Your Turn: “He Got Another Woman Pregnant While We Were on a Break!”
New readers, welcome to Dear Wendy, a relationship advice blog. Read some of the most popular Dear Wendy posts here. If you don’t find the info you need in this column, please visit the Dear Wendy archives or the forums (you can even start your own thread), do a search in the search bar, or submit a question for advice at wendy(AT)dearwendy.com.
In a feature I call “Your Turn,” in which you, the readers, get to answer the question, I’m presenting the following letter without commentary from me:
I told him to stay with her and have this family as I don’t want to be any cause for them breaking up, but he told me there was no way he was staying with her because he can’t stand her. He says he told her he’s not happy about this pregnancy and didn’t want a baby and asked her to abort as he was 40 years old. She told him she got pregnant on the pill, which I think is a lot of cod wallop. I have tried to encourage him to stay with this woman soley because of this pregnancy, but he wants me and wants to marry me as he said all along, and he is furious with this woman for keeping the baby after only knowing each other two minutes. It’s not right… I’m sure I wouldnt….! But I think she’s tried to trap him and he’s untrappable.
I don’t know how I’m going to feel about this baby malarky. He told me he will obviously be paying for it but wants nothing to do with her OR the baby. He made his feelings clear to her when she was only two weeks pregnant, telling her they haven’t been together two minutes! I think she’s nothing but a little scroat. Any advice on this would be appreciated as I’m so confused and hurt. He said this is not gonna ruin us, but I’m unsure. — Already Tired of the Baby Malarky
Dude, get away from this guy pronto! He sounds like bad news. Regardless of whether or not he wants to stay with this women he impregnanted, do NOT stay with him yourself! You’re only asking for heartache down the road.
And WHY did he not practice safe sex since he only knew her “2 minutes”? A condom would have prevented this whole thing AND protected you from STDs. He sounds a bit flakey.
To be fair, (and I’m not at all discrediting what you’re saying, because it very well could be true), but no where in the letter does she mention that he did or did not use a condom. I assume from the debate that this has become a fact that was inferred due to the women being on birth control. I still think the guy is an irresponsible dick, and the LW is acting like a brat, but I don’t want to make any assumptions about his activities post the LW when we actually have zero information about it. He could have been one of those unforunate souls that DID protect himself, even with the woman’s added protection, and it still resulted in a child.
Exactly; he sounds like a total loser, and how the hell would she ever be able to trust him going forward? I wouldn’t. Plenty of fish in the sea, as they say.
1. I’d confirm that she’s actually pregnant
2. I’d confirm that he’s actually the father
This does sound like a lot of cod wallop and baby malarky shenanigans to me as well.
Yes, the language in the letter is certainly…. original. 🙂
I’m guessing that she’s in the UK or Ireland, or perhaps New England. That’s true Yankee vernacular.
“and he is furious with this woman for keeping the baby after only knowing each other two minutes. It’s not right… I’m sure I wouldnt….! But I think she’s tried to trap him and he’s untrappable.”
WTF!!! LW, your BF impregnates another woman AND you think that you are entitled to an opinion about whether she should keep her unborn child? That is really fucked up. It’s none of your business. Your boyfriend is a scumbag and you should probably not have anything to do with him. You should be furious with him and dump his ass! BTW, has he heard about condoms?? It is possible to get pregnant on the pill if you don’t take it at the same time everyday, so maybe use backup protection if you’re fucking someone you don’t know? Just a suggestion for your scumbag boyfriend.
The entire letter reeked of entitlement. Unfortunately, your boyfriend may have gotten another woman pregnant. That is not her fault. The last time I checked it took more than one person to make a baby. She has decided to keep the baby and that is not his choice and CERTAINLY not yours. What you would do in her situation is irrelevant.
It upsets me how much anger seems to be directed towards this unborn child. I hope your boyfriend will reconsider not being a part of this baby’s life. But then again the child might be better off without such an jerk as a role model.
As far as your relationship with him. I don’t think that this necessarily has to end you, but I would think long and hard about continuing to be involved with a 40 year old man who is unable to take responsibility for his actions. Then, again you seem a tad immature so maybe you deserve each other.
Regardless of all my snark, I really hope that if the two of you stay together you don’t take your aggravation about the situation out on the child. That child has done nothing wrong and doesn’t deserve to be thrown in the middle of these grown-up problems.
I agree with all of this. All I could think about when I read this letter was what an awful situation that child is going to be exposed to, through no fault of his/her own.
And to the LW – your boyfriend is not the victim in all of this. He willingly engaged in sex (apparently without a condom) with a woman he knew “for two minutes”. That was his choice, but what he’s done is made you feel sorry for him. Please.
Love your last two paragraphs!
ColorsOfTheWind makes excellent points, and I agree; however, I’d quibble with the phrase “grown-up problems”. Exactly where is there a grown-up here?
Which brings me to my question for LW: You say your boyfriend is 40 years old, but how old are YOU? Because you sound about 17. She “trapped” him? So what? He “wants nothing to do with her OR the baby”? Good. No loss there. But wherever you’re writing from, I suspect the child support laws are strong enough that, if she goes after it, he won’t have much choice. And frankly, the more money and less contact the baby gets from your boyfriend, the better off he or she will be (not that s/he has much of a chance, given the nest of “grown-ups” s/he’s coming into).
But we’re here to offer advice to LW, so I say evanscr05 is right: Dump this loser, yesterday. He’s a scumbag and your only choices are (1) say so now and be rid of him, or (2) wait 5 or 10 years and say “Why didn’t I see this 5 or 10 years ago?” By then you may be after him for child support yourself, and good luck with that — there’ll be at least one in line ahead of you every payday.
Or could CG be right, and this is all a hoax? Oh, in a perfect world…
Ugh so agree with Amanda. Why does anyone think they have a say in whether a woman aborts or keeps her child? Get your hands off my uterus!
We’ll get our hands off your uterus when you get your hands off our wallets.
You pack of hypocrites. You say “it takes two to make a baby” but somehow it’s only the man that gets labeled an “irresponsible dick”. The man should have no say on whether or not she keeps the baby but she should have a LOT of say over his finances for the next 18 years.
How about equal right for, you know, everyone?
I don’t think she should have any sort of legal say about the decision to keep the baby, but I don’t think she’s committing some horrendous crime for judging it. We judge people all the time where our judgment has absolutely no effect on the outcome, we aren’t participants in the issue and no one gives a crap what we think. We judge what people wear (“what on earth was she thinking?? doesn’t she have friends to tell her “just say no” to neon macrome?”), we judge who our friends date and marry, we judge everything, usually based on what we would do. I don’t see why this issue is any different. Her judgment is irrelevant, but it isn’t immoral.
Simalar to me.. we fell inlove from schòol at 15 we kiss at 16 sex at 21 we separated for 5mths …he saw another girl and she lie told him she was pregnant..she moved in his parents house..i said goodbye …he came begging me ..he dont love her….tears tears .. the next month her period came her lie came in the open…she never left ..i have since moved on ..25yrs to dated he still beging me to come back…i played a game with him recently ..i said i would leave my husband would u leave your wife…to be with me…he said yes yes…do u have money to buy a house for me like what u did for her….the silence was deafing….i hang up the phone.. players…move on leave him alone
Oh thank you thank you thank you! I wanted to punch my computer screen while reading this and was so afraid the comments would not say what you are saying.
I hope the LW takes note of the fact that Amanda’s comment currently has 61 “likes”.
This whole letter is a giant “Friends” reference. Remember that episode when Rachel told Ross she was pregnant and he freaked out because they used condoms? And she was all, “Um, yeah, those aren’t always 100 percent effective.” And he was like, “THEY SHOULD PUT THAT ON THE BOX!!!!!” And then of course Ross’ “WE WERE ON A BREAK” meltdown. Good times. 🙂
And is this letter for real? Who actually uses “cod wollop,” “malarky” and “scroat”? My Spidey sense is tingling that this could be a fake. But if it’s not, ITA with Amanda, LW.
I don’t think I have ever seen so many thumbs up on one post… And it deserves them!
A forty-year-old man knows exactly how women get pregnant and how to avoid that if he absolutely doesn’t want a baby. He chose to not wear a condom and now he has to be responsible for his choice. I don’t think a relationship with the other woman will work but at the same time I’d run from a man who wants nothing to do with their own child. This baby will need a dad, not just a check, and if he can walk away from this child he can walk away from you just as easily. This man seems to be both irresponsible and immature so be glad you can move on and not be stuck with him.
He’s 40 and he doesn’t want a child. So much that he demanded his interim girlfriend get an abortion. He should get a damn vasectomy. That’s what responsible men who want to have sex with women and don’t want children do.
He ought to get a vesectomy since this guy is obviously carrying the manchild gene. No reason to pass that one along to future generations…
“the manchild gene”!! TOTALLY USING THAT.
What’s your lawyer’s address? I’ll have mine draw up the paperwork for licensing fees.
Even though people would like to think that the pill is 100% effective it is not. And there are many things that can happen that make it even less effective, like forgetting a pill, taking antibiotics, etc. And for some reason people always seem to have the idea that it won’t happen to them.
It takes two people to make a baby and two people to decide what to do after one of them gets pregnant. Your bf can’t stop her from having the baby. If it is his child, he owes the child at least something. He did help create it.
Also I take that because your boyfriend knew she was on the pill he didn’t use a condom. Can I just say that would bother me a lot. So while you were on a break he had unprotected sex with just her or other people too? That fact just rubs me the wrong way. Both parties should be concerned about birth control. It seems like you would be even more concerned about this when sleeping with someone you are non-monogamous with.
So true. My sister has 3 birth control babies. I’m lucky that it has worked well for me and I’m still childless, especially given the recent breakup and all. But condoms should still be used unless the relationship is established and monogamous and both parties are disease-free. That’s why we never used condoms. In the future, if I should ever have the desire to date again I would use condoms in addition to birth control to make sure I don’t get diseases. I do plan to stay on my birth control because having a period every month doesn’t sound like loads of fun after only having 4 a year for so long.
Sounds to me like your sister isn’t so much unlucky, but a liar. Come on! Really? Three babies? All magically on the pill? What the fuck ever. I mean, for starters, if I even had one unplanned baby while on the pill, I’d probably not continue to use it…
she doesn’t have to be unlucky or a liar to be taking her pills incorrectly.
And she doesn’t have to be a liar to have been on antibiotics, thus rendering the pill largely ineffective.
Come on, though… Three times? Seriously?
It happens, some people are incredibly fertile. I know one 40yr old lady who got pregnant after having her tubes tied.
But in that case, taking the pill you know that you´re supposed to use a back up method while on ATB.
No, then I would say she is just stupid. Really stupid.
This is a great contrast to Wendy’s piece about Drew being a great husband/dad. LW, this guy sounds like a scumbag. He was clearly having unprotected sex with at least one other person. I know you two were on a break but I hope you made him get swabbed for STDs.
Ok, so this dude:
-Exposed you to STIs by going bareback with a woman “he can’t stand” and “he’s known for two minutes” and then coming back to you
-Got her pregnant
-Tried to pressure her into getting an abortion
-Is furious with her for keeping her baby
-Wants nothing to do with his own child
What was your question again?
haha I agree. I don’t really know what the question was – I just assumed it was “should we stay together” How can you not also be angry at your bf LW? He was there just as much as that woman was. He was not “tricked” into having sex with her without protection. He CHOSE to do that – he took that risk because it feels better on his penis without a condom. And he took on the consequences. Quit acting like he’s so hard done by by this woman and tell him to get some responsibility.
He didn’t expose her to STDs. He was broken up with her at that time, and had no agreement that they would get together in the future.
If he didn’t get tested prior to running back to the LW then yes, he did expose her to STD’s. That being said, the LW didn’t say whether he was tested so we don’t know for sure.
I have to take the stance that it is no one’s responsibility but their own to make sure they don’t get STDs. If she did not use protection with him, or ask him to get tested when they got back together, that is no fault of his, imo.
i completely agree, it is both parties responsibilities to make sure they are preventing pregnancy AND stds. when i was single i acted as if the other people i was involved with weren’t thinking about it. meaning, i was on the pill, i brought condoms, i asked about testing. and if you aren’t mature enough to deal with those things (as well as the potential for an unplanned pregnancy) don’t have sex. because, no one can give you a 100% guarantee that none of that will happen.
sorry lbh this actually doesn’t have anything to do with your comment, i agree with you. i’m just annoyed that so many people (at least many of the LWs here) act as if birth control or std prevention isn’t something they need to worry about.
that’s a bit dramatic, don’t you think?
yes he doesn’t seem like much a catch, but to say he “exposed her to STD’s!” is a stretch.
Also, I don’t understand why you spend your whole letter insulting her instead of him.
EXACTLY.
So your boyfriend said he wants nothing to do with his own child (except the required child support) and that didn’t make you run screaming the other way?
Oops, it took so long that I thought my post was lost in space. It is duplicated below.
It was one of those comments that deserved the opportunity to be liked twice anyway.
It takes two to tango my dear – your boyfriend is as much to “blame” as this woman. And as far as that man saying that he wants nothing to do with the woman or THE BABY – shame on him. And shame on you for agreeing that he is entitled to this opinion. It is never the unborn child’s fault.
She gets to decide whether she keeps the baby or not. If she does your boyfriend will deal with the aftermath of having sex without a condom. Sorry for the crass language.
As for what you do: I personally would ask him to ask the woman to get a paternity test. I would also ask him to get an STD test because he had unprotected sex. This woman might very well be lying. But if she is not YOU need to decide if you can handle your boyfriend having a child with another woman. It’s 100% ok if you can’t or don’t want to be in that situation.
Originally i had used much more crass language and forgot to delete the apology – ooops!
Oh, good lord. You know, I don’t have much patience this morning, so I (somewhat) apologize if my reply reeks of snark.
But woman, grow the hell up. I mean, seriously. Is this Twilight, for God’s sake? Because last I checked, saying dramatic things like “we can’t bear to live without each other” was reserved for 16-year-old fans of poorly-written vampire romances.
Your 40-year-old ex-boyfriend sounds like an immature, irresponsible, whiney person. And, lo and behold, you aren’t coming across any better. And for what it’s worth, I highly doubt he can “bear to live without you.” I mean, he didn’t exactly waste any time getting some other chick pregnant, did he? And it seems to me that he isn’t looking to get back together with you because he’ll die without you; it seems like he’s trying to escape the clutches of responsibility by retreating to what he knows — As in, someone who takes no issue with his immaturity and irresponsibility.
And you know, it’s pretty reprehensible to be calling this other woman a slew of names. Maybe she IS trying to “entrap” him. And maybe she is a harlot of sorts. But to me, it sounds like you’re misdirecting your anger. She isn’t the one you should be taking issue with. Before getting back together with your ex, maybe you should consider strongly whether or not you want to be with the kind of person who’s angry that someone didn’t abort in order to alleviate HIM of responsibility. If it were me, I’d stay FAR away from someone as seemingly immature and callous as your ex…and I’d get myself to therapy to deal with my OWN immaturity and callousness.
I love your snark this morning!! And, you know, your well reasoned logic and stuff.
Well said – I was like, “is this letter for real?” the whole time I was reading it. I think it’s the first time I am hearing someone smear another person for NOT having an abortion. It’s not JUST about your ex-boyfriend, LW. If the baby mama wants to keep the baby, it’s her decision. If your dead-beat ex wants know part – that is HIS decision. But don’t be surprised if he gets slapped with child support responsibilities b/c he couldn’t be responsible enough to prevent pregnancy – it takes two.
“Oh, good lord. You know, I don’t have much patience this morning,”
That pretty much sums it up for me. No real comment from me today. It’s more than I can handle on a Monday!
Hey, say what you want about the letter but don’t diss my Twilight!!! 😉
Vampires aren’t supposed to glitter and werewolves aren’t supposed to be pedophiles. Just say’in.
“Oh, good lord. You know, I don’t have much patience this morning, so I (somewhat) apologize if my reply reeks of snark.”
Heh, are you suuuuure you still want to be a professional therapist? lol.
LW, why are you directing all of your anger at this other woman? So, she went out, hooked up with someone she knew briefly (which a lot of people do) and accidently got pregnant. 50 percent of babies are unplanned, and that includes married couples using contraception. Birth control isn’t full-proof. I’m not sure why you think this woman is trying to trap your boyfriend unless there are other details you didn’t provide. For all you know she could be 35 and realize that this may be her one chance to have a baby. Or she’s against abortion. Or she’s financially and emotionally ready to have a baby. Maybe she doesn’t to be with your boyfriend, perhaps she just wants him to be there for the baby as a father.
I think it’s dispicable that you would consider re-uniting with a man that thinks his only obligation as a father is financial support. It doesn’t matter whether he wants to be with this woman or not, your boyfriend made half of this baby and has an obligation to be a father figure to it. While I realize that this is a stressful situation, your letter indicates that you will always harbor resentment for this child and this woman who will be in you and your boyfriends lives FOREVER. When you have a child with someone you will have to deal with them FOREVER. I don’t think you have the maturity to deal with this sort of complexity so I would peace out for the sake of everyone involved, especially the baby.
Babies aren’t “malarky”.
LW- your boyfriend is scum. And you don’t sound much better.
It is my biggest pet peeve when a woman blames the “other woman” for her boyfriend’s stupid actions. Stop insulting her and learn to see the situation for what it really is. I know it is hard since you love this guy to see how reprehensible he is.
