|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:52 AM December 27th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Is it any wonder this subject does not get much mainstream press? "Dad" would be furious; Mom so "embarrassed" at her 'oops'! There is great source material on this page. Some eye-opening numbers: "a worldwide median nonpaternity rate of 9% from a sample of 10 studies." Also: "Some men ... have a higher chance of being deceived than others -- and it is those of low wealth and status who fare worst." "The true frequency of non-paternity is not known, but published reports suggest an incidence from as low as 1% per generation up to about 30% in the population." This means that, at LEAST, one out of ten babies are NOT from the dad who mom says is the dad. Think about that! And think about this: it is no simple matter to get pregnant. (In a single menstrual cycle, the chance of a perfectly normal couple achieving a successful pregnancy is only about 25%, even if they have sex every single day.) So if 10% of children are fathered NOT by who mom says, how many MORE times has mom cheated on "dad" without getting pregnant, lied about it, then laughed behind his back all the way to his bank account? Will we men ever see the plain facts sitting in front of our faces? Wake up! Educate yourselves!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And unfortunately I suspect that this happens much more of the time than was documented in just one Australian study! The sick women who do this are trecherous to say the least; they probably suck the blood of multiple "fathers'" wallets at a time!
And of course false _paternity_ gets no press whatsoever. Every day on Maury Povich and Jerry Springer you see men accused of cheatin gon their poor addled wives, so of course the stereotype exists that it's never the other way around! Not all women are the little preyed upon angels they make themselves out to be; in fact very few are!
Love,
Raincloud
++ I'm female, nineteen, and sick of feminism! ++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by TLE on 06:27 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Your post just made my day! Welcome Raincloud!
Hey, I just saw the Povich show today and they were doing more DNA daddy tests. Just like always, when the woman is proven wrong about the father, she runs off and cries and is comforted by the understanding Maury. Poor dear, is there anything we can do to help? But when the test comes back showing the man is in fact the father, he's scum and has to apologize and take responsibility, and all the boos from the crowd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:33 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
I believe that 90% of Povich's shows are about paternity or cheating lovers/spouses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by TLE on 05:50 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
It all seems perfectly obvious to me, but when I recently brought up the paternity fraud issue with a male friend, it was slow going. He had bought into the whole female line of reasoning that:
1) It's better not to traumatize a family with surprises, such as a test revealing the dad is not really the biological father.
2) It's in the best interest of the child to have a stable emotional and financial support from a father, even if that person is not the biological father.
3) Fatherhood is in fact, more a social construct than a biological event.
I countered with:
1) Would women put up with hospitals randomly distributing babies to women who gave birth on that particular day? If motherhood isn't a social construct, why is fatherhood?
2) Shouldn't a woman who has intentionally misidentified the father of her child for financial (or other) gain be held accountable for her actions and charged with a crime?
3) If the phrase "it's for the good of the child" justifies all actions by a woman, then shouldn't women be able to randomly pick out rich men and declare them "fathers" for the good of their children?
My friend remained stubborn and irritated. Forget convincing women of anything, we have a lot of work to do to wake up men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:49 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Sad but true. The average man is every bit as responsible as the average woman for the men being treated as second class citizens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:52 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Discuss the problem with everyone you know. The conspiracy of silence has got to go!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:26 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Feminism is predicated on the idea that women are incapable of evil. Paternity fraud is the ultimate counterexample to this premise (women perpetrate paternity fraud, men are the victims). If paternity fraud ever makes major headlines, and enough citizens get sufficiently pissed off about it, kiss modern feminism goodbye. The real accomplices of paternity fraud are the hypocritical "family values" conservatives, who rail endlessly about gay marriage and women in the workforce but COMPLETELY IGNORE PATERNITY FRAUD! Do conservatives have ANY idea how much they could cripple their liberal opposition if they exploited this issue?
When was the last time Sean Hannity, Pat Buchanan, Joe Scarborough, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, or Bill O'Reilly ever discussed paternity fraud?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by TLE on 09:00 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Scarborough had Carnell Smith on his show about a year and a half ago, and was very sympathetic in his coverage of the bizarre laws that continue to force ensnared men to pay for fraud committed against them. He had a feminist suck-up male attorney trying to explain how "it's all in the best interest of the child," including that children be lied to about who their real fathers are.
In general your point is well taken. I think a lot of men are waiting for a party to actually represent them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:17 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I shouldn't have added Scarborough. I'm not that familiar with him yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 09:43 AM December 28th, 2004 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
aHHHHHHHHHH... its like some drone...
"it's all in the best interest of the child"
to tell you the truth if this is the doctrine then let this be the doctrine. all poor children will be raised by billionaires.
with an average cost of 1000 per child per month(actual costs being less due to economy of scale, and infrastructure reuse), bill gates could expect to easily raise 50,000+ children on one billion for the next 20 years, and still end up with lots and lots of cash of that 1 billion left over.
throw in the walmarts, soris's, mars family, trump, some of the saudis.. etc... and this whole children in poverty thing would be gone.
so when we are talking
"it's all in the best interest of the child"
are we really saying that.. or are we saying something else? is it really that hard to show that this is not the case?
Artfldgr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What seems to being said in the article, is that the action taken by Mr Blunkett - Home Office Minister in England - should be outlawed !
As everyone is probably aware, he conducted two separate 'secret' paternity tests on his son, before matters got to court.
Of course, we could have one law for them, and, one law for the rest ! ! !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:55 PM December 27th, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Right. The idea is to criminalize men's acting to find out who their biological children are. The idea is to keep men ignorant and handing over "child support" payments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Anonymous User writes "Last year, more than 3,000 DNA paternity tests were commissioned by Australian men, and in almost a quarter of those cases, the test revealed that not only had their partners been unfaithful, but the children they thought were theirs had been sired by someone else. The Supreme Court in Victoria is scheduled to hear an appeal from a woman who was successfully sued by her ex-husband for paternity fraud.