|
|
insignificant other (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} snacky) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} otf_wank,@ 2006-03-11 11:35:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
My Little Pony people, wanking again!
I'm putting this here instead of f_w, because it's not really fandom-related.
It starts with this news report, about a man who is filing a lawsuit, claiming that paying child support violates his constitutional rights. See, he wasn't ready to be a father, so he shouldn't have to bear any responsibility. They're calling it Roe vs. Wade for men!
So that is linked over at Ponyland's Catfights, a message board where themost socially retarded bitchiest members of the My Little Pony fandom gather together to, er, bitch about other pony collectors, and be bitchy about life in general. I think they don't quite understand the definition of "catfight", but hey, they're MLP collectors, not brain surgeons. But I digress!
athaliah1 links the news report with this comment:
I can't believe people are taking this shit seriously. *indignant snort* I'll post more when I'm not quite so pissed.
It starts off pretty mild with comments like:
Omfg, you have to be kidding me, keep it in your pants asshole
and
I sure as hell don't want to pay crazy taxes because of all the dad's who decided to opt out of their responsibilities.
Well-known pony wanker Diet Otaku pops in with i don't know, i do think it's kind of shitty that women can terminate a pregnancy but men can't. And others join in, agreeing that men who don't want children don't have any rights if a child is conceived. They can't force "their woman" to have an abortion, so they're stuck with paying for a child they didn't want and don't care about. It's so unfair to force men to take responsibility for a child they didn't want! There's a bit of a discussion about how man should have rights in deciding what a woman does with a pregancy, and it's not very contentious until sammmmmmmmm comments:
But, but...she MADE me put my penis in there!
And we're off to the races!
Diet Otaku: oh come on. you're saying that we should basically limit sex to procreation only just because some stupid bitches lie to their boyfriends to get pregnant and get child support $$$?
See, all women who have unplanned pregnancies? Stupid bitches who lie! Oh, Pony People! You are so openminded and educational!
Lilithdrff tries to be reasonable: I can see both sides of the argument. And yes, there are women out there who do get pregnant to trap men (my cousin did that, but she had a miscarriage, not the first time she tried it out either). However, no one grabs their cock, and sticks it in anyone's pussy. If they're not ready to have kids, wrap that bitch up, or keep it in your pants. And same goes for chicks, use protection or close your legs. Personal responsibility for their actions, it's only fair.
Other people support this strange, strange view of "you are responsible for your actions and their consequences", but Diet Otaku is not convinced. Because sex is fun! And there should not be consequences for having fun, especially if you don't want a baby and just want to have FUN!
Diet Otaku: well, are you 100% prepared for a baby? personally, i don't think people should be expected to abstain indefinitely because there's a .0001% chance a baby might be conceived. what, are we supposed to be a world of 40-year-old virgins by choice? that sounds like catholic logic right there. "no pleasurable feelings for me, thanks. too risky." what about people who choose to remain childless their whole lives? they're supposed to just die a virgin?
See, that's good logic, right there. "Taking responsibilty" of course equals = never having sex ever. But people don't agree with Diet! They cannot recognize her wonderful logic!
Bubbles:
personally, i don't think people should be expected to abstain indefinitely because there's a .0001% chance a baby might be conceived.
No, they shouldn't. But they have to RECOGNIZE the fact that it IS a possibility, and face the consequences if it happens.
Rosencrantz (our ownsepiamagpie): frankly, if the woman's gonna be raising a kid? The guy paying some child support still gets him off easy.
Diet Otaku just wants people to understand that if a man gets a woman pregnant, if he didn't WANT it to happen, he shouldn't be responsible: i agree that he didn't take the necessary steps to protect himself. but he has a point about guys being helpless when the woman wants a baby and he doesn't. i'm sure that if guys could turn off the sperm spigot every time they have sex, they would, but if a guy knows from day one that he is 110% sure he doesn't want a kid yet, and he protects himself, and she STILL gets pregnant, and she decides being a mommy would be fun or whatever, what can he do? it's 100% up to the woman whether to get the abortion, and if the man and woman disagree on whether it should be done, the man's just SOL and at the mercy of the whims of the woman. if i want an abortion and my partner doesn't, i'm going to have an abortion. if i don't want an abortion and my partner does, i'm not going to have one. and my partner is forced to submit to my decision. that's not fair, IMO. if it's the woman's sole discretion whether or not to have the baby, it should be the man's discretion whether or not to support the baby.
personally, i think the situation would best be resolved by having a judge review the case and man's financial status to determine whether he should have to support the baby. in this case, he should, because he's financially well-off and didn't take the necessary steps to protect himself. but if a man is wearing a condom and is only making $20k a year or whatever, and she still gets knocked up and he offers to pay for an abortion and she either turns him down or spends the money elsewhere, he should not have to pay child support. he did everything within reason to prevent the pregnancy, short of performing the abortion himself.