My only real advice is along the lines with what the other posters have already said. I have a feeling you are going to stay with this guy no matter what (since you would just diiiie without him). But, seriously… you should both get tested for STDs. That’s all I can really offer.
Oh, me too! It amazes me how people can say things like “That whore slept with my boyfriend!” and keep a straight face. REALLY?
Oh I completely agree! I’ll never understand the chicks who want to blame/curse/fight the other woman like the dude has no part in the whole mess. Then they want to fight for the loser like he’s some sort of prize! I’ll never in a million years get it.
Seriously, he’s scum, DTMFA.
Sounds like he found something easy, and easy cost a lot….money and happiness. She deserves to be treated as cheap and unwanted but he doesnt deserve to skate free. You and the baby are the victims. Sounds like he is 40 and stupid and she is a user and tramp, based on what your story says. There is a chance it isnt his. And I would believe him that he has no interest in her other than convenience. But, are you willing to pay for his mistakes. If she is a crappy mom the kid will be used to interfer unless she can find some sucker that wont let her. just my opinion. Of course my opinion of her is based on the story he is telling you. If he cant afford the child support, get away from him as he will be an emotional and financial drain. Dont let him use you because his life is in chaos now.
It’s a crappy scenarios – but shit happens, and there’s really nothing YOU can do about it. Forcing him to stay with her isn’t going to make anyone happy at all. He has a responsibility to the baby, but that’s as far as it goes. It’ll take work and patience, but he CAN be a father to the baby, and a partner to you.. The idea that he owes his life to her now that he’s fathered her child is precisely the reason so many people are in unhappy marriages and there is such a high number of marital affairs. Whether or not she trapped him is irrelevant, in my opinion. The point is, there’s a baby on the way who needs a daddy. He can be one – he better be one- and still be a loyal partner to you. It’ll be hard work, but I genuinely think it can be done. Best of luck.
He has a requirement to the mother of his child as well. He doesn’t have to have a romantic relatioship with her, but if she keeps the baby, and IF he is a real man, then this woman will be in his life for the rest of his, as the child is her child as well as his.
I don’t think the LW can handle a relationship where another woman has her “man’s” child. “Man” is in quotes becuase no “man” abandons a woman that he impregnates. It takes two to make a baby, and it doesn’t seem like he was taking any precautions.
A real “man” steps up to be there for the baby, more than just money for the baby, and to be there for the mother even if he can’t stand her. That’s the risk that you take.
In many states men can declare themselves non-fathers. It is legal. The states don’t advertise this. They like to entrap men, too. Parasites are all the same.
So, stop with the 19th century stuff about doing the “right thing.” Women have complete reproductive autonomy. They should act responsibly.
Marriage to this woman would be the most stupid thing possible.
Oh, they do? Which states, may I ask?
PS. Women have complete reproductive autonomy, but as far as I know it is impossible to become impregnated without a man somewhere in the equation. We still can’t quite manage partheogenesis or budding. So… the man in there” He should probably act responsibly too.
If a woman wanted to choose to terminate the child, would she be less of a real “woman” for not “stepping up” to the responsibility? If not, then why can’t a man sever all legal and fiscal responsibility prior to the child’s birth (as it would be a parallel situation)? Are women less able to care and provide in today’s society?
She’d be less of a real woman if she left the kid on its father’s doorstep and went off footloose and fancy-free while he was left to raise it all alone.
The pill doesn’t stop ovulation in all women. Many women become habituated to the hormone regimen and begin ovulating again, even while on the pill. It is quite possible to become pregnant on the pill. Happens all the time.
According to pro-choice rhetoric, this man has NOTHING to do with the existence of the child.
He delivered, at her request, one-half of a set of DNA blueprints.
She provided the other half of the set, the construction site, the construction materials, she built the child. Her body, her choice, he had NOTHING to do with it.
He had no more to do with the existence of this child then an architect who only provides half the blueprints has responsibility for the existence of the Pentagon.
That reasoning, btw, comes from Karen DeCrow, feminist attorney and former president of NOW.
If you want to hold this poor man responsible for some child some women decided to create, that’s just mean and patriarchal crap. According to DeCrow, he shouldn’t even have to pay child support, because that’s fundamentally unfair. It was her choice.
Deal with it, ladies.
Be responsible for your own bodies and your own choices.
The decision to have sex is NOT a decision to have a child.
Quit trying to dig into other people’s wallets to subsidize your lifestyle choices.
I must respectfully disagree with you. A kid is not a building. The decision to have sex is not a decision to have a child, but it always carries that risk.
If you don’t want to potentially end up with a kid with a woman you can’t stand, don’t have sex with her. If you and a person you want to sleep with are not on the same page on what should happen in case of accidental pregnancy, don’t have sex with them. If you don’t do these things and you end up donating the genetic material for a person that gets born and is running around and you’re its dad, you pony up some child support because it took two people to make that kid. That’s taking responsibility for your own choices.
And seriously – what is with people having sex with people they “can’t stand” – clearly you could stand them long enough to bang them. Everyone needs to quit having sex and then saying they “hate” or “can’t stand” that person. That is lie fed to naive girlfriends/wives. LADIES – he could stand her. You have the proof – he banged her and now they have a child together.
Exactly. Some of the best advice my mom ever gave me way back in the day was “Listen. Anytime you have sex, there’s a chance you could get pregnant, no matter how careful you are. Don’t ever sleep with someone mean or stupid, because if you get pregnant, you’re going to be tied to that person for the rest of your child’s life.” And I was like, “Ewww, Mom, that’s gross!” But it was great advice, and I’ve always followed it.
Totally agree.
In the same situation currently. Loved this guy, things were not working out, cos he was fucking around with other girls. I knew, but loved him so much, forgave him & said we’d give each other some space, but when I gave that space, he just went on ahead & made this lady pregnant. My heart broke into a million pieces. Cried my eyeballs out evry nite. & he tells me now, the mother agreed to take the child & look after the child, & he will leave the baby mama for me, because he loves me.
Now, I want to believe him, but in my rightful mind I know I will be so dumb to buy all that he is say. I mean, he loved the baby mama enough to get erected & to bang her & to just release evrything to make her pregnant, & what the fuck am I thinking?!?!? That my life revolves around this so called love of mine?? I must be bloody kidding myself.
This man does not deserve my tears!
PERIOD@
If women insist on compelling child support from the man, then don’t whine if society insists that women support the child until birth.
Abortion is incompatible with compelled child support.
You have to give up one or the other.
Choose.
Actually no. Women don’t have to choose between the two – both are within their purview.
It is amazing to me to see the vitriol that men are carrying on with talking about paying money towards the health and well being of a child that they helped create. Thank God for the laws in place protecting children against men like you. You are acting like child support is some sort of lottery win for the woman – it is court ordered money that is to go towards the care of your child.
Seriously – this is skeeving me out. This is your CHILD. Your biological child. A human being on this earth that is 50% like you.
I love the argument that the women receiving child support are just sipping margaritas all day while getting mani/pedis on this income. I actually work in a field that deals with this, and let me tell you, the women who are actually applying for court ordered child support will be lucky to get $400 a month. Do you know how much day care alone is a month? Close to $1,000 – and that’s for a shitty one.
It’s like people that think women become foster parents for the money. What a joke.
Their choice, honey.
They wanted the child and now they want to whine about how hard it is?
Please.
You sound like one of those pro-lifers who are always compelling women to do things against their will.
Her body, HER choice.
Her consequences.
If there is no child at conception…
If the woman is not required to support a child…
Then how does the woman get off require the man to do it?
Go argue with the feminists.
You sure aren’t one.
Okay so what if the LW is not pro choice. What if she believes than an abortion is murder? (We’ll assume she is pro life for non religious reasons – because I’m not sure why a religious person would be fine with banging after two minutes – that’s a whole other can of worms).
This is my question for you. If you are so against men having to pay for a child they don’t want that was nonetheless created by their penis – couldn’t you make this issue a hell of a lot easier by just telling your male friends to wrap it up? A condom’s like 50 cents. Why are you standing up for mens right to bang a chick they have known “two minutes” without a condom and have no consequences for THEIR actions. You’re all about putting consequeces on her choice to keep the baby – what about his consequences?
Let this be a learning lesson for everyone – male and female. If you don’t want a baby – use birth control. Women – this means the pill or condom or whatever. Men – this means condom. Everyone is in charge of their own decisions. Here he chose not to wrap it up – now he made a child. And the world goes round.
My point is if you don’t want kids there are always ways to prevent that – he chose not to and now he can deal with the consequences.
Women don’t “get off” requiring men to do it. The law does, because once the child is here, through no fault of its own, it needs to be supported in order to have a successful life and successful children are in the best interest of all of society. So the law says, hey, you two created this child, you two are responsible for supporting it. If the person who carried the child to term (woman) wants to turn the kid over to adoptive parents to care for it, then the responsibility’s on them. If the woman wants to abort, then she can, but that’s a decision she has to make because it’s happening inside her own body.
Is it 100% fair to men or women? No. Is it fair to a kid to be born into a world where his dad abandons him? No. Is it fair the the woman has to be the one to undergo a surgical, often time traumatic procedure when a man can just move and disappear? No. Life isn’t fair. For anyone. This surprises you?
Steve- The law doesn’t say there’s no child at conception. It doesn’t even come close. Roe v. Wade merely established that abortion is a privacy issues and that a woman’s right to choose what is done with her body takes precedent over the rights of a state to prevent abortion. And whether you believe it’s a child at conception or not, it’s a scientific fact that conception is what, at the very least, leads to life. And you can’t have conception without sperm. Male rape victims notwithstanding, men control where their sperm goes. Especially if you think the laws are unfair, I think you’d be particularly cautious in your actions. Because once the innocent kid is here, the fact that he/she was an accident does not mean he/she has less of a need for supportive, involved parents.
It’s a sad situation when an unplanned pregnancy happens between two individuals that aren’t committed to each other, let alone two individuals who actively dislike each other. Given the particularities and context of any particular situation, there is a lot of unfairness to go around. Mostly for the kid though, I think.
Well, the law is schizophrenic.
It says there is no child at conception.
But it also tries to say that the man had a part in creating the child.
These two ideas cannot be simultaneously true.
The man has NOTHING to do with any child creation.
Nothing.
He ejaculates – that’s it.
The woman accepts the ejaculate – what she does with it is now her business, and her business alone. It has nothing to do with the man.
If the woman wants to have a child, then she can, but that’s a decision she makes because it’s happening in her own body.
I can’t see how anyone would be upset with a man who agrees with that statement and concludes that he has every right to walk away from the whole situation. Woman’s body, woman’s choice, woman’s child, NEVER is it the man’s child.
Here’s a thought experiment for you:
Identical twin men: one is an IVF doctor, one is a carpenter.
The carpenter asks his brother to impregnate his wife via IVF using the carpenter’s sperm.
Who’s the daddy?
The sperm is genetically identical to the IVF doctor’s sperm, and it is the IVF doctor who impregnates the woman, even if he never has sex with her.
So on what grounds do you hold the carpenter for child support and let the IVF doctor walk?
Obviously, NEITHER man is responsible for the child – the woman wanted it, she grew it. It’s HERS, but it does not properly belong to either one of the men. Neither one of THEM created a child. Only the woman did.
Their choice, honey.
They wanted the child and now they want to whine about how hard it is?
Please.
You sound like one of those pro-lifers who are always compelling women to do things against their will.
Her body, HER choice.
Her consequences.
If there is no child at conception…
If the woman is not required to support a child…
Then how does the woman get off requiring the man to do it?
Go argue with the feminists.
You sure aren’t one.
“If you don’t want to potentially end up with a kid with a woman you can’t stand, don’t have sex with her.”
C’mon now, you’d never buy that argument for forcing the woman to have the child. I’m waiting for the moral and mental gymnastics that say it’s OK to force a man to spend 18 years paying to provide a good life for the result of his error in judgement, but it’s not OK to force a woman to spend nine months working to simply give life to the result of her error in judgement. “But it’s her body” Well, department of labor clearly shows that statistically a man in a low-paying job is far more likely to die in a workplace accident over the course of 18 years than a woman over a normal pregnancy.
That a woman has a “right to choose” if she carries a child to term or not should nor mean that she has a right to choose how a man spends his money for the next 18 years. The “you made your choice when you had sex” argument goes both ways.
If you support legal abortion, then you emphatically deny that men create children.
According to legal abortion theory, only women create children.
So, if you insist that men create children, or even assist in such a thing, you are some kind of slimy pro-lifer meddling in the affairs of independent women who need men like a fish needs a bicycle.
Child support is, indeed, a lottery win for women, by which they compel men – who had nothing to do with their lifestyle choices – to support their lifestyle choices in the manner to which they have become accustomed.
Let me repeat myself – IT IS NOT A LOTTERY WIN. A lottery win implies she is loaded and set for life. She will be lucky to have 50% of the day care costs alone paid for*.
And yes men create children. Your logic is weird. Both men and women create children. Do you want to talk about how a baby is made? It’s when a man’s sperm connects with a woman’s egg. Both a man and a woman are needed to create a baby. This is why homosexual couples have to adopt.
Now that that lesson is over do you have any other questions?
* – However, if you bang and get knocked up by tiger woods (quite possible given his standards) you will be set for life – and hence – a lottery win is born.
Bull on all counts.
Homosexual couples don’t HAVE to adopt.
That’s what IVF is for – either the male or the female gives of their own gametes. Males pay a surrogate to carry the tissue blob, or lesbians can carry the tissue blob themselves.
I see you’re an ignorant homophobe too.
Probably a creationist, from what you know about biological science.
THERE IS NO CHILD AT CONCEPTION.
If there was a child at conception, abortion would be murder.
Even SCOTUS pointed that out.
The way you talk, I gotta believe you’re one of those disgusting pro-lifers who are always trying to control people.
For the love of all things holy – are you deliberately obtuse or truly lacking in basic comprehension? There is no child at conception – very good. At conception there is a zygote, then an embryo and then a fetus. What do you think happens to the fetus? I’ll give you a hint – it turns into a baby. Men don’t pay child support during gestation – only when there is an actually living child is in the world that has physical needs. And the man? He was instrumental in the whole zygote creating – you know – that thing that turned into a baby… What’s that? He didn’t want a baby? Oh no! I wish there was some way he could have prevented himself from ejaculating into a woman… if only there was some way he could have arranged that… some way for him to have control over his reproductive material… or the choice of woman …or the choice to ejaculate at all… if only… the poor man… no choice in the matter AT ALL…
Welcome to adulthood. Actions have consequences. Don’t like the consequences? Don’t engage in the action.
guys..you’re not gonna get anywhere with this one. pretty sure he is actually an extreme pro-lifer who is playing into his rhetoric backwards. Step away slowly.
I agree Savannah. His response to my comment was all don’t tell me what to do with my body. Which is funny, since we’ve been telling right wingers that all along.
You are an insane person, FYI.
I get what you’re saying. I don’t agree with it, but the beauty of being an American is we both get to have our views. But let me make a few suggestions Steve. IF men want to engage in condomless sex and want a choice (which women DON’t have btw, we don’t TELL our bodies when we want our eggs fertilized and when we don’t, I WISH we could that would be such an intelligent design feature!) in whether or not a child is a result here is what all you men should do at like age 18 or whatever. Freeze your sperm and get a vasectomy. That way you and only YOU get to decide which woman you deign to procreate with. Problem. Solved. Your welcome.
Hey, honey, I thought you had control over your bodies?
That’s what you’re always nattering about.
So go control them all you please.
Just stay away from men’s wallets.
Furthermore, don’t tell me what to do with my body and I won’t tell you what to do with yours, little girl.
Typical female (notice I didn’t use the word “woman”, because she isn’t grown up enough to be one) – wants to control every man and every bank account around her.
Calling the women here “honey” is pretty condescending, Steve. Knock it off.
You sound awfully bitter to me. What’s your personal experience with forced fatherhood, no say over an abortion or ‘crippling’ child support? There has to be a reason behind all this vitriol.
Wow. You have a lot of personal issues to deal with, little boy.
“The manner to which they have become accustomed” is a reference to alimony, not child support. And alimony is given to whichever spouse made less income, not women as a rule. Also I disagree with the logic that “if you support legal abortion, then you emphatically deny that men create children”. In a perfect, totally fair world, both men and women would get stuck with pregnancy and rearing of children because they both equally engage in the sex that results in the pregnancy. But biology puts the woman in the drivers seat once conception results. That can either be a blessing or a curse, depending on your views of abortion, where you are in your life, who your partner is, etc. It’s not some windfall for women. Men abandon and fail to pay for children constantly. CONSTANTLY. Both sexes suffer from inequalities in the reproductive process due to biology.
By “nothing to do with their lifestyle choices” do you mean “never put it in her” because I don’t think we make men pay child support to women they have not had sex with. Just sayin.
Honey, go read a lawbook.
Males who have been RAPED still have to pay child support.
There are any number of cases where under-age males, 12 years old, 14 years old, 16 years old, get hit for child support because the female teacher who statutorily RAPED them got pregnant.
And those young boys and those young boys’ parents have wages garnished for the next 18 years to pay for the rapist’s child.
So go whine about how unfair life is to someone who is as ignorant as you are about how life works.
Oh, really? And those rapists who raped them get the money? No, that’s the kid’s money. The kid isn’t a rapist, the mother is. The child support goes to support the child. Who deserves to have the two people who were responsible for bringing it into the world both contributing to support it. It really isn’t fair, but that doesn’t mean we have to make it more unfair.
