Fireman who donated sperm to lesbian couple fights demand for child maintenance

...with no documentation to cover himself. He should have had these women sign legal documentation stating that he would not be responsible for the child at all.

Men that think the majority of women are fair, hardworking, honest people are fooling themselves. The average woman is a hardcore liar and extortionist. The average female has no morals whatsoever unless it is about gaining things for her. The more men agree to enter into transactions with narcisisstic women under the false pretense that women are sugar and spice and everything nice, the more men will have to pay.

Never donate sperm to a woman without a legally enforceable contract stating you DO NOT have to take care of the child. It should state clearly that the woman has agreed you're not responsible. When will dumb men get it that women are not going to "play fair"? All of this bullshit some MRAs keep spewing about "it not being a zero sum game" and other protect the women bullshit means nothing to women. They are playing for keeps and many men aren't. Men still are addicted to rotten ass pussy. I could see if it was a woman that truly loves you and supports your rights, but most women don't. They want what they want -- for them -- and that is it. Noone else matters. The whole "children's issues" thing is simply a means to an end for women to extort more money from men. The MRAs here recently saw an article that revealed that the payments don't even get to the fucking child half of the time.

BUT I'll bet there are still some MRAs that are ready to go to bat for an entire gender wherein the majority of its members has done nothing but impugn, hate, and use men for how long? The minority of women that don't agree with misandry and vocally oppose it are few and far between. Men that don't want to be slaves to women will never be free as long as men keep coddling women as a whole.

----------

The Women are at Fault by Matthias Matussek

Another good promotion for the artificial womb.

----------------------------------------------------
Female feminists is just a human shield disguising the real wrong-doers. If you want to fight with feminism effectively, you must target the root of feminism: MALE DAUGHTER OWNERS.

There is nothing more vile in this world than lesbians exploiting a fireman.

Errr, fire-person.

Is there?

(M.R.) - "The average woman is a hardcore liar and extortionist."

Now that is truly insulting.

The AVERAGE woman does not possess the mental capacity or integrity to recognize when she is lying, and what you describe as extortion she views quite naturally as her god-given entitlement.

So, she is entirely innocent of your charge.

It is only the SUPERIOR female who is conscious of her acts of predation -- dissembling and rackteering being mere tools of the actual, ummm, ancient trade.

It is important to have respect for women, and to distinguish the vile from the truly vile.

...I really feel sorry for this guy, and for the child involved here!!..Someone that lives near this guy should give hime some web addresses so he can be part of the solution!!

*****I just went to the comments section of this piece, and wrote...

I feel sorry forn the fireman and the child involved in this quagmire. For an interesting discussion on this goto.....mensactivism.org

..If we all did a little of this on different comment sections around the internet, we could definatelly grow our readership!!

They don't seem to be taking any more new comments (for the last 4 hours it appears frozen at 74 comments). This has been a common occurrence I've noticed before with this particular rag.

where do i start?

IMHo he did wrong. they were not his friends. they used him. he is the victim here. the law does not want to change. not going to change. not until there are serious repercussions for those manipulating the law.

one thing i have always noticed about lesbians. they are all feminists, and they all hate men. comes w/ the territory.

not a healthy atmosphere for raising children. understatement.

how many believe gay parents don't predict gay children?

not me. show me some real (legit) stats. not going to happen. keep telling me pc doesn't hurt children. liars ALL.

What this guy needs to do now is contribute some money on an annual basis to men's rights causes, and to support men's rights issues in general. If every man who was victimized like this would stand up then this bullshit would come to an end in a hurry.

davinga...you mention lesbians raising children!!

One thing is statistically for sure..

A dirty little feminist secret is that there is much more violence is lesbian relationships than there are in male/female.

And children will be exposed to this elevated level of domestic violence,

not even mentioning the passive agressive violence!

There's a lot more Tori Amos in lesbian households, too.