Wait, he *shouldn't* perform the abortion himself? I love how "she still gets knocked up" implies that "knocking up" was all on the woman's part.
Bubble continues to try to make sense: Then the man needs to talk to her about it BEFORE they ever have sex. If they're not on the same level about having kids if it happens, then they either need to abstain or realize that THEY ARE RISKING GETTING PREGNANT. Like Aequa points out, there is NO SUREFIRE BC method. The point is that there are responsibilities involved when you screw someone. If you can't handle the repercussions, then you need to stick to abstinence, mutual masterbation, or oral sex....
And what if she makes less than him, what then? That child's going to grow up in poverty. Now, if he gives her money for an abortion and she agrees and then spends it elsewhere, and the courts can prove it, I suppose he could be absolved. But if he just throws money at her and demands one, he's still liable. The risk was still there, for both of them. And no matter how much he may dislike it, the fact remains that IT IS HIS KID.
In response, Diet Otaku adds her own "facts" to the situation, and falls back on the "but it's FUN!" argument: it was my understanding that she told him she was on BC *and* infertile and was not ready for kids. that sends a pretty clear message to me that he shouldn't have much, if anything, to worry about.
i'd seriously like to know how many people who suggest this are actually celibate. it's not that easy. humans have a natural urge to have sex, you can't just expect everyone below the poverty line to never have sex because they're too poor to raise a kid. no, sex isn't JUST for fun, but with the advent of so many methods of birth control, sex is PRIMARILY for fun these days. that's why sex is so attractive, because it's fun and it feels good. nobody's watching porno going "mmm, makin babies."
MandiOLP feels men's pain: I have to say I find it a bit funny that so many people are adament on a woman's right to choose not to commit to a possible lifetime of responsibility, but as soon as a man pulls down his pants he flushes his rights down the toilet. That seems terribly selfish to me.
Obviously she understands, because her boyfriend Sesshoumaru is feeling OPPRESSED BY THE VAGINA OMG: As a man, I feel obligated to post in this thread. However, as so many have shown how much my opinion as a man matters to them, it doesn't make so much sense that I give my opinion at all.
...Unless of course I want to be like Rosencrantz and shove my head up your collective vaginas and agree that the fact that my penis obviously makes my right to choose whether or not a child makes its way into existence completely void.
Poor poor man! The mean women are saying that if you impregnate them, you should take responsibility for the child! And that bad other man is agreeing with them! God, life is soo hard for a pony-collecting manbitch!
The entire thread is here for your enjoyment.
Beware! The thread contains a picture of Freddie Mercury singing into a giant purple and green dildo. While wearing cowhide. I don't fucking know, don't look at me.
I'm putting this here instead of f_w, because it's not really fandom-related.
It starts with this news report, about a man who is filing a lawsuit, claiming that paying child support violates his constitutional rights. See, he wasn't ready to be a father, so he shouldn't have to bear any responsibility. They're calling it Roe vs. Wade for men!
So that is linked over at Ponyland's Catfights, a message board where the
athaliah1 links the news report with this comment:
I can't believe people are taking this shit seriously. *indignant snort* I'll post more when I'm not quite so pissed.
It starts off pretty mild with comments like:
Omfg, you have to be kidding me, keep it in your pants asshole
and
I sure as hell don't want to pay crazy taxes because of all the dad's who decided to opt out of their responsibilities.
Well-known pony wanker Diet Otaku pops in with i don't know, i do think it's kind of shitty that women can terminate a pregnancy but men can't. And others join in, agreeing that men who don't want children don't have any rights if a child is conceived. They can't force "their woman" to have an abortion, so they're stuck with paying for a child they didn't want and don't care about. It's so unfair to force men to take responsibility for a child they didn't want! There's a bit of a discussion about how man should have rights in deciding what a woman does with a pregancy, and it's not very contentious until sammmmmmmmm comments:
But, but...she MADE me put my penis in there!
And we're off to the races!
Diet Otaku: oh come on. you're saying that we should basically limit sex to procreation only just because some stupid bitches lie to their boyfriends to get pregnant and get child support $$$?
See, all women who have unplanned pregnancies? Stupid bitches who lie! Oh, Pony People! You are so openminded and educational!
Lilithdrff tries to be reasonable: I can see both sides of the argument. And yes, there are women out there who do get pregnant to trap men (my cousin did that, but she had a miscarriage, not the first time she tried it out either). However, no one grabs their cock, and sticks it in anyone's pussy. If they're not ready to have kids, wrap that bitch up, or keep it in your pants. And same goes for chicks, use protection or close your legs. Personal responsibility for their actions, it's only fair.
Other people support this strange, strange view of "you are responsible for your actions and their consequences", but Diet Otaku is not convinced. Because sex is fun! And there should not be consequences for having fun, especially if you don't want a baby and just want to have FUN!