Because guess what? 12, 14, and 16 year old girls are statutorily raped, too, and their rapists? Are sued for child support.
Crap, I hit post too soon.
Because the one who is raising the kid is obviously already supporting it. In the case where a woman goes to prison because she raped a kid, you can bet they’re going to hit her up for child support too.
Male victims being forced to pay child support, while extremely rare, I agree is sad and unfair to those boys. But it is a result of a legal system that prioritizes the needs of children over fairness to the parents. A woman who is raped is stuck with the agonizing choice of getting an abortion, or carrying a child to term. And that isn’t fair either. While I grant you that the lack of control for men once a pregnancy occurs is, in a sense, unfair, I think there is unfairness on both sides of the issue. And it’s not because either sex is evil or worse than the other. It’s because of biology, and a legal system that puts the interests of the child above the interests of the parent.
Of course life is unfair. To everyone. You’re the one asserting that it’s only one sex that experiences unfairness.
Also, when you call people “honey” constantly or tell them to go read a “lawbook”(?) it comes across really condescending and I think it makes people take your reasoning less seriously.
No, honey, I am not and I don’t believe HmC is either. But if that rape victim gave birth to the child, dropped it on the rapist’s doorstep and left, it’s highly probable that the law would pursue her for child support. It’s wrong and it’s not fair, and that’s what should be changed, not the fact that a man who voluntarily engaged in activities that everyone knows could result in pregnancy can *gasp* be sued for child support for a kid he doesn’t really want. Which, if you’ll recall, honey, was what we were discussing in the first place before you sidetracked us.
“So, if MEN can be compelled to support children after rape, you must also support the idea that WOMEN can be compelled to support that “child in the womb” after THEY get raped.
You are arguing for NO abortion in cases of rape.”
No. If a woman is raped and aborts a child, there is nothing to support. Men can’t choose to abort because biology dictates that the fetus is not in their body. If men abandon a child, you have a child with needs that take precedent over fairness to the abandoning parent.
I think the key is that the choice to abort doesn’t result in an innocent child that still has needs to be met. Abandoning a child does. That’s the difference.
So, if MEN can be compelled to support children after rape, you must also support the idea that WOMEN can be compelled to support that “child in the womb” after THEY get raped.
You are arguing for NO abortion in cases of rape.
You have no idea what you’re talking about, with regard to “child support”. The calculus is income dependent based on who’s the higher earner. If it’s dude and he’s a brain surgeon or something and she’s a hot part-time bartender, his “child support” will be assessed at an amount that will put her in decent rent, a mercedes car payment and plenty left over for nice clothes and dining out, with an occasional weekend getaway thrown in the mix.
Child support, such as it is, is frequently used as “stealth spousal support”. It may not be widely known among the comment threads of women’s advice blogs and other social hangouts but the family law bar is well aware of this issue. Don’t be so quick to assume every dude who makes an observation about a real phenomenon is some embittered douche full of vitriol; you may learn something in the process.
Well he will still have to pay child support. So deal with that.
Steve, I don’t think you should waste your energy getting so fired up about this. I honestly don’t believe any of this will ever be an issue for you. You seem too whiny for most women’s taste.
I think whatever scorn you’re heaping onto this woman you should deal evenly to your boyfriend. But it doesn’t matter what you think of her or her decision to carry your boyfriend’s baby.
The only thing you need to think about is if you can stay and have a healthy relationship with a man who has a child with another woman and wants to bear minimal responsibility for raising the child.
Boy, for someone who can’t live without you, he sure didn’t wait to go out and sleep with someone else! You deserve better than that (and ditto what everyone else has said – your beef is with your scumbag boyfriend, not the other girl or the baby).
Sigh. What kind of 40 year old “can’t live without” their SO. You can’t live without food. And water. And oxygen. This guy, you can most definitely live without. And should.
Step back and take a look at what you have told us. He doesn’t want anything to do with her? Cold, but I suppose not unheard of. He ordered her to get an abortion? Well, ok. But she’s having his baby and whether he likes her, loves her, or hates her, that baby is his child. And he wants absolutely nothing to do with that baby? That is not acceptable. I could maybe understand if he was 19 and didn’t know what to do. But he’s 40?! Grow the fuck up! Why do you want to be with such a douchenozzle?
I don’t think you are right to try to make him stay with her. They shouldn’t just play house for the sake of the kid. But he SHOULD want to be involved in his child’s life. The fact that he doesn’t means he’s no good for either of you. Bow out gracefully and give him the space he doesn’t know he needs to get his life together.
I agree – people who are dysfunctional should not stay together for the sake of the kid – it will just make things worse. But they should try and work together to create a decent life for the child – it does not have to be in a relationship with one another though. Don’t push him to be with this woman. But if you are uninterested in a relationship with him because of his newfound drama then walk away sister
So your boyfriend said he doesn’t want anything to do with his own child (besides the child support) and you didn’t run screaming the other way?
He says he can’t stand her? She looked enough to bang, though, huh? It is possible to get pregnant while on the pill, it happened to three women I know. The plain truth is your boyfriend did not think about the consequences of unprotected sex (STDs anyone?) and now he must deal with those consequences. He does have a responsibility towards this baby, whether he likes it or not. This guy isn’t worth anyone’s time. But you are wrong for trying to force him to stay with someone just because of the child. That won’t solve anything. Cut your losses and get the hell out. And do some growing up before you get involved with someone else.
He says he can’t stand her? She looked enough to bang, though, huh?
Um, yeah. Believe it or not, but a bedpartner with a scintillating personality is not a prerequisite for the male orgasm: it’s possible to have and enjoy sex with somebody who you nevertheless regard as entirely obnoxious and devoid of LTR potential.
I’m not even sure how to address this letter, so I guess step by step is a good way to go…
“My boyfriend and I split up for two months. We decided to get back together as we can’t bear life without each other.”
Well, I guess its good that you now know that you can’t bear life without each other, but that seems a bit juvenile to me. I think I said that about my boyfriend was I was about 15. And now I couldn’t imagine life without my husband, but I’m pretty sure I’d live through it (and have) if he weren’t around. But… you were split up for 2 months and can’t bear to live without each other yet he didn’t waste any time jumping into bed with someone he barely knows? And without condoms?! First things first, get yourself to a doctor or Planned Parenthood or somewhere like that and get tested for STDS!
“I told him to stay with her and have this family as I don’t want to be any cause for them breaking up, but he told me there was no way he was staying with her because he can’t stand her. He says he told her he’s not happy about this pregnancy and didn’t want a baby and asked her to abort as he was 40 years old.”
A pregnancy, especially an unplanned one with no real relationship behind it is not a reason to stay together. Ever. All that does is make 3 people miserable (both parents plus the child). And I’m not sure what his being 40 years old has to do with her getting an abortion. Does he think he’s too old to be a dad? Because thats really not that old.
“She told him she got pregnant on the pill, which I think is a lot of cod wallop…But I think she’s tried to trap him and he’s untrappable.”
You do know that birth control isn’t 100% effective, right? Even if she was taking it appropriately (same time every day, no antibiotics interfering, etc), it still isn’t 100% effective. And why do you think she’s trying to trap him? Because she accidentally got pregnant with his child? Has she tried to convince him to come back to her? Or is she trying to get him to live up to his responsibilities (which he brought on himself when he had unprotected sex and got someone pregnant)?
“And he is furious with this woman for keeping the baby after only knowing each other two minutes. It’s not right… I’m sure I wouldnt….!”
Its not really his right to decide whether or not she keeps the baby. Yes, it takes 2 to tango but she is the one carrying the child and an abortion isn’t just an easy thing to do. First of all, it can take a bad psychological toll on someone who doesn’t want to have it in the first place. Even people who do want to have one often suffer from some kind of depression or at least sadness. Secondly, it is a medical procedure. Any complications from the abortion would be hers to bear, not his. And how do you know you wouldn’t do the same thing she is? Unless you’ve been there, you don’t know.
“I don’t know how I’m going to feel about this baby malarky. He told me he will obviously be paying for it but wants nothing to do with her OR the baby.”
Babies are malarky. They are babies. Unwanted or not, they are innocent in this whole mess that your boyfriend and his whatever-she-is created. And honestly, if my boyfriend told me he wants nothing to do with his own child…. well, then I’d run screaming the other way. What happens if you get pregnant? Will he react the same? Its one thing that he says he will pay for it (I’m assuming this means child support), but a true father doesn’t just look at this as a once a month payment for 18 years. They look at it as their child, no matter who the mother is.
You want some advice? Get over yourself and get over him. You don’t really get a say in this matter. You don’t get to badmouth this woman just because she won’t get an abortion that YOU and your boyfriend want her to get. You have no say whatsoever in this situation. You seem to put a lot of blame on her, but you do know that he was there too, right? And he put you in danger of contracting an STD because he failed to use a condom. I think your anger is severely displaced and I think I know why – if you evaluate the situation without being blinded by your inability to live without this guy, you would see that his true character is shining through and its probably not someone you really want to be with. Its easier just to blame her and act like he’s an innocent victim, but he’s not. The only innocent victim in this situation is that poor child.
Oh wow, that was longer than I expected. Sorry to be so long-winded but it happens sometimes.
Not long-winded – just a breath of fresh air and reason after the insanity in that letter.
LW, take a step back and think about what you would tell one of your girlfriends in a similar situation.
A dude you’re dating barebacked someone while you were on a break and then came back to you and said he couldn’t live without you. This is the set up for some serious melodrama. And lo and behold, that’s exactly what you’ve gotten. Even if this “baby malarky” goes away, even if this woman only demands financial support and nothing else from your boyfriend, this sort of drama will be your life if you stay with him. Hell, given the entitlement and lack of boundaries displayed in your letter, it’ll probably be your life no matter what.
Like I said, step back and evaluate this situation as if you were an outsider. What can you change? You can leave this dude, try to learn to live life on your own, try to show compassion toward your fellow women, and try to learn to identify unhealthy relationships straight away, before you find yourself embroiled in more soap-opera style theatrics.
What would you tell your girlfriend or sister if they were in the same situation is always a good go-to.
I don’t know why this posted as a reply to Honeybeenicki – I tried to post it separately.
I’m not so sure why he isn’t allowed to be angry at her decision to keep the baby. I’m not saying I think he should get any sort of say in it, but why are we so quick to deride his emotional response to an accidental life-altering event that, in his mind, could have been corrected, but isn’t going to be due to someone else’s decision? I think it is fair for him to be disappointed, angry and frustrated. Sure sure — you have sex, there’s always the possibility of a child. But not usually. When someone else makes a decision that massively affects my life for the worse and disregards my preferences, it makes me angry and frustrated. I think that is fair. Why isn’t it fair of him to be angry?
LW: When I started reading this letter I was prepared to tell you to MOA, but by the end I decided that you and your boyfriend sound like equally shitty people! You deserve each other!
Guess what LW? You are an entitled, awful, C.U.N.T for even THINKING that you have an opinion on what this woman does with her pregnancy. (and I hate that C-word….but LW, you deserve it). You deserve that label for attacking a woman that you don’t even know, for trying to blame her for sperm-jacking your loser boyfriend and for suggesting that she is trying to “trap” him.
WHAT THE HELL IS YOUR PROBLEM, LW? WHAT THE HELL IS YOUR BOYFRIEND’S PROBLEM. Your boyfriend is 40 effing years old. He knows how to make a baby, and he knows how to avoid making a baby. He chose not to take the steps to avoid making a baby, and to avoid putting himself (and you!) at risk of STDs. But you’re too stupid/gullible to be angry at him.
So again, LW. you=see you next tuesday.
Man, I was having a crappy morning and now I feel SO MUCH BETTER, because I’m not this LW.
God, I’m so glad someone else thought of that word when reading this letter because I’ve used that word exactly three times in my life as an insult, and yet I couldn’t quit thinking it.
I often feel bad for the LWs who get called names and judged super harshly on this site and sometimes feel the need to defend them when they just seem lost and in need of some advice.
After reading your comment, all I wanna say is, AfuckingMEN.
Although I can’t decide if she’s purely a straight-up C.U.N.T. or if she’s just done too many drugs or something and her brain is rotting away. Either way, it sounds like she and this douchenugget guy are made for each other. I just feel sorry for the pregnant girl.
Watch your language young lady! I’ve done too many drugs and I’d never write a letter like this XD
ha, I’ve done too many drugs too. But I just watched this documentary on ecstasy users whose brains were literally rotting away (Ah!!! never again! sorry, brain). I just picture this LW with only tiny chunks of her brain left rattling around in her head as she sputters out this completely illogical rubbish (malarky). Drugs was just one theory to how she got that way.
The only thing I can say that no one else has so far is, why would she want to trap this man?! He’s scum, no one in their right mind is going to want to stay with him. I highly doubt that’s what she’s doing considering she’s only known him “for two minutes.”
Well, it’s always possible that she’s NOT in her right mind…
LW, your boyfriend is an ass and you’re acting like one. Just because she’s decided to not have an abortion because your boyfriend “can’t stand her” and doesn’t want anything to do with her or the innocent child, who, like it or not, he helped create, doesn’t mean she’s trying to trap him or that she’s a “scroat”. WTH is that?! He sounds wholly unlikable so I think it’s doubtful she wants anything to do with him, especially now. You have no opinion in this matter. However, it’s your choice whether or not to get back together with him. Personally, I wouldn’t. He sounds self-entitled, immature, arrogant, an all around horrible person. Just because he’s willing to pay child support doesn’t mean he’s not a deadbeat and who would want to be with the kind of boy who would abandon his child. Definitely do a paternity test to be sure but if he follows through with not being a part of the child’s life, he’s a scumbag. Gain some maturity and realize that you have no part in this decision, she’s decided to keep the baby, she’s the one who will be carrying the baby, raising the baby, etc… Grow up LW and dump him. I’m going out on a very weak limb to say that you’re probably a better person than this letter which means you’re definitely too good for him.
Woah. Stuff like this really grinds my gears.
It takes two to make a baby. If he didn’t want to make a baby, he should have been wearing condoms or not having sex at all. I’d be more concerned with him having unprotected sex with someone HE just met. I hope you make sure he gets tested for STIs before you sleep with him again.
Also, HUGE RED FLAG. He doesn’t want anything to do with his child? Why would you want a future with someone that could do something like that? Trying to force someone to get an abortion? Holy hell, this guy sounds like a dick.
Totally personal question, but have you ever been in the position where you had to choose whether or not to have an abortion? I haven’t, and even though I am 110% pro-choice, I’m not sure if it’s something I could actually do. Abortion is a very personal choice and whether or not this woman chooses to have one is entirely HER business. Your boyfriend made his choice when he had unprotected sex. And at 40 years of age, he should know how babies are made and if he didn’t want kids, maybe he should have considered getting snipped?
Run fast, run far and don’t look back.
Continuing along the lines of what John Rohan said above (maybe way above, because I’m at work and my reply will take some time to type surreptitiously):
The LW and the guy broke up. Every relationship ends in death or a breakup, so this is not unusual.
The guy started dating someone else. Again, not unusual, and since the LW and the guy were broken up, the LW has no claim to what the guy could do after the breakup.
The guy had sex (presumably) without a condom with a woman that (he at least believed) was on the pill. OH MY GOD!! SEX WITHOUT A CONDOM!!! He must be a complete scumbag, because no one ever has sex without a condom unless they intend to have children or are scumbags. Or, hey, maybe they were both tested, maybe they were both clean, and maybe he believed her, and maybe she actually was on the pill.
The woman then – apparently – became pregnant with – apparently – the guy’s child. Yes, he should have realized this was a possibility. So, hey, let’s jump on him and discuss how vile he is because he didn’t take measures to avoid it (and let’s do so without any actual proof that he didn’t wear a condom, that she wasn’t on the pill, and so on). Why? Because he should have known she could have gotten pregnant! Apparently, the belief is that no one should ever have sex unless they intend to have a child with the person and are sure that it is a good idea.
That line of reasoning is fine – but condescending – only for those who never in their entire lives have ever done anything that might have resulted in something unexpected (and unwanted) happening. Ever look at the clock in your car to check the time while driving (or the radio to change channels, or a billboard)? Why, my God, you could have hit a chid running out in the street. There are many other examples of behavior that might possibly lead to unwanted consequences that we each do daily. Hell, as a parent, I probably should never drive to get coffee because I’m risking death in an accident for something I don’t need, and yes, I do know that people die in car accidents.
The guy and the woman had sex. She got pregnant. He didn’t expect that to happen. She isn’t a woman he wants to be with his entire life. The fact that all this happened doesn’t mean he’s some despicable jackass.
Now? He wants to get back with the LW (again, apparently). So of course the events are filtered through that lens. He’ll of course express things in a way that maximizes the chance of him not doing any more to hurt the LW than necessary. And, again, this is common except with those inflicted with social disorders who can’t seem to not say exactly what they’re thinking. But, of course, this makes him an asshole.
And finally , yes, I do think he should have some right to what happens to that pregnancy, and yes I do think that “trapping” someone by getting pregnant is repulsive, and so yes, I can understand his anger at the woman if that is what is happening. I believe that, in the case of consensual sex leading to pregnancy, both parties would be able to decide if they want to keep the child, and if the man doesn’t and the woman does, she should bear full responsibility for child care, because it is a decision she has made. No one should be forced to abort a child, but no one should be forced to have one they do not want. We have the means to resolve pregnancy issues. They should be used. However, I realize that’s a pipe dream. As much as men have some inherent advantages, women do as well, and one of them is the ability to, once pregnant, get support for 20+ years from someone they might have just met.