FEMINISM-- Fuck Every Male Idiocy Now Is Socially Mandated

*****internet activism tip*******

when you see a current event in the news such as this sperm donor article...To see who else is talking about this article ...google.."sperm donor"

..then read their article about this case..

then post in their comments section...post something like...

""for more discussion..goto mensactivism.org""

hey, It might just add few readers if we do it enough!!

John Stossel is an idiot.

Example of sexism given by MRA's: Men are required to register for the draft, whereas women are not. This results in the deaths of a disproportionate number of males.

Stossel's example of sexism (against women): Why should Mickey Mouse, the "Cookie Monster", and other such popular children's characters, necessarily be male?

Sorry to change the subject.

-ax

Old G.I.

I remember when Psychiatrists’ taught that Homosexuals’ exhibited a BEHAVIORAL trait, normally thought to be caused from a bad relationship with a same sex parent.

Homosexual’s and left wing political groups lobbied the AMA for years to expunge this teaching, while attempting to prove the individuals exhibiting this trait were born this way. This behavior has never been proven as taking place within the development of the womb, but in 1979 homosexuality was no longer ruled as a behavioral problem by the AMA. Then with the on slot of Aids’ (probably) originating from men having sex with the green monkeys’ and getting this type of hepatitis from this unholy union, the disease was spread around the world.

When examining the human brain of aids patients’ a discovery was made that there was a certain neurological trait only found in that of homosexual men. This trait could have been developed as a result of this lifestyle, however there was an immediate political move made in finding; (the man was born this way).

By nature homosexual relationships are never stable, in fact more heinous crime are committed by this group in domestic violence than any other. This fact is often hidden from the public eye, as to not promote “bigotry and intolerance” because of the “new” medical community, and politically motivated sociallogy.

My point is that these types of Unions, should never allow same sex couples the “rite” to raise children in a potentially unstable and violent relationship of this kind.

People dare not address this issue because of death threats, and being marginalized as a bigot in today’s culture.

With the election of President Clinton there was a movement to change the military’s position on homosexuality. These behaviors have now become a Constitutional issue, and even Clergymen that teach otherwise could be held with committing a hate crime.

This poor firefighter is just another example of an effort by society to blame shift the responsibility from itself; and the responsible party onto the innocent.
This is because the world’s professional community cannot admit this is a behavioral problem, and to say so will be a crime!

I agree that tolerance must be a trait exhibited by society out of love for our fellow human beings, but not at the cost of the family; by activist judges, doctors, and politicians.

In 1965, Senator Patrick Moynihan was condemned for his observation of the consequences of family breakdown:

"From the wild Irish slums of the 19th century eastern seaboard, to the riot-torn suburbs of Los Angeles, there is one unmistakable lesson in American history: A community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any rational expectations about the future -- that community asks for and gets chaos."

This is a reply to: Axolotl posting, “Totally off Topic”

I am a newly Retired Soldier, I was raised in a home with traditional values and taught that it was my duty to respect and protect Women.
Is that to be considered a hate crime in the future?

As a child the boys took shop, and the girls took home economics.
That soon changed; ok I understand that rationale, but then they mixed our gym classes, boy scouts, and it seems any other role I can think of...
People often talk about the rites they should have, but what about the responsibilities.

Is it responsible to lie in bed when a burglar invades your home? Obviously not!
Is it responsible for the Husband to send his Wife into the living room to confront the burglar? I think not, yet this is the present day push of Feminist or others with an agenda, to send our Wives and Daughters into Combat!
This has nothing to do with ability rather; to me it is a question of ethics and what is best for that unit as a whole. This is the responsible question to be considered by society.

Personal sacrifice has nothing to do with ones individual rites, it is done most often out of love for others! This action is the glue that holds a society together, not selfish ambition with a disregard for others.

I was a trained Equal Opportunity facilitator in the Army; I understand Merit Promotion, equal protection, and the individual rites of others. However, I also understand self less service, duty, honor, respect, integrity, and doing what is best for the Unit.