Diet Otaku: well, are you 100% prepared for a baby? personally, i don't think people should be expected to abstain indefinitely because there's a .0001% chance a baby might be conceived. what, are we supposed to be a world of 40-year-old virgins by choice? that sounds like catholic logic right there. "no pleasurable feelings for me, thanks. too risky." what about people who choose to remain childless their whole lives? they're supposed to just die a virgin?
See, that's good logic, right there. "Taking responsibilty" of course equals = never having sex ever. But people don't agree with Diet! They cannot recognize her wonderful logic!
Bubbles:
personally, i don't think people should be expected to abstain indefinitely because there's a .0001% chance a baby might be conceived.
No, they shouldn't. But they have to RECOGNIZE the fact that it IS a possibility, and face the consequences if it happens.
Rosencrantz (our own
sepiamagpie): frankly, if the woman's gonna be raising a kid? The guy paying some child support still gets him off easy.Diet Otaku just wants people to understand that if a man gets a woman pregnant, if he didn't WANT it to happen, he shouldn't be responsible: i agree that he didn't take the necessary steps to protect himself. but he has a point about guys being helpless when the woman wants a baby and he doesn't. i'm sure that if guys could turn off the sperm spigot every time they have sex, they would, but if a guy knows from day one that he is 110% sure he doesn't want a kid yet, and he protects himself, and she STILL gets pregnant, and she decides being a mommy would be fun or whatever, what can he do? it's 100% up to the woman whether to get the abortion, and if the man and woman disagree on whether it should be done, the man's just SOL and at the mercy of the whims of the woman. if i want an abortion and my partner doesn't, i'm going to have an abortion. if i don't want an abortion and my partner does, i'm not going to have one. and my partner is forced to submit to my decision. that's not fair, IMO. if it's the woman's sole discretion whether or not to have the baby, it should be the man's discretion whether or not to support the baby.
personally, i think the situation would best be resolved by having a judge review the case and man's financial status to determine whether he should have to support the baby. in this case, he should, because he's financially well-off and didn't take the necessary steps to protect himself. but if a man is wearing a condom and is only making $20k a year or whatever, and she still gets knocked up and he offers to pay for an abortion and she either turns him down or spends the money elsewhere, he should not have to pay child support. he did everything within reason to prevent the pregnancy, short of performing the abortion himself.
Wait, he *shouldn't* perform the abortion himself? I love how "she still gets knocked up" implies that "knocking up" was all on the woman's part.
Bubble continues to try to make sense: Then the man needs to talk to her about it BEFORE they ever have sex. If they're not on the same level about having kids if it happens, then they either need to abstain or realize that THEY ARE RISKING GETTING PREGNANT. Like Aequa points out, there is NO SUREFIRE BC method. The point is that there are responsibilities involved when you screw someone. If you can't handle the repercussions, then you need to stick to abstinence, mutual masterbation, or oral sex....
And what if she makes less than him, what then? That child's going to grow up in poverty. Now, if he gives her money for an abortion and she agrees and then spends it elsewhere, and the courts can prove it, I suppose he could be absolved. But if he just throws money at her and demands one, he's still liable. The risk was still there, for both of them. And no matter how much he may dislike it, the fact remains that IT IS HIS KID.
In response, Diet Otaku adds her own "facts" to the situation, and falls back on the "but it's FUN!" argument: it was my understanding that she told him she was on BC *and* infertile and was not ready for kids. that sends a pretty clear message to me that he shouldn't have much, if anything, to worry about.
i'd seriously like to know how many people who suggest this are actually celibate. it's not that easy. humans have a natural urge to have sex, you can't just expect everyone below the poverty line to never have sex because they're too poor to raise a kid. no, sex isn't JUST for fun, but with the advent of so many methods of birth control, sex is PRIMARILY for fun these days. that's why sex is so attractive, because it's fun and it feels good. nobody's watching porno going "mmm, makin babies."
MandiOLP feels men's pain: I have to say I find it a bit funny that so many people are adament on a woman's right to choose not to commit to a possible lifetime of responsibility, but as soon as a man pulls down his pants he flushes his rights down the toilet. That seems terribly selfish to me.
Obviously she understands, because her boyfriend Sesshoumaru is feeling OPPRESSED BY THE VAGINA OMG: As a man, I feel obligated to post in this thread. However, as so many have shown how much my opinion as a man matters to them, it doesn't make so much sense that I give my opinion at all.
...Unless of course I want to be like Rosencrantz and shove my head up your collective vaginas and agree that the fact that my penis obviously makes my right to choose whether or not a child makes its way into existence completely void.
Poor poor man! The mean women are saying that if you impregnate them, you should take responsibility for the child! And that bad other man is agreeing with them! God, life is soo hard for a pony-collecting manbitch!
The entire thread is here for your enjoyment.
Beware! The thread contains a picture of Freddie Mercury singing into a giant purple and green dildo. While wearing cowhide. I don't fucking know, don't look at me.
