NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/abortion/inequity/6249

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-02 | 2.8 KB

Xref: sparky alt.abortion.inequity:6249 soc.men:22025 soc.women:22043 talk.abortion:53916 alt.feminism:6733
Newsgroups: alt.abortion.inequity,soc.men,soc.women,talk.abortion,alt.feminism
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ddsw1!karl
From: [e-mail] (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Reproductive Technologies... (was: Re: Father Notification...)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 03:52:22 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL
Lines: 51

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gordon Fitch) writes:
>| >[e-mail] (Karl Denninger) writes:
>| >| ...
>| >| I propose as the yardstick of equality the total number of minor children
>| >| under the custodial care of each sex in single parent homes.  When it
>| >| reaches the level of the population dispersion (49% men / 51% women I
>| >| believe) then we have equality.  Until that time men are to be preferred in
>| >| both custody and child support awards.

>However, what I was thinking of was this: insisting that
>49% of custody go to men may run into the question of
>whether 49% of the men _want_ custody.  Considering the
>implacable resistance to paying child support shown here
>and elsewhere, I have the idea that a good many men might
>not consider your proposal a boon if the luck of the draw
>smiled upon them.  Take care: you may be giving ideas to
>the devious witches on NOW's General Staff for yet
>another plot.

Yeah, we're upset about the idea of child support.

Particularly when "support" is grossly in excess of what is required to
support and raise a child, and is another name for alimony.

Particularly when men have no control over the raising of their children,
but get the bills anyway.

Particularly when the woman can up and move 3000 miles away and the man has
no recourse -- effectively preventing the man from having a parental role in
the raising of his children.  All at her whim.

Particularly when, should the man complain, she can simply use the "nuclear
bomb" of child custody disputes, sexual abuse allegations, and >even if they
are false and baseless< walk away scott free -- with the kids -- while the
man is ruined not only personally for financially as well.

(Feminists, don't bother saying "but some men have custody".  90% of men in
this situation do not have >meaningful< custody or contact, but they do
seem to have the bills.)

Yeah, men are upset.

I suspect that if men had their kids, and were the ones receiving the
support checks, you'd hear a lot fewer complaints.

Go ahead NOW.  Use this tactic (affirmative action).  We'll be real upset.
:-)

--
Karl Denninger ([e-mail], <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [[phone]]