Unfortunately, because of the natural laws govern ring our species, men are often distracted by women no matter how much they may try and remain indifferent.
I have witnessed this conflict of interest on ships, in the field, publicly and privately.

In the Military, Unit cohesion is essential, it can determine life from death, good judgment from bad and it affects everyone!
Sexual equality is often compared with the Civil Rights movement, but race and skin color have little to do with men’s performance in a threatening environment.

Remember the old cry of “women and children first” aboard sinking ships?
Maybe not, but this does lend credibility to the moral and ethics portion never mentioned in this debate.

It is my opinion, that any woman that would purposely try to insert herself into a combative role with men, is more interested in pursuing her selfish ambitions, than the psychological or personal welfare of that group.

This action would be divisive, selfish, short sighted and certainly not a force multiplier.

For political reasons, men and soldiers can not, and will not address this issue, "in this manner".

The claim that all women are weaker than men is a false one. Women are not weak little creatures that need to be pampered and protected. I know many women that can take down a grown man. These women are no less capable of being soldiers than the men they would fight alongside.

To pigeonhole all women as "being in need of protection by men" is the real ideological bullshit. The problem with you "OLD G.I." is you're stuck in old, outdated ways of doing things. Drafts are not institued because they are seeking highly-skilled soldiers; drafts are brought about when there is an extraordinary need for soldiers, "any" soldier will do. This is why young men that have never even had combat training can be drafted. So...just as they can pick unexperienced MEN during drafts they can pick unexperienced WOMEN.

Men have no obligation to do anything for women. No grown man is responsible for a grown ass woman. As adults women should be able to take care of themselves. If they can't tough luck. Go sit the fuck down and cry to Oprah. If women are weak and need to be protected then they can stay the fuck home and bake cookies and clean house "while being protected." If women are equal to men then they had better fucking get their asses in line when the draft comes around and they had better be willing to take a bullet just like men do.

Get the fuck out of here with that "men owe women protection" bullshit. Stop living in the old days...

----------

The Women are at Fault by Matthias Matussek

There are some men on this forum, which have missed my point completely.

What I am saying is that most soldiers I have known will be distracted by women fighting alongside of them for any prolonged period of time.

Furthermore the male troops will have to take up the slack if the woman cannot keep up.
I am thinking about the men’s rites in the trenches not the women’s!

The selfish ambition of a woman wanting to serve beside a man in combat puts more of a strain on the men. If they draft women put them in there own units,this won’t endanger the combat effectiveness of men.

That is what I was trying to say, I’m sorry some guys couldn’t understand that.

Maybe they need a Reality check...

What I am saying is that most soldiers I have known will be distracted by women fighting alongside of them

That means they are bad soldiers. They need more training then in order not be distracted by the sex of their partners on a battlefield.

----------------------------------------------------
Female feminists is just a human shield disguising the real wrong-doers. If you want to fight with feminism effectively, you must target the root of feminism: MALE DAUGHTER OWNERS.

That means they are bad soldiers. They need more training then in order not be distracted by the sex of their partners on a battlefield.

Quoted for Truth(though not the signature part about "daughter-owners").

Anyone paying more attention to the "gender" of their fellow soldiers -- as opposed to the god damn battle they are in the middle of -- is an idiot and deserves to be shot.

Chivalry is a "social construct", not a natural one. The claim that men are "hardwired" to protect "women in general" is false. The truth is chivalry is programmed into men at an early age with the "boys don't hit girls" ideology. Only the strong can break the programming. Welcome to the "real" matrix. Women -- and manginas that call themselves "real men" -- use chivalrous indoctrination to control men by making men "believe" they have the upperhand. Thus any man that goes out onto the "battlefield" with a chivalrous attitude was never a real soldier anyway.

The culprits? Chivalry and female narcisissm along with the feminized milllenial entitlement mentality.