So, really, I guess I disagree with the majority of the comments here. He might very well be an immature asshole. But I don’t see anything in the letter that means he must be.
I think both you and JR are twisting this around to make it sound like we don’t like the dude because we’re prudes who don’t believe in casual sex, or that we’re siding with the LW or something, when most of us actually said that we believe that the LW is as scumy as the dude.
I don’t believe in forcing people to become parents either. If I ever get pregnant and the dude wants nothing to do with the child, I will not force him. He can just disappear forever for all I care. But this doesn’t mean that he’s not scum. If he decides to abandon his child, he is. And that’s why I wouldn’t want anything to do with him in the first place.
And most important of all, what’s all this talk of ASKING WOMEN to have abortions? Dude, that’s seriously out of line. Not your body, not your choice. Wrap it up or don’t have sex, that’s the only choice YOU have.
“Wrapping it up” doesn’t prevent pregnancy. It merely reduces the chances.
I take it, then, that your position is that a man should never – ever – have sex unless he’s either (a) sterile, or (b) willing to raise the possible resulting child and/or pay for that child for a couple of decades, but that a woman has those choices but also can opt for an abortion and so can opt out of the obligation of a child. However, a man should have no such option and should be forced to pay (literally and figuratively) for having sex.
Is that your position, or am I misinterpreting it?
You may not agree with it, but the laws are such that he is obligated “to raise the possible resulting child and/or pay for that child for a couple of decades,” if she decides not to terminate the pregnancy. He knew it but was willing to take that risk just like any man does when they engage in sex with a woman. Whether or not the current laws are unfair to the man are irrelevant since this child has already been conceived.
I agree that using a condom (even when she was on the Pill) would not have necessarily meant she wouldn’t have gotten pregnant. But, it would have reduced the chances. She might not have been on the Pill, but that was a risk that he chose to take by having sex with someone he knew “for two minutes” without a condom.
I don’t know if he’s a bad guy or not since we only have the ex-girlfriend’s side of the story. I don’t think he’s a bad guy for having sex with this other woman, and it was his decision to not use a condom. He can take all the risks he wants – it’s his choice. But, now he’s faced with the unwanted consequences of that choice, and while it’s unfortunate, it’s how life works. It’s unfortunate that he may potentially be a life-long “relationship” as parents with this woman, in addition to the legal responsibilities for the child, but any 40 year old man knows that is a potential risk. He’s not a victim, unless she raped him. He can’t try and opt out of the “rules” that he knew he was playing by when he had sex with this woman.
Everyone seems to assume he didn’t use a condom, but nothing in the letter says that. For all we know, he used a condom and thought she was on the pill.
Also, he seems willing to abide by the laws. I think they’re unfair in the same way that I feel it’s unfair to prevent women from having abortions, but thats’s beside the point.
He had sex, she got pregnant, presumably it’s his, and he’ll provide support. Nothing about that makes him a bad person.
I just personally get outraged that this is the case: that he would have to pay support regardless, but that she can opt out of it. I accept that it’s the law, just like it’s the law that you basically have to get raped by an ultrasound device in Texas in order to get an abortion.
Maybe that outrage will be the catalyst for you to start a political career in order to change these laws that you feel are so unfair.
The laws are unfair because they aren’t designed to be fair to the PARENTS- they’re designed to work in the best interest of the innocent child that didn’t choose to be born. Well, they don’t entirely disregard fairness to the mother and/or father, but the child’s interests take precedent. And the fact is, biology dictates that women have control once a pregnancy has occurred- not just the legal system. And a grown adult man is well aware of this system when he chooses to have sex.
What exactly would your perfect laws look like in regard to custody and child support anyway? Men get to abandon freely and pay no child support if they don’t want anything to do with the kid? Men get a say in abortions? Honestly, I see unfairness in the current system too, but I don’t see how you could look out for the best interests of children while simultaneously making everything 100% fair for both mother and father. The laws are imperfect because the biology of men and women is different. Men and women have control over conception on the front end of the decision- and a woman is “stuck” with the pregnancy. She has to go through a pregnancy no matter what (assuming she doesn’t believe in abortion). Men will never have to make that choice. Is that fair to women? No. But biology runs the show and grown adults know the game going in.
There are unfair aspects of the whole legal and biological reproductive system for both men AND women. You can look at it like women are lucky- they can opt out at the last minute! Lucky us. We’re also stuck with either A) experiencing an abortion or B) going through a pregnancy. Not to mention raising the baby, which women are way way WAAAYYY more likely to do alone than men. Why do you think that is? Oh yeah, because plenty of men already have no problem abandoning AND not paying.
The fact that only the woman has the abortion option is biology, not anyone’s opinion. Is it fair that in cases where neither the man nor the woman wants to continue a pregnancy, only the woman has to undergo a medical proceedure (or even when they want to carry to term for that matter)?
Fortunately, it’s a well known fact that there’s no 100% guarantee with birth control. Nor is there any guarantee that the woman who tells you that she doesn’t want to have a baby won’t change her mind when faced with that decision. Or that the person you’ve known for two minutes and are now having sex with is being honest with you about anything. Don’t choose to roll those dice if you can’t cope with all of the possible outcomes.
Sure, lots of people take those chances. They aren’t bad people because of it. But I have no tolerance for the ones who cry foul after the fact when it hasn’t gone their way.
Abstinence is 100% effective, just saying.
True.
Listen, people have sex…casually…and sometimes with people they never hope to see again. Whatever. The dude having sex is not my issue. My issue is even, at the very least, if you don’t want to wear a condom….then pull out!!! If you don’t want a kid with a stranger then PULL OUT!!!
Jesus fucking christ! The pull out method? REALLY?! You’re fucking advocating that brilliantly fool-proof method?! I mean for fuck sake? Argh. I give up. Seriously, no wonder so many of are all too stupid to understand where babies come from…
Babies come from the hospital. You go to a window and pick one out and take it home with you.
Now I’m confused. Where does the stork fit in?
he delivers the baby from the nursery to your house. door to door service.
Then I amend my original argument.
If you choose to live in an area known to be frequented by storks then you have no one but yourself to blame if you become a parent.
Actually, pulling out has a 4% failure rate versus 2% for condoms for perfect use. It’s not that bad (though I’ll take an IUD’s 0.6%, thanks). It’s believed to be ineffective because for years people thought there were sperm cells in pre-cum, but that’s a myth. It can pick up cells from a previous ejaculation, but peeing flushes them off.
I wouldn’t advocate using the pull-out method alone, but if some stranger says “Its cool, I’m on the Pill” and you don’t *quite* believe her and you don’t have a condom, I guess it wouldn’t hurt.
Aim for the face. Furthest from the vagina, just saying.
If I polled my high school, and under “Forms of Contraception” I included “Pulling Out,” I’m estimating (based on the number of children at my last reunion) that would be about 70% of respondent’s methods. Seriously, there are as many babies in my class as there are classmates.
LMAO mainer!!! 🙂
According to this, then, a woman should have the choice of forcing the child, once born, onto the father, and then only paying child support for a couple of decades.
Remember awhile back there was the letter about the girl who had an abortion and was scared to tell her bf because he was anti-abortion. I said there and I think it bears repeating here: you have no right to assume the woman you are having sex with has the same views on abortion as you. And since she’s the one with the baby in HER uterus, there’s not a whole lot you can do to force her to have the abortion or stop her from doing so.
Therefore, when having sex with a woman, you must assume that she could get pregnant and could keep it even though you don’t want it; or on the flip side, abort it even though you don’t want her to. If you can’t live with those outcomes, don’t have sex with her.
“And most important of all, what’s all this talk of ASKING WOMEN to have abortions? Dude, that’s seriously out of line. Not your body, not your choice. Wrap it up or don’t have sex, that’s the only choice YOU have.”
Reframed to show the immaturity of the argument:
And most important of all, what’s all this talk of ASKING CUSTOMERS to order fries with that? Dude, that’s seriously out of line. Not your wallet, not your choice. Wrap it up or don’t serve burgers, thta’s the only choice YOU have.
I attempt to avoid name calling, but if you have a problem with one person ASKING another person to do or not do ANYTHING, you are a poor excuse for an adult!
Reframed to show the low quality of the comparison:
“Would you like an abortion?” = “Would you like fries with that?” –> OK!
“Have an abortion or I’ll be furious” = “Have fries with that or I’ll be furious” –> Psycho
I attempt to avoid name calling, but you’re not very smart.
Once again it’s the way the LW and the bf (at least the way the LW is presenting his reactions) acted about the potential baby that are rubbing people the wrong way. Once you decide to have sex you are basically saying that you realize pregnancy is a possibility. And this is the problem with having sex in a non-monogamous relationship and not fully protecting yourself. Because, you don’t know the other person you don’t if they remember to take their pill on time, if they forget pills for days at a time, if they are taking antibiotics, or if you’re just one of the unlucky small small percentage that gets pregnant while taking the pill.
And aborting a pregnancy is also something that is a very difficult thing for many women. You’re asking them to have a medical procedure and abort their unborn child. And no it shouldn’t be just the woman’s responsibility that the bf just met if she decides to not have an abortion or give the child up for adoption. Because the bf in question was part of the creation of the child. If he didn’t want a child he should have better protected himself.
They way the *LW* is painting the picture here of how she and her bf are treating the unborn child is unfair to the child and is why people are reacting the way they are.
And hopefully people begin to realize that just taking the pill isn’t an absolute gurantee that you won’t make a baby.
“He wants to get back with the LW (again, apparently)”
Look you can either take what the LW wrote in the letter to be a marginally accurate representation of what is going on or why bother reading and commenting at all?
from the letter:
“We decided to get back together as we can’t bear life without each other.”
“but he wants me and wants to marry me as he said all along”
“he said this is not gonna ruin us”
“He might very well be an immature asshole. But I don’t see anything in the letter that means he must be.”
Wrong. Absolutely, positively, 100% wrong. He’ll “pay for it” but wants “absolutely nothing to do with it.” I believe the definition of an immature asshole is a 40-year-old man who won’t own up to his responsibility to be a father to the baby he had equal part in creating. I think your maturity should absolutely, completely be judged against how you react when life throws you unexpected things…like an unplanned pregnancy.
There’s nothing wrong with casual sex. And while not using a condom might not be “the end all be all” of crazy mistakes, he should have known better. Does that make him an asshole? Not necessarily. But if I’m going to have casual sex without proper protection, well then I’d better damn well be prepared for the potential consequences. And guess what…the potential consequences came to life, quite literally for him.
And, like an immature asshole, he decides he doesn’t want to own up to his responsibility. Yeah, I believe that means he “must be.”
“I believe the definition of an immature asshole is a 40-year-old man who won’t own up to his responsibility to be a father to the baby he had equal part in creating.”
So, to be clear, every woman who has had an abortion is, in your mind, an immature asshole. Every woman who has given a child up for adoption is, in your mind, an immature asshole. Any woman who, in a divorce, grants custody of the children to the father is an immature asshole, and any woman who spends her life in her career an allows the father to raise the children is an immature asshole, because, in each of those cases, the woman is just as guilty of abdicating the role of parent as the guy here would be, and in many of them, she also doesn’t even provide financial support.
The guy had sex with someone who got pregnant. It happens, no matter what precautions are taken, unless you opt out of sex. He made his position very clear very early on. And he has agreed to support the child financially. Nothing about that makes him the definition of immature or of an asshole.
I don’t know what’s causing all this rancor, RR, but it’s surely not just the letter.
I don’t feel like his decision to not be involved in his biological child’s life makes him an immature asshole. My biological father, whom I’ve never met, responsibly paid child support and didn’t confuse me by dropping in and out of my life. I’ve grown up better being raised by a loving, supportive mother who wanted me than by two parents who didn’t want to be together, one of whom readily admitted he wasn’t ready or willing to be a father. There is a certain degree of sadness in all of this, yes, but I’ve turned out far better than my friends whose fathers have been unable to make up their minds one way or another about parenthood. “Pay[ing] for it” is responsible, even if it’s not what the mother of the child, or potentially the child, may initially want.
Rachel, I have a child in the same situation. I would love to pil your brain on this, specifically how your mom handled discussing it with you if you would be Willing to share.
In any event, I’m happy to hear what you’ve shared already!
I’m perfectly happy to share my experience with you! I don’t ever remember being heartbroken about not having a father. When I was young, but old enough to ask, my mom always told me that my biological father just wasn’t ready to be a daddy. Not because there was anything wrong with me or because I didn’t deserve a father or because I wasn’t lovable — she was always sure to explain that it was his deficits that kept him from being a part of my life. As I’ve gotten older she’s told me more details about the situation (they were tenants in the same complex working towards professional education [law and med school] and both around age 30; I was a surprise and he was more dedicated to completing his education, while she wasn’t upset that she would be a mother sooner. There were no hard feelings). She never said an unkind word about him and made sure I knew that he’d fulfilled his obligations by paying child support. So I have a pretty positive impression of my biological father. And as an adult who isn’t ready to have children, either, I can empathize with his decision. And I appreciate that he made his decision and stuck with it, instead of deciding to drop in and out whenever he felt like.
Honestly, I did grow up craving a strong male presence in my life and have always gravitated towards male professors or bosses who wee willing to play the role of mentor. I’m happy to have found a father in my father-in-law, who has really become the dad I never had in that he loves me, supports me, listens to me, and even spoils me, haha!
But the important thing for you to know, as the mother of a child who may not ever know their biological father, is that your child won’t miss what they never had. If you are sure to always love, support, and listen to your child, he/she will be just fine!
Do you have any other questions? If you’d like to share you e-mail, we could correspond more about this. Thanks for listening to me. =)
Cant thank you enough for your response! It’s very comforting to hear and I hope to do as good of a job as your mother did. Thank you again from the bottom of my heart.
You’re more than welcome. I’m sure you’ll do a wonderful job! It’s very clear that you care a great deal about the quality of your child’s life and emotional well-being. I have no doubt they’ll be happy, healthy, and well-adjusted with a mom so loving as you!
If you were driving your car, and looked down at the time, and hit the child would you ask the parents of that child to not report you to the police, because it’s also there fault for letting there child run in to the street? Would you tell the parents that you would gladly pay for the funeral, but you want nothing else to do with what happened, and that you are going to go live your life like nothing did?
You and John are both arguing something that nobody else is. People aren’t calling him scum for having unprotected sex with a women he was dating. They are calling him a scum for not taking any responsibility for happened, and they are calling the LW names for acting like her BF is a saint, and had nothing to do with making this baby. You two seems very good at twisting everyone’s words, and then getting mad at those people for it.
You seem to have completely missed the point that virtually anything we do involves risk, and that doing those things doesn’t mean we’re prepared for any possible consequence at any time.
Anyway, people are calling him scum for having unprotected sex with a woman he was dating. Read the comments.
People surely aren’t calling him scum for not taking responsibility, because he’s apparently going to provide support.
People are calling him scum because he’s a guy who doesn’t want to become a father to that woman’s child. Why he is scum but a woman who opts for an abortion or adoption isn’t… it’s beyond me. They’re the exact same situation, but for some reason, he’s scum.
Not me. I think he’s scum because he’s furious with the girl he impregnated.
So, if she opted for an abortion and he was furious with her for not keeping the baby, would he be scum? Is it the fact that he wants something different from what she does that makes him scum?
At the point where he had options he chose one that could result in a pregnancy. And now that there’s a pregnancy and the options aren’t his he’s furious at the woman he impregnated because it isn’t going the way he wants. He’s scum for directing his fury at anyone other than himself.
While I stand by my statements about this woman being a total idiot, etc., and the fact that I don’t think anyone was calling him scum for having sex with someone after he broke up with his girlfriend, I will say that I agree with the idea that its unfair for guys that they have no say in keeping or aborting but will be on the hook for child support even if they wanted the mother to have an abortion. Its very unfair. (yes, I know, life’s unfair). I’ve been in the position where I chose to keep my baby when the “father” wanted to abort. I gave him a green flag to make his decision and let him off the hook for any and all care and support, so long as such decision was irrevocable.
I chose to have a baby. While we both “made” it, I wanted it and he didn’t. I didn’t see that it made sense for him to send a check for MY child when he never had even met her. But I guess I looked at it a lot like a woman adopting a baby alone would.
Also, just food for thought, a lot of you are saying how horrible it is he wants nothing to do with his child but is willing to pay for it…would you say the same thing to someone who gave their kid up for adoption? Its not exactly the same by any means, but similar enough for me to have thought it.
You know, I was thinking about that, too. But I believe there’s a definite difference. When choosing adoption, I think you’ve made a conscious decision that your child will be better off being parented by people other than you. For whatever reason that may be. It doesn’t involve any weird semi-involvement; but rather a clean break for the child and a chance to build a happy, loving life with a set of great parents.
This dude intends to contribute to the child’s life financially, but in no other ways, which seems vastly unfair to the child. It means he or she will know their father, in a sense, and will also have the opportunity to believe that their father just simply didn’t want to have anything to do with them. At least with adopted children, they usually have one or two great parents who can explain, in a way that doesn’t hurt them or damage their self-worth, why they were put up for adoption.
Well, I have to just give the opposite side of this that 1. at least he plans to financially provide for the child and 2. if someone is so adament about not wanting children as he seems to be, then all are probably better off “giving” the child to the mother only which is a hell of a lot like adoption.
