed up it is, dont these girls know that by crying wolf theyplace doubt in the minds of the jurors in future cases and a legitimate rapist might get off?

today it seems that men are the second class citizens in relation to the law, not women as tattooguy implied

erm discuss aforementioned 3 topics [ choice of keeping baby, divorces/ visitation rights with kids and rape cases] in relation to men either getting or not getting the harsh end of the stick in these situations

 

[azzie]

thats true
there are so many guys out there who would be great fathers to their kids....... if they even got the chance to be with them for long enought to have any impact
i think feminism just went a touch too far

edit: scrap that feminism sux

 

[hipsta_jess]

For me:
abortion- should be entirely a womans choice, she has to carry it for 9 months, and do the bulk of the raising for at least 18 years (as much as you might like to deny it, women are still the primary care givers)

in general- as much as I hate it, even in todays society women are still seen to some extent as the home-maker, the care-giver, etc...so, it would make sense that society tends to lean towards giving the mother primary custody, etc.

other- Yes, I do think a lot of fathers get a raw deal, and there probably are times that the father would be a better parent to the child than the mother. However, the woman carries the baby for 9 months, and generally provides food (ie, breast milk) for at least a couple of months, and nothing, no matter what you say, can break that bond, and no matter how hard the fathers try, or no matter how much they want to, you just can't carry a baby, or feed it. Sure, you can care for it, provide shelter, nurture, etc, but there are things only a mother can provide, even once the child is older and no longer "needs" the parent for that sort of stuff, the bond has already formed.
Generally I think each custody dispute should be judged on an individual basis (yeah, yeah, they are, but there is still the 'mother knows best' type attitude), and generally a 50/50 custodial arrangement met. However, obviously, there are cases that either the mother or father is unfit for regular parenting and all, but generally I think 50/50 is the go.

Hmm, I have no idea what I've just argued for. I think what I'm saying is in terms of bringing the baby into the world, and raising it for the first probably 2-3 years, its generally a mothers role, but then after that its more shared.

 

[katie_tully]

Guys get the raw end of the stick when it comes to kids. Everybody is going to believe the mother, and if the mother doesn;t get access or some shit, it's apparently being sexist...unfair, etc.
A man will "apparently" hit his wife, and lose all custody/visitation rights...A mother can be a crack whore, leaving her kids unattended, ort aking them to crack houses...DOCS takes them for 2 months, but hands them back...
Distinction is nobody questions whether the woman is lying when she says he hit her...
I feel sorry for dudes.

 

[glycerine]

I agree that fathers often get the raw end of the deal thanks mostly to society's perception of mothers as nurturers, whereas family roles are often, in fact, usually far more complicated than that.

However, I still maintain that women of course have more rights in regards to abortion, purely because biology dictates that *gasp* pregnancy itself is an entirely female burden. (Don't give me shit about moodiness etc - boo fucking hoo hoo). Yes, I agree, the father should have a say... but in the end, it has to be largely based on the female's feelings and willingness to bear the burden of pregnancy for nine months. If roles were reversed and men were the ones who carried the baby, I would say exactly the same thing - whoever is giving the role of carrying the baby for 9 months has the ultimate say in whether or not to keep it.

 

[Phanatical]

It's very true that women have more rights in relation to children. And coming from a family where I am closer to my father than my mother (even though i love both parents very much and both parents love me), I think that the rights my father has compared to those of my mother aren't fair. I'd like to think I'll one day be a father, and I'd hate to think I could lose my children because the mother of my children is a manipulative bitch without the best interests of my children at heart.

One of the reasons suicide is so much higher among males is this very issue - the fact that it drives fathers to suicide should indicate that they care enough for their children that they would rather die than be separated from them in life.

Problem is, in 91% of cases that face the Family Court, the mother will win custody of the children, and the father will be able to visit once a fortnight. This sort of feminist mentality is destructive to society, yet we encourage it.

This is why men and women should become active in the Men's Rights movement. "Masculist" is NOT a dirty word.

 

[neo o]

(Don't give me shit about moodiness etc - boo fucking hoo hoo

Men don't just get that from preganant women.

 

[Phanatical]

Yeah, we get it from women, period.

 

[glycerine]

oh cry me a fucking river.