Old G.I. was correct on one thing that the majority of women have a self-absorbed nature. Me, me, me..

----------

The Women are at Fault by Matthias Matussek

OMFG!...

This guy has to give money to a lesbian couple because he donated himself to them?

that is more offensive than rape murder and genocide...

The guy has really nothing to do with it.

This is like cutting off a peice of someone else's body and demanding tribute for that favor.

And the state is mandating it?

ON top of all that it's not even are real couple it's a lesbian nerotic deviant malformation.

I would be so appalled I would puke myself inside out.

People who are so unhealthy are really not fit to raise a children. I cannot imagine allowing a child to be legally raised by those who live as homosexuals... utterly disturbing .

What other forms of hatred and perversion are we going to insitutionalize and synergize?

I don’t mien to steam anyone and I don't know everything, but I am old enough to remember why women and children came first in catastrophes...
It was not just in protecting children, as there used to be a thing called the FAMILY.
A Man used to, normally feel responsible for his wife and children.

That is when marriage was important, and Mr. & Mrs. and Mss. were proper english not "Ms"., some would do well to listen to others that have been around for a while.

The past culture in these United States used to represent predominantly “conservative values”. It was not until the 60’s that these traditional values started to change.

One of the reasons for drafting “men only” in WW2 was not because of the “combat theaters needs”, but rather in protecting the structure of society at home.

People thought at the time, this action was the rite thing to do, in preserving the structural stability of the family and society.

The Soviets could not afford such a luxury, and had women troops fighting alongside of men.
You are correct, women do and have fault alongside of their male counterparts for centuries; in fact (just for your information), I was responsible for teaching this very topic at Ft. Bragg in 2003.
I would agree that today it is indeed possible to draft both men and women; but I believe I may have expressed my opinion too openly in this area.

Historically, the selective service board only requires the registration of males at this present time. I will not argue about my “personal ethics”, concerning the draft of women.

However historically speaking, this was done with the concept of protecting the family and society on the home front.
The traditional family comes first to me, and this “used to be” of the utmost concern to a Nation, not selfish self-indulgence and personal gain.

As far as drafting when the “need arises” you are about half rite, but the other aspect of the draft also changed in the 1960’s; it was called Civil Rebellion, “you know- burning draft cards”, and the Government is terrified to try it again.

In fact, if a soldier goes AWOL today, rarely if anything happens legally on the first couple of offenses. Yes the 1960’s affected everything in the culture war of today.

I was there, and I know what I am talking about, contrary to popular opinion.
Allot of good happened in the “awakening” of the 1960’s.
But also did allot of destructive behavior which we have never fully recovered from, including the women’s movement.

Coming back to the initial story of a lesbian couple and the sperm donor. Some people said the liability for the child support should be placed on the other woman in a couple. I do not think so - she is already the party deprived the most. Consider the contributions and benefits involved in the case.

Contributions:
1. Genetic contribution (valuable if the genes are considered "good")
2. Financial part of raising a child
3. Chores of raising a child
4. Labor, health risk and related damage to the woman's body

Benefits:
A. Satisfaction of the "I want a child from you" desire.
B. Your moral values being passed to the child
C. Love and affection from the child
D. Satisfaction of woman's biological need to have a child
E. Satisfaction of social expectation from a woman to have a child

Comparing parties' contributions and benefits with the balanced ones, i.e. those of a husband, wife and a child in a typical happy family, and assuming that initial
agreement between the parties about absence of financial responsibility and child rights was neutral, we get that:

I. Fireman does not owe the mother anything, since originally the agreement was fair and nothing changed since then.
II. The child owes to the biological father for the genes.
III. The mother got a child from a higher-grade man she could not have gotten in a marriage, and thus is better off than in an typical family.
IV. The other woman in the lesbian couple temporarily had child's love without giving birth, but eventually was left without a child, which is a disadvantage.

So... who should pay whom? A mother and child owe it to the fireman and the other lesbian. Interesting, right?