I see no reason why the mother in this scenario cannot be a great parent who can “explain, in a way that doesn’t hurt them or damage their self-worth, why they were put up for adoption [or only have one parent involved]”
I think difference is ensuring that the child is cared for. Which includes emotional support, not just financial. When you give your child up for adoption, you are giving him or her to people who really want a child and are prepared financially and emotionally to give that child support.
Not to say that a single mother cannot give a child the support she needs alone, but as the father if you wash your hands of being in the child’s life, you do not KNOW or even have a reasonable expectation (especially if she’s a one night stand you’ve only known for 2 minutes) that the mother will be a sufficient parent. And throwing money at her only covers one part of that. And not even the most important part.
But clearly this woman who is keeping her child DOES really want the child and is presumably prepared to handle all that comes with having a child. I’d rather him be honest and bow out now then be in and out or in as a lousy, forced parent.
No one knows if adoptive parents end up being fabulous parents.
Also, there are so many single parents who have adopted.
I’m not saying this guy is wonderful by any means. I just think that if he is saying he doesn’t want a child then he’s probably not fit to be a parent and the parent who does want a child is more fit. I can’t help but think just as she has a choice to abort, keep or put up for adoption, he too has a choice and while not admirable, it may be for the best.
I feel in a way he is essentially giving the child up for adoption…to the mother who wants the child. And I do commend him for providing financial support. That is a WAY better scenario than I mentioned above which would be an in and out dad who pays zilch and really fucks the kid’s head up.
I totally agree with you for reasons you likely already understand. I think this man, regardless his quality of character in other situations, demonstrates good foresight in deciding that no, he’s not ready to be a father. If he was the kinda guy that decided he wanted to be in his child’s life every 5 years when it was convenient and made promises that he never kept and lost interest after a while, that would be seriously damaging to that child’s sense of self-worth.
The fact that a child is adopted does not somehow guarantee the they’ll be cared for. Adoptive parents are as capable as any others of deciding that having a child isn’t right for them, that they weren’t’ as prepared for it as they thought, and that the child isn’t “really” theirs, and they’re as likely to have other major negative events in their lives as anyone.
I think the overwhelming majority of adoptive parents are good, caring, nurturing parents. But there is no “ensuring that the child is cared for” in an adoption. It’s always just a hope.
So, in other words, RR, it is a noble thing to give your child to strangers in the hope that he or she is treated well (that the adoptive parents won’t abuse them, won’t get divorced in a messy way, won’t let them fend for themselves, and so on), even though you’ll have no interaction with that child again, but it is base and vile to have the same lack of interaction but to provide financial support… which doesn’t in any way affect the mother’s ability to find a partner that is right for her.
If the guy just walked away and contributed nothing, then that would be exactly akin to most adoptions, which, essentially, just mean letting someone else take care of your child. I understand that there are many times when adoption is the best choice. I just don’t see why that’s ok but it’s not ok for the guy to essentially do the same thing… but then have to pay.
I am curious what RR will have to say after some interesting points being made after her comments. I’m pretty surprised by some of the stances she’s made on this thread and I do enjoy and almost always agree with her comments.
I think this is a very fair and reasonable response, I wonder if she will think so too.
You said it better, but I jumped back in before seeing your replies.
This is clearly a heated topic, so I’m not sure we’re all being purely logical about it. I know I’m not, but that’s mainly because I’m in a foul mood and feel feisty.
The mention of being logical for some reason made me think of the whole idea of true abandonment. I know I’m stretching here, but…
In the state I live in, you can leave a baby (or even child I think) in a church or hospital if you do not want the child and you will not get in any trouble for it. Its a great idea, really, for someone who is unfit and probably on the verge of abuse or something else horrible. I would MUCH rather this guy walk away now then be stuck with a screaming baby he doesn’t care for and end up throwing it off a bridge. How many times have we read articles like that and think to ourselves ‘couldn’t you have just left the baby with family or at the hospital rather than kill it.’
I completely agree. Part of the reason I feel no one should be forced to be a parent is that those who are forced to be parents often cause the most lasting damage to the children.
Contrary to what might be implied buy my other comments in this thread, I’m not typically a proponent of abortions. I just feel that they are, at times, the least bad solution.
I’ve stayed away from this question because I honestly don’t think I have a very well informed opinion on the matter. I mean sure I can relate to the horrible emotions one gets about thinking that their guy’s (even if he’s an ex at this point!) slept with someone else. I don’t want to be too harsh on the LW because emotions are a messy messy thing and I’m not at all eloquent when I’m upset. But everything you’ve written here about the pregnancy and the well being of the child has made me look at things with fresh eyes. I know you’ve been in a tough situation and the fact that you and your daughter came out of it the amazingly awesome people you are shows that all a kid needs is an amazing mother who wants to provide for her kid at whatever cost to herself. I don’t mean to gush but seriously LBH, I respect you and your opinions a lot on the matter and thanks for making me question my gut responses a bit with your candor!
Wow, thank you so much Lili. Made my day!
I mean every word! You’ve given me a lot to think about in terms of my views on raising children that come out of short term flings and i’m appreciative for the insight.
Sometimes the contribution of a father who doesn’t want to be a father is far worse than the lack of father. I am no worse for never knowing my biological father, who paid child support, and being raised alone by my mother. Friends of mine who were raised largely by their mothers but had to deal with their irresponsible, alcoholic fathers who dropped in and out of their lives whenever it pleased them did far more emotional damage to their children than my lack of having a father did to me. If the child’s mother fully intends to love and support and care for her child, and explain to him/her that their biological father’s lack of desire to be a dad or deficits has nothing to do with him/her that child will grow up no worse for wear.
I think you handled your situation in the best way possible.
Well to start there’s this ridiculous bit of misogyny and what seems like lack of understanding of child support: “one of them is the ability to, once pregnant, get support for 20+ years from someone they might have just met.”
I just think its extremely scumbag-ish to want nothing to do with your child, no matter how it was conceived. Even if you had a vasectomy. Even if you wore a condom. Even if she was on birth control. Even if she was lying about being on birth control. That makes her a scumbag, but it really doesn’t absolve you of being the parent for that child. So yes, if she is trying to trap him, he should be furious at her. I just don’t see any part of the circumstance that allows a 40 year old man who was having consensual sex to take the other issues out on his own child by refusing to have anything to do with it. That is what makes him a douchenozzle.
There is a massive difference between wanting a pregnancy to be terminated and deciding to have nothing to do with a child who has been born. The guy has not opted out of a child’s life. He has made it clear that he wants a pregnancy to be terminated. Those are very different things.
“He told me he will obviously be paying for it but wants nothing to do with her OR the baby.”
Again, he has not opted out of the child’s life. You’re taking something he is saying pre-child and assuming that it is the reality of what will happen post-birth. As of now, all he has done is indicated that he wanted her to have an abortion.
Regardless, I again find a double standard in saying he must be scum to not want to be in the child’s life but that opting to give a child up for adoption is a perfectly viable choice for a woman.
I agree with your second paragraph.
I agree with you, as well. As a child who was raised by my mother and saw neither hair nor hide of my biological father, who diligently paid child support, I’ve turned out for the better. If he truly wants nothing to do with his child and is willing to pay his obligatory financial support, I don’t think that makes him a scumbag, I think that’s good foresight. He does have the right to change his mind about how involved he’d like to be.
I think the LW and her ex would do better to break up for good. It doesn’t sound like he’s ready to be a one-woman man and get married (let alone start a family), and it doesn’t sound like the LW is entirely willing and able to deal with being with a man who has fathered a child that isn’t theirs. I think the LW comes across as bitter and resentful and would rather blame the other woman, making her out to be the villain, than to admit that she and her ex really might not belong together.
Oh, and i’m missing the misogyny in that child support comment. If you are a woman, if you just met a guy, and if you become pregnant, you can get 20+ years of child support. That isn’t misogyny. It’s the law. One does not need to hate women to find inherent unfairness in current laws.
I’m sure there are many, many women who would argue that it’s not all rainbows and butterflies in attaining child support. In fact, I’m sure you could find a wealth of women who never received support a day in their life. I’m really astounded that you would say something so flippant like women can get support for 20+ years, as if it’s nothing! When I could just as easily say, “It’s so easy for men to disappear after a pregnancy and never give financial support to their child.”
Likewise, you could find a wealth of men who paid for children who weren’t theirs. The fact that you can find examples of a law being broken doesn’t make the law just or valid. Also, at least here in this state, it’s not in any way an easy thing to get out of paying, and I think it’s relatively difficult to avoid paying child support unless you’re essentially a transient or if the woman doesn’t make much of an effort to get support.
Regardless of the law – which I think is enforced far more often than not – it seems wrong to me to argue that men have no control over whether a child is born but are legally bound to pay child support, whereas women can end the pregnancy or put the child up for adoption. Since most of the people here seem to be pretty strong advocates of women’s right to choose, to be treated equally, and so on – and I agree with those stances – it seems backwards, odd, and a double standard to say that men need to be financially responsible if the woman decides he should be and that they should have no say whatsoever in that.
You really have no idea what child support means. The law does not say “men need to be financially responsible if the woman decides he should be.” He has a choice – he can be a father and split the responsibility with the mother instead of forcing her to have sole responsibility.
I know exactly what child support means, and you are discussing the post-birth situation, where there actually is a child who actually needs support.
You bolster my case by agreeing that he can share responsibility with the mother or simply provide support… but he does not have the option to opt out entirely, which is something the pregnant woman can do.
“but he does not have the option to opt out entirely, which is something the pregnant woman can do.
Exactly, so if knowing this you still choose to proceed with anything that could result in a pregnancy you have no one to blame but yourself if you become a parent.
“he does not have the option to opt out entirely”
This is not true, and I say this because a (male) friend of mine went through this a few years ago. His girlfriend got pregnant, they got engaged, realized they didn’t work as a couple, they decided it was in the best interest of the child if he was not a part of her life in any way, shape, or form, and so he signed some legal documents waiving all parental rights to the child, which absolved him of any responsibility to provide child support. I won’t go into the reasons they came to this, (very long, and quite personal, story), but it’s entirely possible that if a women gets pregnant and decides to keep the baby though the father would prefer she abort, he DOES have the option to waive his parental rights and duties to the child and thus not be legally responsible for child support.
That is not a legally binding document and is unenforceable. He can change his mind at any time and will likely get visitation at minimum.
I’m only speaking on speculation, of course, since I was not a part of the situation and only heard about from him. But, they both had lawyers. Documents were drawn up by said lawyers. Part of the agreement was they he was to never have any contact with the child. Both agreed to cut him out entirely, up to and including child support, so that he was free of any obligation. I was a completely amicable situation and he’s had no issue with this arrangement and it’s been many years. You’re right, it could be unenforceable. I’m not a lawyer, or in any way familiar with the law about these things, so my assumption is based on what a friend told me first hand about his experience.
I didnt mean to imply it wasn’t true, it just unfortunately isn’t enforceable. But still a good thing to have.
FYI – first time posting but long time reader. I simply had to chime in here as this is what I do for a living and so many people are sadly misinformed.
Termination of Parental rights does NOT absolve you from paying Child Support in the United States of America. Example: Couple agrees to the set-up evanscr05’s friend did. Mother hits hard times and ends up going on either Medicaid or Temporary Assistance/Welfare. Government will go after him for either Medical Support and/or Child Support. Terminating his Parental Rights just means he has no say in child’s education, no visitaton, etc. He still has to pay. Now if the issue remains private without government involvement, then no problem as long as she keeps to their agreement. But she can also at any time change her mind and he has no recourse. Why you ask? Because she does not have the right to waive support for the child. That support is not hers. It belongs to the child and the law is concerned with ensuring the best interests of the child above all else.
Fyrebyrd2 – Interesting! Thanks for the clarification. Another thing that happened in my friend’s case is that at the same time that they signed things to waive his parental rights, the mother had the child adopted by her fiance and then her fiance’s name was put on the birth certificate from the get go (though, this was all done behind my friend’s back and that part was done without his consent, nor was even discussed). Does that change the situation as all?
Adoption is a completely different matter. If her fiance adopted the child, then he is the legal father and she would go after him for Child Support. If this is the case then your friend is in the clear because he has no legal responsibility any more. Someone else has assumed it. On a side note: If the adoption had not occured and she went after him for support, he could contest it by stating that it would be detrimental to the child as he has no fatherly relationship with the child and introducing such a relationship so many years later would be harmful. The court considers the psychological effects on the child before ordering support. Also he could argue in court that the EX’s fiance has taken on the role of father and the child would be damaged to find out that the fiance is not really the father.
But again the adoption makes that all moot.
I had no idea. I always thought that had to be a mutual decision.
The misogyny is the implication that this somehow makes it easy for a woman. Like being pregnant is easy. Like raising a child is easy. Like getting child support is easy.
Like being pregnant isn’t massively uncomfortable. Like labor isn’t extremely painful. Like most men are running around handing out free money to them without them having to fight for it.
Besides the fact that child support is rarely enough to actually support yourself and your child. No clearly this is a brilliant way to be supported for life.
I would like to also say, we don’t know that she’s trapping him. We don’t know that she asked for any money. All we know is that he will be paying for it but wants nothing to do with it.
There’s many reasons besides wanting a man’s money to not get an abortion.
If it’s not easy, opt out of it. No one is forcing any woman to have the child and much less to keep it. If it’s not easy and it’s not what one wants, opt out of it.
At least, as a woman, you have that option.
By the way, there was no implication that it makes it easy for the woman to get child support. Merely that it is an immense expense for the man for a situation that he didn’t want – a situation which, as I said, the woman is never forced to endure.
You’re wrong. There is no “inherent unfairness in current laws” — child support is gender-blind. The law provides that the parent taking care of the child is entitled to support from the other parent. It’s not a gender-based law. Surely you know that… So if you want to hate women for having child support, why don’t you hate the men who skipped town.
You know as well as I do that the law is gender biased in effect in not in letter. Woman are more easily able to get custody and so are more likely to get support.
However, my point isn’t that children should not be supported. It’s that men should have as much of a say in whether they want to opt into support as do women. Women can decide to abort the pregnancy or to give the child up for adoption, both of which are choices that remove any future obligation. And before we launch into a discussion of how terrible abortion is, in this case (the LW) we’re talking about one that is very early on. It’s not a complex procedure. I’m not saying it’s a trivial thing, but it’s nothing compared to birth. Men don’t have those choices if they don’t want the child. They can either hope the woman opts to not keep the baby, or they pay.
This is not unlike telling women that they cannot have an abortion in that it forces parenthood when it needn’t be forced. I don’t think a woman should ever have to have an abortion, but if the father decides early on that he doesn’t want the child, I think he should have the same rights to get out of it as the woman does.
“Women are more easily able to get custody”? No, a responsible father who is involved in the child’s life will get joint custody. Not in the ’50s or ’60s – and maybe not as late as the ’80s – but today the father gets joint custody. The only ones who don’t are the ones who don’t ask for it and/or whom the court deems is unable or unfit to.
That still has no impact on my main points. I don’t think the actual equality is as you think it is, but even if I agree that it is, it has nothing to do with what happens early on in a pregnancy.
Can I interject for a moment and note that CUSTODY isn’t generally what’s tied to support; PLACEMENT is. The vast majority of parents who have at least a rough acknowledgement of their paternity/maternity have joint custody even if the guy’s a deadbeat. Where the issue comes in is who physically is around the child more, which is placement, which — though there has been progress — tends to err on the side of the mother still, with all other things being equal. And since placement errs to the mother, so does support for the exact reason you pointed out above, Addie: support is a gender-blind concept. It’s just that all the other concepts that get us to the point of support aren’t gender blind yet.
I think what you are trying to explain are the two types of custody…over the person and over decision making for the person.
Well, custody deals with life choices (what school they go to, what religion they’re raised as, what kind of medical treatments they get, etc.). Placement deals with where they are physically. Courts are loath to do anything but joint custody unless one of the parents is an absolute idiot. Case in point: my mother was mentally ill, verbally and physically abusive, and vindictive enough to hurt my siblings and I just to spite my father, and she STILL got joint custody. However, my father got primary physical placement, and my mother got 4 hours of visitation a week, and THAT is what dictated child support (or would have if she could have afforded to pay it).
Having legal custody doesn’t guarantee you or prevent you from paying support. Having placement, on the other hand, does, and what I’m saying is that when it comes down to “where are the kids going to stay”, in situations where everything else is equal, the default position is still with the mother in most courts, with the father’s visitation dependent on how close to equal the two parents are. So while support is gender-blind, the points that get you to the question of support aren’t, which kind of means support isn’t either.
Oh, and I don’t hate women who get child support. I hate a society that even makes this an issue. When two people opt to have – not conceive by mistake but instead carry through to birth – a child, they should be obligated to that child.
But early on, this is not an inevitable outcome, and if only one person wants the child, the other should be able to not be obligated. Men still lose here, because if they’re they one who wants the child, tough luck, but that’s the way it is. I don’t have a problem with that.
The system you propose – that if conception is not by mistake and if the man does not decide early on that he doesn’t want to be responsible, then he should be obligated to that child – is the craziness system ever. How the heck do you administer THAT?!
Well, that part is pretty easy, since it’s the way things work now. All I’m advocating is the addition of a requirement that the woman has made a good-faith effort to contact the father-to-be once she found out that she was pregnant and that he didn’t opt out of support.