 

[neo o]

oh cry me a fucking river.

Thanks for the demonstration.

 

[Serius]

where as some women consider who should decide to keep the baby solely on who is pregnant and hence has to have the baby for 9 months, i dont see why that is fair
sure the woman could demand to not carry the baby to term if she has a medical condition that may put her life at risk, but the baby is 1/2 the fathers genetically and he gets ZERO say in what happens to his son/daughter. think of it this way, a guy gets his g/f prgenant, they break up but he thinks of aborting a baby is killing his child and his religous views are put into question because no matter what he says, the woman has the choice to kill his baby

i dont think thats really fair, i know this one family, the wife threatened to abort the baby and the husband thought of abortions as killing children so he told her he cant do anything about it legally, but if she does goes through with it, he cannot stay married to a child killer, so they divorced. Well my mums a midwife [ she delivers babies] so i know tons of stories like these

the big deal with me is not religous or anything like child killing or crap like that its simply that if a girl i loved got pregnant and i wanted to keep my son/daughter i dont have any say in it so i dont have the choice to keep a child know that pisses me off that i dont have a say in the welfare of a baby i half created
load of crap really, if that type of shit continues i think i am gonna end up being anti- abortion, if abortions were gotten rid of, the woman has no choice but to carry it to term, and then i am not sure on adoption laws, but if she wanted to abort it and obviously didnt want it, then i could adopt it right? then i would be perfectly happy

so it should go basically like: the woman wants an abortion. the man says no, he wants to keep the baby therefore the baby cannot be aborted without both parents consent, if one consents and the other doesnt, then the baby must be adopted/ cared for by the parent who did not consent to abortion. e.g i get a girl pregnant. she wants an aborion. i say no. she carries baby to term, spits it out and then i am the full custodian of the baby and she doesnt have to see it or pay welfare or anything from then onwards. same should apply in reverse if i want her to get an abortion and she doesnt want one. then basically i dont have to see her or the child or pay support or anything

 

[glycerine]

The problem with saying 'ok, you have to have both parent's consent for abortion' is if, say, the father wants it and the mother doesn't, you're essentially giving the woman no say. Like, it's all good and well to say "fathers should have equal rights", but until that baby is able to live without the mother's body, it is not an equal burden and therefore men shouldn't have an equal say. Yes, the mother should take his feelings into consideration but in essence, if you think that women should be forced to carry a HUGE physical burden that they don't even want for 9 months just because you want her to, you're an idiot.

 

[Phanatical]

We're not giving the woman no say. I'm advocating giving the man a say as well. His opinions should play a part in the decision, and should be reflected in the ramifications of the woman's actions. In this case, if the woman wants the child, the man doesn't, and the woman carries the child to term, is it still right to ask the man for Child Support? Perhaps his rationale for abortion was that he couldn't financially support the child and didn't want to bring him or her into a world of disadvantage. If the situation were the other way round, then the man might consider the mother the murderer of his unborn child, and maybe he should have the avenue to sue the mother for damages.

And this gender equality doesn't end at birth either. The family court remains unashamably biased towards women, and there are thousands of cases where men will lose custody of their children, or will be denied a say in how the children are raised, because our laws do not reflect gender equality in any sense. It is extremely important that society firstly acknowledge that men Do face disadvantage in society, then do something about it.

 

[shazzam]

The Family Law Act doesn't discriminate against either gender. With regards to custody, Section 60B clearly states that:
(a)
children have the right to know and be cared for by both their parents, regardless of whether their parents are married, separated, have never married or have never lived together; and
(b)
children have a right of contact, on a regular basis, with both their parents and with other people significant to their care, welfare and development; and
(c)
parents share duties and responsibilities concerning the care, welfare and development of their children; and
(d)
parents should agree about the future parenting of their children.

Mothers don't tend to get the "better deal" when they receive 80%, say, of the value of estate which was bought under the names of both parents. The reason that mothers may receive more is because they usually have to take time off work to look after children, and thus their income would be substantially reduced, whereas the fathers generally continue working uninhibited by parental duties.

There is no law to prevent the mother from working full-time while the father looks after the children. However, besides the fact that many men do not like the idea of nursing children in their homes all day, there are many duties (especially in cases where the children are very young) that men cannot perform. eg breastfeed infants.