In the current system he has the option to opt out any time prior to conception. Until that’s legally extended as you propose any man who doesn’t exercise that option has no one to blame but himself when he becomes a parent.
Who then supports the child that the man made? Shall I and all the other taxpayers? How about if I choose to opt out of THAT? These are not discussions about angels dancing on the head of a pin – there is a child that needs financial support during his/her life. If you were instrumental in the making of the child – congratulations – it is yours. Now pay for the child’s necessities in life. You seem upset at biology – that women are the ones that carry the children and and therefore has the ability to decide or not to continue on with a pregnancy whereas a guy doesn’t have that same right. How very astute of you to notice the fundamental difference between the genders. The female of the species carry the offspring. She is sovereign over her own body. Tell you what sunshine – I promise that when men carry the children you all can decide about terminating the pregnancy too irrespective of your partner’s wants – then we will have that equality you want so bad. I can’t believe the absurdity of some of these arguments.
Who then supports the child that the man made?
How about, “The woman who decided to keep the child knowing that the man was not interested in being a father and providing support?”
Yep. If it is hers you bet she supports it. It’s the second set of support owed to the child we are talking about.
No interest in fatherhood? Outstanding – don’t have kids. You are indiscriminate in your partner choice and/or birth control? Welcome to parenthood.
Nothing in the story suggests that the guy in question was, as you put it, “indiscriminate” in partner choice and/or birth control. He slept with a woman he believed to be on the pill.
Yes, no birth control is perfect, blah blah. Let me fill you in on reality: when a guy sleeps with a woman he believes to be on the pill, he does so with the not-unreasonable expectation that she doesn’t want to become pregnant. He’s signing up for sex, not fatherhood, and it is an egregious breach of the implied sexual contract for the woman to turn around and say, “Whups, knocked up! But even though I led you to believe I didn’t want to become pregnant, I’m going to have the baby anyway and thereby obligate you to two decades of support.”
Your body, your choice; however, your choice, your problem.
That is what passes for reality in your world? Taking no personality responsibility whatsoever and then whining about the consequences?
How silly I have been. I have been trying to have a rational conversation with people unfamiliar with reason.
Thank God for the real men.
You wouldn’t need to administer it. The obligation would fall solely on the mother. In this situation, there would be no contest of custody or support. The father would divorce himself from the child and any obligations to the mother.
This gets to the basic conflict. Women have the discretion to assert paternity on a man, though he has limited rights to contest that paternity claim. If they do, he is obligated to support the child. So the system is very one sided. Women can choose whether to bind a man to support their child without the man’s discretion.
The fact that the courts have found that men should be obligated to support ‘mistakes’ is motivated by a desire to secure the welfare of the child. This doesn’t arise from the rights of the mother. Though some women seem to believe that is the case.
It’s a difficult question. In most cases a child has been brought into the world consensually, and so both parents should be obligated to support that child. But in cases where a woman chooses to bear a child against the wishes of the father, the reciprocal obligation is less concrete.
So sad that anyone would think it’s even necessary to implement such a system.
I’m not advocating for it, just describing what’s been proposed elsewhere.
IMO there are probably better ways to deal w/ the more egregious incidents of paternity fraud.
It is actually quite easy. Whoever is saying otherwise is simply wrong. All it is is having someone served w papers requiring them by law to have a q tip swab their mouth.
Considering how often it is done on daytime television, I am shocked to find out that a paternity test is so damn hard to procure.
“Your body, your choice; however, your choice, your problem.” BC
Where exactly do you live? Because it doesn’t work that way around here and everyone knows it. I have zero sympathy for for any guy crying about how he’s stuck paying for a child he doesn’t want. Like it’s a big shock that birth control can fail, that people can lie about using birth control, that women get to choose whether they want to keep their children and that he law requires men to financially support their children whether they want them or not.
Seriously, cry me a river you ignorant #**>##!!!
“The guy and the woman had sex. She got pregnant. He didn’t expect that to happen. She isn’t a woman he wants to be with his entire life. The fact that all this happened doesn’t mean he’s some despicable jackass.”
So, you read the letter and all of the replies and what you got out of it is that a guy got a girl preganant who he doesn’t want to be with his entire life and everyone responding considers him a jackass because of that? You clearly didn’t comprehend what you were reading very well. Go back and reread the original letter starting with the part where he’s furious with the woman he impregnated.
“she should bear full responsibility for child care, because it is a decision she has made”
Eh, he knows where babies come from and there are plenty of ways to have an amazing sexual experience that absolutely cannot result in anyone getting pregnant. He chose to roll the dice and take his chances with intercourse. It was definitely his decision too.
So, in other words, men should only have oral sex… no, wait, not even that, because the STD risk remains… but that women can have all the se they want, because they have the option of aborting a resulting pregnancy?
Your argument that consenting adults should never have sex unless they’re prepared to become parents neglects the fact that not only do we have the means to significantly reduce the risk of pregnancy, we have extremely safe ways of terminating pregnancies, especially very early on.
However, hey, feel free to pretend it’s still 2000 BC.
WTF are you reading? Have whatever sex you want. I don’t care. And my opinion doesn’t change whether you’re prepared to have a kid. My opinion is that we all know that it can happen whether you’re on birth control or not. And that, fair or not, men do not have the option to compel an abortion or opt out of their financial obligation for any resulting children.
It is my argument that only an ass would be furious at anyone other than himself when he becomes obligated to provide for a child that he created.
“…only an ass would be furious at anyone other than himself when he becomes obligated to provide for a child that he created.”
No, he could be furious at the legal system that compelled it or at the woman (who, by the way, was equally culpable in the creation) who opts to continue with a child only she wants.
This isn’t about a child who has been born and who has needs. This is about a pregnancy that’s two weeks in. Two. Weeks. At this point, it’s an easy thing to resolve this without decades of support and animosity. So, yes, I can see why he’d be furious. I don’t think he’d be right to be furious in many possible scenarios that would still fit what was said in this letter, but there are ones that would which I think would cause justifiable fury.
“No, he could be furious at the legal system that compelled it or at the woman (who, by the way, was equally culpable in the creation) who opts to continue with a child only she wants.”
Who are we talking about now? The letter writer’s bf is furious at the woman having his child. And the legal system that obligates him was in place when he put himself in this position. He’s responsible for the choices that brought him where he is now. Fury at the woman he impregnated is misdirected.
Again, you’re defending this guy’s right to have sex and that is absurd to me. Everything else aside, most of the guys in this thread are more upset about the sex part than they are about the child out of wedlock part.
I don’t see why the guy should get a free pass for having unprotected sex. Yes, it’s not a crime. But you know what? Everyone I know, including myself, that is not ready to have a child uses a condom or doubles up on protection, or makes sure that the pill is taken on damn regular basis. When I was on the pill, my ex boyfriend STILL used condoms to make sure it was safe. And he’s 28.
Scummy is the wrong word to use. Any 40 year old man that’s in the habit of jumping into bed with a woman who claims she’s on BC after knowing her for 2 min is so dirty, I’d be afraid to touch him much less get back in a relationship with him.
I’ll continue playing devil’s advocate here today…
“Everyone I know, including myself, that is not ready to have a child uses a condom or doubles up on protection, or makes sure that the pill is taken on damn regular basis. ”
So it sounds like the mom here must’ve been in a postiion to want and/or raise a child. As a woman, I have to take responsibility that any man I have sex with may very well walk away from me never to be heard from again leaving me with a child to raise alone. That is a risk women take.
Are you a male or a female?
If he doesn’t want to have children that much, yes, he should be the one to do everything to prevent it.
I agree with you regarding “being a part of the child’s life” but I don’t agree with you on the money aspect. And not because he deserved it for having possibly unprotected sex. But because I am perfectly fine with pregnancy being a strict liability issue.
No matter what happens, if you open a bottle of coca-cola and it explodes, taking off your arm in the process, Coke pays you damages for it. Doesn’t matter if they took every precaution to design the world’s best bottle. Doesn’t matter if it has a sign on it that says “don’t shake… takes arms off if explodes!”. Doesn’t matter if the owner of cocacola sat down with you and discussed the possible risk of opening a bottle and what you would both do if something went wrong. Nope, none of it matters. Coke bottle explodes taking off your arm = coke pays. Coke didn’t have to do anything wrong.
BUT. Coke doesn’t have to visit you in the hospital and make sure you’re happy. It doesn’t have to toss a ball with you to help with your rehab or take pictures of you with your new arm. It just pays. Because otherwise, society would, if you could never work again and started collecting welfare, etc. So people got together, decided “coke is in the best position to pay if its bottles explode” and there you are.
So society got together and decided that the biological parents owe a duty of monetary support to children the create. Does that suck for some individuals who didn’t want it in the first place? You bet. But coke didn’t mean for its bottle to explode and take your arm off either. It would have been way happier if its bottles didn’t explode. But c’est la vie. It pays and so do the provider of the sperm.
I don’t think he is a bad person for telling a woman within the first trimester of a pregnancy that he barely knew and presumably made no false impressions to that he did not want a child and had no intention of being a part of that child’s life. I do not think he has a duty to “be there” for the child he never wanted and made it known he did not want to have with time to do something about it. I do think he has a legal and monetary one, which he has stepped up to. I don’t think he’s scum based on this either.
Yes. This. I wish I could like it twice.
Going through the comments here, right on cue, I already record no less than five times that the boyfriend is called “scum” or “scumbag”. And not surprisingly, the name callers are all female.
So, this man had sex with a women while he was unattached and not under any commitment, and that makes him “scum”?
Some said he deserved the label because he exposed the LW to STDs. Are you kidding? Yes, he had unprotected sex. But that’s a crime? He wasn’t in a relationship with the LW at that time, and had no expectation that they would get back together. So he had no obligation to her whatsoever.
Some people are correct that the LW’s anger is displaced. She has no right to be angry at this other woman, and doesn’t know what her motives are. But that doesn’t mean she has the right to be angry at this man either. When you split up with someone, you SPLIT UP. You don’t have an obligation to be faithful to an ex-girlfriend or boyfriend!
What the LW needs to do is take a deep breath, wait a long time for this situation to resolve, and then decide what she wants to do. At this point, she doesn’t even know for certain that the woman is pregnant or that it’s his child. It’s frustrating, but until then, there simply isn’t much she can do.
I´m pretty sure the guy is being called scum because of his shitty attitude towards the pregnancy and the unborn child.
I’m surprised that so many people here are assuming that just because a guy has sex and gets a girl pregnant, he undergoes an immediate 180* like a Sim changing their clothes and becomes a devoted, excited father-to-be. He’s allowed to not want to be a father!
Um, I don´t think anyone actually said that. But it is a dickish move to get someone pregnant and then decide you´re not going to be involved in that child´s life.
The kid has no blame here.
And as so many others have said… dont´t want a kid? Do something to not have one!
exactly he’s allowed to not want to be a father, but be smarter about birth control. having sex with someone you don’t know that well. make sure you use back up protection!
And be aware that nothing short of not having sex is 100% guaranteed to prevent pregnancy. No matter how many precautions you take, if a pregnancy occurs you have to accept that it’s because of what you did and accept full responsibility for your actions.
So, then, women should always have to accept that they’re pregnant because they had sex and then have the child whether they want to or not?
No, but both partners have to accept the fact that having sex means that pregnancy might occur. By having sex you are saying that the woman might get pregnant and you are willing to deal with it if that is the case. Whether that be by having the child, supporting the child, adoption, abortion, whatever. If you know you absolutely don’t want kids, do everything you can to prevent them.
It seems like the LW is painting the woman in this scenario as the sole person responsible for the pregnancy. But, in reality it takes two to have sexual intercourse and two people to make a baby. Both have to accept responsibility for that.
Let me show you another scenario (that I’m ad-libbing from GirlWritesWhat) following that logic:
A woman is severely allergic to peanuts. She goes to a restaurant and orders a meal that doesn’t explicitly say that it has peanuts in it, but the restaurant has several other dishes that have peanuts in it. She doesn’t tell the waiter that she has a peanut allergy, because she assumes that simply ordering a dish without peanuts in it will protect her. The waiter has no idea that she has a severe allergy to peanuts, so doesn’t tell the kitchen to change gloves when preparing her meal. Thus, her meal is tainted with traces of peanuts. She experiences an allergic reaction and has to be rushed to the hospital. By your logic, it’s just as much the waiter’s fault for not making sure the kitchen used different gloves when she didn’t bother to tell him just how severe her allergy was. When it’s the woman who will suffer the consequences, it’s the woman who should be vigilant.
She should have either used additional contraception or not engaged with sex with a man who wasn’t actively pursuing fatherhood, because now she’s fucking with 2 other peoples’ lives who do not have an active role in the decision-making process. It’s not the man’s moral fault that he didn’t think he would be roped into parenthood by a singular sexual encounter when he was told she was on the Pill. Being on the Pill is akin to saying that you’re not interested in having children, so I think it’s not completely invalid for him to assume she wasn’t ready to have children, and to be angry when he ends up being forced into fatherhood.
“It’s not the man’s moral fault that he didn’t think he would be roped into parenthood by a singular sexual encounter when he was told she was on the Pill.”
It is due to his own stupidity if he thought that a single sexual encounter could not produce a child, that birth control pills would definitely prevent him from impregnating someone or that he could legally opt out if a pregnancy occurred.
“Being on the Pill is akin to saying that you’re not interested in having children, so I think it’s not completely invalid for him to assume she wasn’t ready to have children, and to be angry when he ends up being forced into fatherhood.”
But being on the pill is not akin to saying I will choose to have an abortion should a pregnancy occur. A man’s legal obligation to support his children is not some well hidden secret and nowhere is it mentioned that he’s being asked for anything more. His anger is unwarranted unless it’s directed at himself.
Ummm sorry your comparison is ridiculous because in that case it’s 100% the fault of the person eating at the restaurant. Yes, the woman in question should have been just as involved in making sure she didn’t get pregnant as the man. My point was BOTH of them are responsible NOT just one of them.
And the LW is making it seem as if her poor bf did nothing. Which is not true.
I think what you are forgetting in all of this is that a child is not a peanut. It will have feelings too. And it will need a mother and a father. Whether those parents planned it or not they need to be there for that kid and not just dump it becuase you “feel like it”
Well put. And whether you think it’s fair or not that the woman gets the final say on whether to abort or not and the father has to live with that decision, it doesn’t matter. It’s not a secret that it works that way in our society. You know the risk you’re taking when you do the deed.
Weird question. Are you unable to fathom that although both men and women are responsible for creating a pregnancy, they aren’t capable of both taking on the same responsibilities during a pregnancy? Would be nice if they could because there were many nights when I was pregnant where my husband could have had our babies lay on his bladder instead of mine.
It;s an even bigger dickish move, dare I say — cuntish — move to fucking LIE about being on the pill to get knocked up… Or maybe she’s just a fucking idiot and can’t figure out how to follow the directions on a prescription bottle.
that’s why both parties should be concerned about preventing pregnancy because you have no idea what the other person is doing. unfortunately, i’ve seen more than one person take pills the wrong way (whether it be because they forget, don’t take it at exactly the same time, don’t pay attention to warnings about drug interactions, etc). i’m not disagreeing with you. because it is the woman’s responsibility to take her pill on time, etc if that’s the type of birth control she’s chosen. just as she has the responsibility not to lie. and the man has the option to take extra precaution and choose to wear a condom. so many unwanted and unplanned pregnancies could be prevented if people just showed more interested and care in using birth control.
Men should not rely on women for their own birth control unless the two people in question are in a committed relationship. thats just dumb.
Of course it is, but we have no way of knowing that the other woman was lying about that.
We do know that the guy in question didn´t use a condom (as you yourself pinted out elsewhere, LW would have def. let us know if he had).
I do believe that many “accidental” pregnancies are not so accidental, but that is all the more reason for people who engage in casual sex, and are dead set against having kids, to do everything in their power to avoid having them!
I think the ‘he’s a scum’ is more about not wanting anything to do with a child that he helped create and trying to brow beat this woman into having an abortion.
There’s no statement suggesting that he tried to “browbeat” the woman into getting an abortion. It only says he “asked” her to.
As for not wanting anything to do with her or her child, I’m guessing that is momentary anger directed at her, not the child. There isn’t even a child on the scene yet (!) so it’s a little early to judge.
If you’re a man, your time to prevent having a child is when you have sex and decide how to protect yourself. After that, it’s not your choice anymore.
It doesn’t matter how nicely you do it. You don’t ask women to have abortions unless you’re scum.
Remember we are hearing all this second or third hand. I doubt the conversation went like: “Please have an abortion”. More like: “her: what do you want to do about it? him: I would prefer if you had an abortion”. But just my guess.
Why would you disregard opinions that are based on the data that’s actually there, and then defend yours which is based on a guess you made about people you don’t know? He could have also said he wants the baby, and the LW is lying. He could be imaginary. He could be the a killer robot. That’s not the point here.
I think that is a pretty bad guess with how this guys attitude is towards things, and how badley he wants nothing to do with the child.
badly
Wait…please have an abortion and i prefer you have an abortion are…different?
You are too funny John. You are upset that someone read “browbeat” into the word “ask” – but you have no problem making up a whole conversation in your head – in the same breath no less – even though the LW was explicit.
Bless your heart.
Except I acknowledged that was guesswork on my part. And I’m also not passing judgements on him based on my preconceived notions about how the conversations went down.
Nice try though, bless your heart.
The point is that no one cares about your guesswork, sunshine. It isn’t pertinent to the discussion. Changing the facts and then arguing them is just as useless as creating facts and arguing those – whether you admit to it or not. And good for you limiting your preconceived notions to the entire female gender instead. Admirable restraint indeed.
Have you ever seen an episode of the Maury show or any other talk drama show? Rarely, does a woman bring a man on the show to announce that he’s pregnant and the responds with “I’d prefer you have an abortion.. “. Generally it turns into a bunch of bleeps.
Everyone in this situation sounds like they belong on Jerry Springer. I have a really hard time believing that this guy who “hates this woman” and “wants nothing to do with this child” had a civil conversation with the baby mom discussing their options, while stating his preference for an abortion.
I mean, I know guys are suppose to stick up for guys, but come on..
Pretty sure this: “and he is furious with this woman for keeping the baby” is the browbeat part. The idea that he actually said “I would prefer if you had an abortion” is laughable.
When he got back together with her, he should have had himself tested for STD’s, which hopefully he did. That’s the responsible thing for anyone to do after having unprotected sex and before beginning a new relationship. Beyond that, no one really cares that he jumped in bed with another woman right after they broke up only to decide that he can’t live without her after getting said woman pregnant. He’s scum because he plans on abandoning the baby. Child support is nice, but a father it does not make. Sex makes babies and every time you have sex you run the risk of making a baby. If you can’t handle the though of having a baby, you take precautions (condoms, birth control, vasectomy, abstinence even) and when babies happen, because they do even with protection, you take responsibility for it.
In my opinion, even if the baby turns out to not be his, he’s already shown his true colors; and they’re pretty yellow. Cowards who abandon responsibility when they don’t want to deal with it don’t make good partners.
Well technically for me it was the way he reacted to his potential child and nothing about the way he treated the LW or the woman in the letter.
And I called him out on condom use because truly that should be something we all think about when having non-monogamous sex EVEN if the woman is taking another form of birth control. Not only to prevent babies but to protect yourself from STDs.
And I think the LW is just as much of an ass or whatever other word you want to insert as the bf in question. Both of their attitudes kind of suck.
“So, this man had sex with a women while he was unattached and not under any commitment, and that makes him “scum”?”
I don’t think anyone’s saying that. I think he’s scum because 1.- he asked the other woman to have an abortion and 2.- now he’s mad that she didn’t.
Also who goes around talking about how he “can’t stand” the mother of his child? That’s seriously not cool.
I think he’s allowed to have an opinion about the woman – after all, he’s about to be handcuffed to her for the next 19 years or so. Is he supposed to lie and say she’s a wonderful person, if she isn’t? Is he supposed to just bend over and let her decide how his life is going to go, until the day he dies, just because they had sex once? This attitude that men become slaves the instant a girl gets pregnant is actually very crazy, in my opinion.
“because they had sex once”
Yep. A forty year old man should know that once is all it takes to handcuff himselfto someone for the next 19 years or so. He can have an opinion about her but it’s absurd to be mad at her because they created a baby.
Because when the woman has a baby, she isnt a slave to anything. Nope, not at all, she just goes on living life unchanged…….
I think this guy is a jerk not because he had sex with someone else when he was single, but because he is taking no responsibility for a life he created.
Having unprotected sex is not a crime, but if you have sex without a condom with someone you don’t know or trust entirely yet, you need to know that there is the possibility a child could be conceived, either by accident or deception. If you can’t handle the idea that this could happen, then wrap it up, or don’t have casual sex. His utter failure to own up to his actions is appalling.
And its also appalling that he would “order” a woman to abort. I could understand that he would be shocked and unhappy, but who does that? Furthermore, what adult man refuses to have a relationship wit a child he conceived. I can assume, at age 40, this man may not want to have children ever, but he knows how babies are made. He can’t be irresponsible and fail to take every reasonable effort to avoid pregnancy (doubling up on BC and using condoms, getting a vasectomy, or only having sex with women he knows beyond a shadow of a doubt also do not want to bring children into the world), and then act surprised and angry when it happens anyways.
This LW really doesn’t get a say in the matter, true, but if I were her I’d take one look at the boyfriend’s actions and attitudes and dump him. What happens when *she* gets pregnant and he still doesn’t want to be a father? I wouldn’t want to hang around to find out.
and its also appalling that he would “order” a woman to abort. I could understand that he would be shocked and unhappy, but who does that?
Apparently not him, because the LW never says he “ordered” her to abort.
Ah…true, I reread the letter, and it did say ask not order as I remembered.
Still, if I were the LW and I saw my newly reunited BF acting this way about his soon to be born child, I’d get the heck out of there.
While it would be ridiculous to only have sex if you intended to conceive a child, it should still be in the back of everyone’s mind that it *can* happen, and if so, the woman, who’s burdened with the pregnancy, gets to make the final call. If a guy wants absolutely to avoid becoming a father, he is responsible for using additional BC or not having sex with women if he doesn’t know what their stance on unintended pregnancy would be. If he doesn’t do this, and the woman gets pregnant anyways, he needs to show maturity and be responsible for his decisions.
If he doesn’t own up to his part in creating a child, sorry, I think he’s a jerk.
I also think he’s kind of a jerk for having sex with someone he “can’t stand”. I have nothing against casual sex or sex without a relationship, but you should still have some sort of base level of respect for the people you are banging. Even if she’s annoying, she’s more than a hole for him to stick it in, and it would bother me to know my BF had just used another human being as a glorified masturbatory aid.
If you don’t like someone (as a fellow human being), don’t have sex with them.
Well, it’s possible that he didn’t know her at all, but then after coitus he began to get to know her and things went downhill from there.
That’s true, but by the same token, wait a bit (a few days or at least a full conversation) to see if you can get along with someone on a basic level before jumping into bed with them.
That’s all well and good except it didn’t happen and now they’re in this situation. Scolding him for indiscretion doesn’t do anything — it’s not his OR her fault that their personalities clash. I highly doubt that he would’ve slept with her if he knew how incompatible they are prior to bedtime.
Yes, its true it is past the point. I brought it up, that if *I* was the girlfriend, I would be bothered by this, in addition to his behavior post-conception. Nothing more, nothing less.
If you’re going to be all bent out of shape if the stranger you’re sleeping with has your baby then I’d ask for a hand job instead.
It did say that he was “furious” at her for not getting an abortion. I’m guessing thats where most of us got the idea that he was trying to push it on her.
Our resident male troll is back and defending his gender.
Well, I guess that makes two of us.
I don’t see anything wrong with his points. Perhaps you’d like to refute them instead of going the easy route and calling him a troll simply because he disagrees with you.
Nobody wants to refute what John says in his first post. It’s not a crime to have unprotected sex, dangerous and irresponsible, but not a crime. They were broken up so he had no obligation to the LW. Everyone is pretty much in agreement there. People are calling the LW scum because he’s willing to abandon a child he helped create. Because he’s treating the mother of his child, and his child, with such disdain and disregarding his responsibility to him/her. People are calling the LW names (harsh names to be sure) based on the way she is reacting in this letter. She has every right to be shocked and upset about the turn of the events, but the way she is reacting; blaming everything on the woman, judging her, calling HER names, is wrong and she comes off as an immature, witchy teenager.
Yes, please see cmarie’s comment.
She’s also calling him a troll because he likes to show up only for these types of letters when he can tell DW commentators that we are all obviously wrong and from the she-women man hating club. troll label aside, we do get together monthly and burn ex-boyfriend’s in effigy so he’s got us there.
Eggzactlee, though I don’t burn effigies as we have Spare the Air days in CA.
But simply disagreeing with others does NOT fit the definition of a troll, not by a long shot. One common definition: “a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response”.
BTW, believe it or not, I usually agree with the majority of the commenters here. It’s when I disagree that I usually feel I want to write a comment. It’s ironic that some of the same people who fire off insults left and right on this forum, feel so offended when someone simply disagrees with them.
I disagreed with a lot of your comments but I still enjoyed them. When all of our comments are just reiterations of the same sentiment it can get boring.
And _JSW_, if you’re reading this too, thanks for an interesting evening.
thus why I said ‘troll label aside’. I don’t have an opinion on your status of human or troll via DW forums. And John, be real for a moment, and honestly tell me you jump in on a number of issues here and not to just defend your brethren who you perceive to be under attack. entertaining for sure, but don’t be so surprised when people call you out on it a la Landygirl.
Yeah, but there’s a lot of harshness toward the LW as well. I believe I saw the “C-word” used at least once.
It’s equal-opportunity name-calling.
i thought that was a bit harsh as well – although her anger is unjustified, she’s actually just reacting the same way 99% of people would do in that same situation.
99% of women would not blame the other woman, baselessly accuse her of trying to trap her bf, be angry that someone she has no relationship with has chosen not have an abortion per their wishes, treat this woman as if she is solely responsible for child she only helped to conceive.
I know you may not have that much faith in women based on your comments (here and on previous posts) but just look at what the women on this page have written. They are all pointing out that the bf is equally responsible for the child’s existence and should respect her right to choose.Not only that but they advise the LW to consider her bf role in this drama and not take her anger out on the pregnant woman (who owes her nothing)
Note I said 99% of “PEOPLE” in that situation, not “women”. In my experience, both men and women tend to blame their romantic competitor for everything, no matter where the fault lies (have you ever seen the Jerry Springer show?)
99 % of people would necessarily mean about 99 % of women. The divide between the populations of men and women that make up “people” differs only by a couple of percent world wide, so unless your definition of the term “people” consists largely of men, that argument falls through.
Also, it delights me that you base your assumptions on general human behavior on the Jerry Springer Show.
Oh, and of course, he’s also called a “dick”, and “ass”, and other choice names.
While it is true he has no obligation to someone he’s broken up with, he does have an obligation to not go around making babies with women he doesn’t even know. And, yes, he should be taking precautions against STDs because even if he never gets back with the LW, is he going to remain celibate for the rest of his life? He has an obligation to any future sex partner to keep himself clean.
He has an obligation to use condoms until he is in a committed relationship to prevent unwanted pregnancy and to prevent HIMSELF from contracting an STD (and thus spreading it around). Only men-children would not use a condom in this situation. This whole thing could have been prevented that way. So he literally now has to reap what he sows as the consequences of his actions.
I don’t think anyone thinks he’s an ass for having sex with someone after a split. If he didn’t want to wear condom…whatever…I’ll even give him the benefit there. But the issue is when he decided not to pull out but bust a load into a stranger…he took on that risk of possibily having the responsibility to pay for a kid for the next 18 years.
I’m a guy, and I think that the BF is a loser scum bag. He is placing all of the blame of this “two minute” relationship that resulted in a baby on the women, and that is pretty shitty. He is also probably telling all sorts of lies to keep the LW with him.
“Some said he deserved the label because he exposed the LW to STDs. Are you kidding? Yes, he had unprotected sex. But that’s a crime?”
Relax. No one called him a criminal. It is scummy though.
I would love, just ONCE on this site, for one of the male commenters to address shitty man behavior. Just once. Instead, you pick on women and insinuate that we’re ~unreasonable or some shit.
This dude barebacked some girl, knocked her up, demanded she abort, and then said he wouldn’t take responsibility for his child. That’s shitty. I don’t know how you can defend it.
I think two posts up Bagge72 did.
Hi. I’ve done that on a number of occasions. Thanks for noticing, though.
And you wonder why people accuse the threads of being hostile toward males?
Sorry. That was supposed to be a reply to Temperance, not ele4phant
Ummm… he’s scum because he abandoned a woman he impregnated. Doesn’t have to be romantically involved with this woman, but he wants nothing to do with the child that he helped to create, or the woman he can’t stand.
He’s scum all around in my book. LW, what happens if YOU get pregnant? He’d be out the door on you as well.
“He’s scum because he abandoned a woman he impregnated.”
Oh my.
First, “abandoned” is a bit misleading, since (a) we don’t know that they’d broken up before or after she discovered she was pregnant and (b) he’s agreed to pay for the child.
Second, after all this talk of how disgusting he was for – supposedly – not using a condom, not knowing her all that long, etc., why no talk about this woman doing the exact same thing (number it takes to tango = 2) and having to deal with the consequences? What is he supposed to do to prove he’s not scum? Stay with someone he dislikes because she became pregnant?
Does this mean, then, that you advocate that every woman who ever gets pregnant must (a) have the child and (b) stay with the father, lest she be scum?
Please. Those double standards take up too much room. Consider paring them down a bit.
Ok….you were on a break…he met some women club and after “2 minutes” decided to have sex with her (which people do I’m not against a 1 night stand)….but he doesn’t throw a condom on because she’s on the pill (so he’s not protected from STDs and he has no verification she’s actually using the pill responsibly)…..and if that level of irresponsibility isn’t enough, he “ahem” finishes the job inside of her! Um hello, he’s 40 years old, he knows how babies are made. For someone who “can’t stand” a woman and does not want to have a child you think he would make slightly more responsibly decisions. He’s a real winner.
And how can you be mad at the woman? Its her body, there is a million reasons she might choose to have this child, even if she never so much as speaks to your prince again. Even if she’s a lunatic psycho who got pregs on purpose, you have no one to blame but your boyfriend. When he chose to bust a nut in a stranger he took on that risk. Now he’s going to have to deal with it, even if he wants nothing to do with the child…his wallet will.
And with that said, he should confirm the woman is indeed pregnant and get a paternity test when the child is born.
And now onto you, ummmm you say he can’t bare to be without you and never loved anyone as much as he loves you….well his actions sure say otherwise. You were on a break, not even completely seperated from the relationship, and he clearly has some space in that undying love for you to have unprotected sex with a stranger.
I can’t even write anymore, my brain hurts.
Damn that Ross and Rachel!
My takeaway from this is that men should never have sex unless they’re sterile or want to have children, and even then they should never have sex unless they plan to never have sex with a different person in the future because there is absolutely no way to avoid all sexually transmitted diseases aside from the complete lack of sexual contact. Furthermore, men should be held at least halfway responsible for the resulting pregnancy and child but should have no authority to decide upon his involvement, even though consensual sex involves both people equally.
Therefore, unless a man has sex only with the intent of becoming a father and only with the intent of never being with another woman, he is an asshole.
Is this a valid summary? Because, since you cannot prevent pregnancy and you cannot prevent sexual transmission of disease, I see no other way to look at it. Risk reduction is not relevant, because the risk never goes to 0%.
That is pretty much it. Glad to see you’ve really listened to fellow commentators, reflection on their contributions carefully and made a meaningful contribution to the DW community.
Well, hey, point out the flaws in what I said, then. What I see is a huge surge of anger at the guy and all sorts of reflections on what type of person he must be, and relatively little anger towards the woman, whose pregnancy and right to bear the child are apparently sacrosanct.
Since there is no way to guarantee pregnancy won’t occur aside from proof of sterility, this righteous DW anger would likely be aimed at any man who didn’t end up wanting the child (no matter what precautions had been taken), likely by the same people who’d turn red in the face about any story where a man was forcibly stopping someone from getting an abortion. It’s a double standard.
She didn’t ask for any help with the other women so why would people be throwing out their opinions on that? She asked what to do with this guy.
“whose pregnancy and right to bear the child are apparently sacrosanct.”-yep, true story
“any story where a man was forcibly stopping someone from getting an abortion”- Yes, that is terrible of the man in question.
And yes it a double standard…oh wait men don’t have uteruses, silly me. Not a double standard at all.
Seriously, this makes my blood boil. Absolutely BOIL.
“Men should be held at least halfway responsible for the resulting pregnancy and child but should have no authority to decide upon his involvement.” Pardon me, but…are you fucking KIDDING me?!
You mean, a man shouldn’t be able to decide to throw money at his child, but never once be involved whatsoever in the child’s life? You mean, he should be able to decide whether or not he’s emotionally distant and vacant from the life he had equal part in creating? You mean, he should decide whether or not he leaves a kid constantly yearning for attention they’ll never get? Or pining away for a father figure they’ll never, ever have?
Fuck yes, he shouldn’t have a choice in that. I’m sorry, but sex creates children. Bottom line. And if you aren’t ready for a child, then use a goddamn condom. And realize that when you have sex, you could very well get someone pregnant. And as a grown adult; as a person who’s lived 40 years and should have acquired a sense of decency and maturity; you should own up to the consequences of your actions. God knows the mother of this child will have no choice but to do that. And he shouldn’t, either.
It’s not fair to create a child and then abandon it. It’s not fair to create more fucked up human beings by being the father a kid never had; by making them think there’s something about them that wasn’t good enough. I can’t tell you how many children have grown up thinking something was wrong with THEM because they had a parent who didn’t want them.
Though I’ll grant you one concession: Not having this man in a child’s life might be a blessing in disguise.
Wow RR, I like it when you get angry. 🙂 I don´t think I´ve ever seen you swear on here before!
Ah, nothing like some good ol’ Internet fighting.
No, I’m not kidding you.
“You mean, a man shouldn’t be able to decide to throw money at his child, but never once be involved whatsoever in the child’s life?”
I don’t feel anyone should be forced to be a part of a child’s life. That goes for women as well. However, not once did I say anything like what you’re implying. I think that one should be able to decide if one is ready to be a parent and, if not, make that clear when there is time to abort the pregnancy. If the woman doesn’t want the child, she has that option. If the man doesn’t, apparently you feel that he should not have that option. I’m not arguing that he should be able to force an abortion. I’m arguing that he should be able to get out of the responsibility in the same way that a woman can get out of that responsibility.