Abortion - the reason that men can be charged with murder when they kill an unborn foetus is because this can only be done via violent means. A woman commits an equally heinous crime if she violently kills her unborn child. However, abortions are clinical procedures that are carried out only in early stages of preganancies and so it is unfeasible to consider it the same as a man bashing the baby out of his partner.

 

[shazzam]

You can consider it a flaw in the legal system if you like, but the court doesn't consider who caused the marriage breakdown when it rules. Rather, the one who is disadvantaged is usually the one who files for divorce and I would think in your uncle's case, he would've been the one to do so.

You can't say that the law is biased against men however, since if the man cheated on his wife and the wife filed for divorce she would suffer equal disadvantage as a man in her situation.

The settlement outcome is also stongly dependant on one's solicitor. Even if your uncle may have deserved more, if his ex-wife's solicitor prepared a more favourable affidavit with better supporting documents than your uncle's solicitor, the ruling might sway towards her side.

Edit: Though not applicable in your uncle's case, Argonaut, the settlement may sometimes be in the Wife's favour for the reasons described above (in relation to the care she would possibly have to provide to the children if they are young).

 

[Serius]

yeah the law is unbalanced, but even when it rules fairly it doesnt work in practise

like my dads closest friend, his wife cheated on him and got divorced
so then my dads friend [ lets call him steve] had to pay child support for his kid [ rachael] AND another kid the wife had from a previous marriage, i dunno how it worked but i did have to, something to do with him being the "father" of the kid [ the kid never knew his biological father].

so anyways..... Steve got visitation rights, once every fortnight but the wife kept moving and running away with his daughter rachael, he was always looking about and checking with local churches and stuff looking for his ex-wife to fins his daughter so he found his daughter on a number of occasions and did get to see her briefly but then the wife was refusing him to see his daughter, so he tried to see her at school just to give her a Xmas pressy and the Xwife got an AVO out on him so now his little girl would be around 20 and he hasnt seen her for over 10 yrs and he is heart broken he was a totally decent guy and he was screwed over by the system

my dad knows the daughter but she has been brainwashed by the mother for over 10 years so she hates her dad, but can hardly remember him and never met him for any length of time
just sad really how often the law lets fathers down

and women wonder why so many men commit suicide... that kind if shit happening tears a man apart, i would be crushed from that

 

[Phanatical]

Exactly! Because the mother supposedly makes the better parent, the father is not only left out of the parenting, but also stuck paying increasing amounts of Child Support to a mother who in most cases will spend the extra money on herself, rather than on the child. There has been more than one case that I know of where Child Support pays for the Plasma TV, while the father works back-to-back 16 hour days labouring in a thankless job to raise the court-ordered money. While the mother sits back with her new husband and enjoys the luxuries provided by the Family Court, the father doesn't get to see his child.

Society has finally reached the point where men ARE the disadvantaged, and even oppressed gender. While women are encouraged to take pride in their feminism, and to quote feminist mantras like "oppression of women" and "perpetuating the patriarchy", the word "masculist" is still a dirty word, and anybody who dares associate themselves with such an "evil" movement is themselves branded evil, and interested only in taking women as slaves.

And the fact is that young men of today are emerging from a female-friendly, male-hostile education system into a world of Affirmative Action and the Family Court. They will lead a life of disadvantage in comparison to our female counterparts, and will find it a lot harder to succeed in the world than their fathers and grandfathers.

The only way we can achieve true gender equity is to recognise that yes, Women's Rights equal Human Rights, but so do Men's Rights, and to deny that men don't have the same rights as women in respect to Many areas is to deny that human rights are universal.

 

[tattoodguy]

i like how women are like --------women should have 10000% say in relation to everything to do with the kid.........but they are so quick to put their hand out for money and shit..

when it comes to all the benefits and decisions etc its the womens kid...............when it comes to finaicial stufff..........its the guys kid................its fucking bull shit.

 

[sped_kid01]

i agree with womens rights...but its not fair to give women more rights than men...

equally not indifference

 

[Phanatical]

I believe that women's rights and men's rights are the one and the same thing, since they both relate to human rights. Women nor men should have more rights over the other, as human rights are universal.