I think it is unfair that the man can’t have sex without the possibility of becoming a parent, but the woman can.
“Fuck yes, he shouldn’t have a choice in that. I’m sorry, but sex creates children. Bottom line. And if you aren’t ready for a child, then use a goddamn condom.”
Again, this implies that a pregnancy must lead irrevocably to a child. That isn’t the case. As a woman, you have control over that. Also, it implies that using a condom prevents pregnancy. Nope. Just reduces the chances.
However, RR, I’ll assume that every time you’ve ever had sex, it has been with someone you wanted in your like as a co-parent and that it was at a time in your life that a child would have been welcomed.
“It’s not fair to create a child and then abandon it. It’s not fair to create more fucked up human beings by being the father a kid never had; by making them think there’s something about them that wasn’t good enough. I can’t tell you how many children have grown up thinking something was wrong with THEM because they had a parent who didn’t want them.”
Exactly why I advocate abortions in those cases. However, since the pregnant ex of the LW’s ex seems to want the child and seems to know the guy’s take on it, it is apparently her decision to bring a child into that reality.
I find it absurd that there is a debate about this guy’s right to have unprotected sex as if it’s ever a good idea.
Maybe the “man” in me is coming out today, but in a time where all you hear about is the War on Women and ‘how dare any man tell a woman what they can and cannot do with their bodies’ that anyone on here can say this man doesn’t have a right to do whatever he pleases with his body. So long as he isn’t raping people, who are you to say he has no right to have unprotected sex?
The way I figure, he can go ahead and have unprotected sex all he wants but I still maintain its a bad idea. But I agree – no one should tell anyone what they can and can’t do with their own bodies. It just doesn’t mean that everything will be acceptable whole-heartedly.
Oh I agree that its a bad idea, but still a choice to be made individually.
Ok, let’s say he has the right to have as much unprotected sex as he wants. He can bang the neighbor, the lunch lady, and his friendly neighborhood bartender…whoever. His right to bang someone without protection could end badly and in this case it did.
Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean that you should. People need to think about their actions and the consequences. This woman is having a baby, not a concept. This child will have no father and while I don’t feel bad for the parents, I feel very bad for this child.
Having the right to do something OBVIOUSLY doesn’t mean it’s always a good idea.
“I think it is unfair that the man can’t have sex without the possibility of becoming a parent, but the woman can.”
Where do stand on the fact that when a pregnancy occurs it’s only the woman who has to go through either an abortion or childbirth and the man never does either?
Fair or not, the facts are what they are. We all know that going in. No one should be shocked or angry when they become a parent after doing the exact thing that causes pregnancy.
”Again, this implies that a pregnancy must lead irrevocably to a child. That isn’t the case. As a woman, you have control over that.”
You are talking as if a decision to terminate a pregnancy is as easy as taking out the garbage, as if there are no consequences to it whatsoever. I am sorry, but that is just dumb.
I never grew up thinking there was something wrong with me because my biological father wasn’t ready or willing to be a father to me. My mother taught me better than that. And hopefully this child’s mother will, too. Having the foresight to step out early doesn’t make him an asshole.
However, I don’t think it sounds like he’s ready or willing to settle down with either woman. So he and the LW should break up for good. It doesn’t sound like she’s ready or willing to deal with him having fathered a child, especially if he changes his mind and wants to be a part of its life.
I agree with a lot of what you have been saying, but he clearly states he will be a deadbeat father to the child in question from what the LW states which is the main reason for his villification.
The point you bring up here is why I can’t wrap my head around one night stands. This is always the risk and I’d wager 2% of people or less would actually take the time to ask anything about a potential pregancy before the stick gets dipped…
My personal philosophy due to the current legal malarky is I need to know their standing on what happens if contraceptives fail and, if they would keep the child, is the person somebody I could see myself staying with…both of those things usually require me to know someone longer than “2 mins.”
Not JUST due to the legal malarky..I was too focused on getting that word in. haha
I’ve seen malarky thrown around quite a bit in this thread. It’s a good word. Malarky. Malarky. Malarky. We should use it more often.
No it isn’t. Your are putting words into people’s mouths. I don’t know why you don’t understand that people think this guy is a scum, because he has said that he is going to be a deadbeat dad, and is pretty much taking no responsibility for what happened. People think LW is out of line, because she has no right to be pissed at this women for wanting to keep a child, and no right to make up reasons why she is having this baby in the first place.
As for the STD’s nobody is saying that you shouldn’t have sex because you could get them, they are saying that if you are going to have unprotected sex, and then sleep with a different person after that, you at the very least owe it to them, to tell them that you did this, and if they ask, you should get tested. Now I also believe that the LW is exposing herself to STD’s not this guy, because she knows that he had unprotected sex with another women, and she still chooses to be with him either way.
Account Representative
Um please feel free to disregard teh account representative, that may have been for something else haha.
I’m taking back my thumb up then.
I do think that in their blind rage, some of the commenters have backed themselves into the position that men become the property of any woman they sleep with, as well as their ex’s. Though I doubt that’s what they really believe.
Not everyone believes that. I’m sorry you feel you are in the minority. I appreciate the points you’re trying to make.
are you creating multiple accounts to “like” your own comments? Who the hell else is clicking that button??!
This thread is giving me a headache.
I am willing to give this guy a teeney, tiny shred of doubt that he is in shock and is responding poorly, but that he could be a decent guy who will come around wants he gets his head around the situation.
There is no 100 percent way to prevent pregnancy. Not with hormonal BC, not with 2 methods of BC, not when one of the individuals has been sterilized. If you’re going to have sex with someone you are not in a relationship with, be prepared that a *pregnancy* might happen. And because a man’s physical committment to the pregnancy ends after coming, the woman gets to make the call. Is that fair, well no, but nine months of growing a baby inside you, followed with birth, breast feeding, ect isn’t really an equitable way to split reproduction either. So tough shit.
If a guy *does not* want to be a father, he shouldn’t be having sex with women unless he knows, for sure, they have a similar attitude when it comes unintended pregnancy. If she doesn’t, DO NOT have sex with her.
As for you LW, I’m not even sure exactly what you’re asking. Should you be frustrated at the situation? Sure. Sad that the life you thought was going to happen when you got back with the BF is going to get messier? Sure. But the kid is coming, and if your BF is a decent guy, he *should* be there for his child (if he doesn’t come around eventually, you may need to consider if he’s someone worth being with). You are certainly not the first person in this situation, and its worked out well for others, so you relationship may not be *doomed*, but it will be certainly complicated.
You don’t really get to have a say in this situation, but encourage your boyfriend to have a relationship with this child. If there’s anyone who’s unfairly been put in this mess, its not you its the baby.
“If a guy *does not* want to be a father, he shouldn’t be having sex with women unless he knows, for sure, they have a similar attitude when it comes unintended pregnancy.”
There is no way to know this. And, in fact, there is arguably no way for the woman to actually be 100% certain of her final attitude prior to becoming pregnant. I’ve known people who thought of abortions as no big deal who opted to keep unexpected and poorly timed pregnancies, and people who thought they’d never consider an abortion but who ultimately ended up having one.
Wheww. Want to be disappointed, read the comments first and then read the letter. I was thinking this letter was going to be juicy!!
Here’s how I interpreted it. Dude and LW split, Dude meets Lady, Dude and Lady go home together. No one has a condom, Lady says “It’s cool, I’m on the pill” and Dude says “awesome, I already took my Viagra anyway, can’t really run to the store.” They bone. They probably hang out for a few weeks more, she kind of gets on his nerves for whatever reason and starts to bug the shit out of him. One of the draw backs of only knowing someone for a short period of time. Month later, Lady finds out she’s preggers. Dude’s inner-monologue consists of the word “Fuck” clouded by that ringing noise you get after leaving a concert. They talk, he’d says he’d rather not have a kid and would like her to get an abortion. She says she thinks she’d like to keep it. He says fine, I’ll support you financially, but really I don’t wanna be a dada.
Call me crazy, but I don’t see any party’s reaction to this crazy. I think that it does, as most have pointed out, take two people to get pregnant. We learned that in middle school. But I think that both people have equal responsibility and equal rights in expressing a view. Meaning, a woman SHOULD ask the guy who knocked her up what he would like. She doesn’t have to listen to him, but the concern at least needs to be addressed. Now, the woman could want it and the dude not want it. That happens. But the woman needs to be prepared to accept his involvement as strictly financial. Just as the guy needs to respect the lady’s decision to keep it. He can’t force her to get an abortion, and she can’t force him to be in the kids life. It’s a two way street guys. A guy does have every right to tell her “look, I’m not ready to do this. What are your thoughts on an abortion? Against it? Fine, I’ll support you in raising the child, but I’m not prepared to be a dad.” Yes, it is the less than desirable course to take but he is, in a way, owning up to his responsibility (monetarily). If he doesn’t think he’d be a good dad, he probably won’t be. It’s probably best he’s not in the kids life anyway. It’s easy to think the guy is a scumbag for not wanting to be a dad. But by that same logic, you must be prepared to call a woman who doesn’t want to be a mom a scumbag for getting an abortion (in the instances the guy wants to keep it but that woman doesn’t). You need to be consistent in your line of reasoning. I am pro-choice, for both woman and for men.
Why do you assume everything is so laid back though? It would be nice if he said he’d rather not have a kid, but he said that he is not happy that she is pregnant, and asked if she could abort. He also said he is furious with this women for wanting to keep the child, because they were only together for 2 minutes. He also didn’t say “fine, I’ll support you financially, but really I don’t wanna be a dada.” He said that he would obviously pay but wants nothing to do with the women or the baby. So again I think you are making it seem like he treated her like a human being, and talked about this rationally, but really, he was pissed at her for having his baby, threw some money at her, and told her to never come back again.
That’s true – I figured there was enough speculation on dickish behavior I’d just float a more tame scenario by. But really, no one knows his true reaction. He could be upset (and who wouldn’t be) if he didn’t want it but she was keeping it anyway. But the LW could be using selective words to paint him in a certain light, such as replacing “upset” with “furious.” So me making it a laid-back scenario is no more absurd than making it a scenario where he a shitty human.
*ETA: also, most of my comments on here are usually light-heardely dumbed down just to lighten the mood a little. My above reenactment was not a true depiction of the dialogue I believe took place.
Oh I definitely agree, a laid back scenario is no more absurd, it really depends on how people take what he is saying. That’s why I kind of went to the extreme with the whole “Threw some money” thing.
I always try to take what the LW says at face value though, and a lot of times I turn out to be very wrong when the updates come around, but I still always think it’s better to react to what they said not what I think they said. I also think that some LW’s after reading the comments change there stories in the updates to try to save face though.
Only it is the LW – who seems intent on absolving the boyfriend from all responsibility – saying furious. Why are people here creating scenarios that aren’t in the letter?
The dude in your story is a pretty big idiot if he doesn’t want to be a dada but the word of a woman he had known for two minutes that she was on the pill was enough to get him to bone her. And he’s a bigger idiot if he doesn’t think he’s responsible for what’s happening to him now.
Seriously, doesn’t anyone get off on oral anymore?
By that logic, virtually every dude on the planet is an idiot. Seriously, that is your interpretation of the male thought process? We only have sex if we’re ready to be a father? I get owning up to your responsibilities in an unwanted pregnancy, but you can’t really think that is going through every non-idiot male’s mind when he gets ready to have sex. There’s a fun scenario. Senior year of high school, you turn to your boyfriend and say the words he’s been dying to hear “I think I’m ready.” He responds with “Great, I’m totally ready to be a dad anyway.” “Uh, no, we’re using protection.” “No, I know. But still. It could fail. And if so, I’m ready. Let’s start a family…you know, if the condom doesn’t work.” Is the same thing going through a woman’s mind when she decides to have sex? I know you have to keep the possibility in the back of your mind, but you’ve really been ready and willing for motherhood every time you’ve decided to sleep with someone? That would be the end of any sort of relationship sex. “Baby, our apartment isn’t big enough for a baby. Let’s wait to have sex until we have a bigger place. Or until we decide to start a family.”
Well said.
“By that logic, virtually every dude on the planet is an idiot. Seriously, that is your interpretation of the male thought process? We only have sex if we’re ready to be a father? I get owning up to your responsibilities in an unwanted pregnancy, but you can’t really think that is going through every non-idiot male’s mind when he gets ready to have sex. There’s a fun scenario. Senior year of high school, you turn to your boyfriend and say the words he’s been dying to hear “I think I’m ready.” He responds with “Great, I’m totally ready to be a dad anyway.” “Uh, no, we’re using protection.” “No, I know. But still. It could fail. And if so, I’m ready. Let’s start a family…you know, if the condom doesn’t work.” Is the same thing going through a woman’s mind when she decides to have sex? I know you have to keep the possibility in the back of your mind, but you’ve really been ready and willing for motherhood every time you’ve decided to sleep with someone? That would be the end of any sort of relationship sex. “Baby, our apartment isn’t big enough for a baby. Let’s wait to have sex until we have a bigger place. Or until we decide to start a family.”
You’re reading waaaayyyy too much into what I said. I’m not implying anything other than exactly what I wrote. I don’t care what ridiculous conversation anyone does or doesn’t have before sex. Consider the consequences or don’t. Your choice. I DO think it’s completely absurd to be furious with someone else however when you become a parent after choosing to do the exact thing that can cause pregnancy.
Most women hate giving blowjobs, it seems. Or so so many of you all keep saying….
You’re expecting women to put the penis of some guy they’ve known for “two minutes” in their mouth?!?!?!?!
I think we can all agree that the safest thing for men to do is to simply masturbate alone, while wearing a condom.
and then incinerating the condom.
I think we need to take a poll. Out of my 5 closest friends only one isn’t a fan. The rest of us enjoy it, I think people don’t give the blow job enough credit. We tried to explain to my friend who isn’t a fan how giving a blow job can make you feel empowered and sexy at the same time. She still doesn’t get it, but we tried.
My husband has no complaints :-p
Can’t say I’d give one to a stranger but intercourse with a stranger isn’t my cup of tea either. Just sayin’ there are options, oral being only one of them.
I must be in the minority because oral sex is a regular part of sex btw my husband and I and I’d definitely miss it if it wasn’t. I had no idea most women hated it.
I’ll weigh in on this… If it’s a guy I don’t know well enough regarding his sexual prowess, no way am I going down on him. Blowjobs are a practice in breath holding and gag reflex control, and my jaw ends up hurting pretty badly if I do it for long enough. Unless I’m sure the guy will make it worth my while, I’m not going to do it.
On the other hand, once I’m in a committed and loving relationship, I like giving blow jobs, even though I don’t have any physical satisfaction from it. I find it enjoyable to do because it makes him happy, and it turns me on to get him so turned on. Any woman who can’t see the pleasure in such a “sacrifice” is too selfish to be in a relationship.
I agree with SweetsandBeets. For me, the joy of the act is not actually giving it, but the enjoyment your partner gets. So for someone I love and care deeply about, its enjoyable. But for someone more causal, that isn’t really there as much.
“It’s easy to think the guy is a scumbag for not wanting to be a dad. But by that same logic, you must be prepared to call a woman who doesn’t want to be a mom a scumbag for getting an abortion (in the instances the guy wants to keep it but that woman doesn’t). You need to be consistent in your line of reasoning.”
I kept waiting for someone to say this. If a woman gets pregnant from a quick, meaningless relationship and tells the father that she’s expecting, and the father wants desperately to keep the baby, what do we call the woman who aborts the child anyways? A scumbag? If the father is ready to accept 100% responsibility for his actions and keep the child, but the woman, not ready for motherhood, wants to abort the child and move on, what do we call this woman? A douchenozzle?
personally i think this is a confusing, gray area that I’m not sure I know the answer to. Because the woman in question has to take on being pregnant for 9 months, giving birth, etc. I don’t think it’s necessarily fair. But, in that case as well I would have told the woman to make sure in the future she better protected herself.
Too bad men can’t get pregnant.
I agree. I mean, hey, we certainly couldn’t be any more careless or reckless with this precious gift than women keep on proving to be…
Nice way to generalize. I know plenty of women who are exemplary parents. Is this a schtick or do you genuinely dislike women?
It’s not a comparable situation at all. I wouldn’t consider him a scumbag for asking her to consider abortion. It’s interesting how none of these comments address that he SPECIFICALLY said that he would have nothing to do with his own child. That’s f’d.
Because women are always unfairly saddled with the burden of child birth, we will always be the ones who make the choices about what’s going on in our own bodies.
Great, yet another fine example of the sheer brilliance and intellect of more and more heterosexuals — in this case, the male — whom increasingly seem to have all the knowledge and intellect as to where babies come from as, say, your average comatose five year old.
Move on already, LW. Move on. That’s my advice.
But if YOU really are so fucked up and so pathetic that you want to build a life with a man who for intents are purposes wants to simply abandon his own child — have at it. While you’re at it make sure to pop out a few more kids yourself, too. Just keep right on thinking about yourselves as so many of you seem so want to do…
Increasingly, more and more, these letters just simply disgust me.
I’m not disagreeing with your assessment at all, however, I have to question you on this…do you really believe that if it were possible to two men or two women to get pregnant that they never would and things like this would never happen just because they were heterosexual? Last I checked being gay doesn’t mean you are also a genius who never makes mistakes.
*homosexual
Considering the fact that I know far more gay guys having sex (and lots more of it, with more partners, too) than I do straight people and I can honestly say none of my good gay friends have ever magically come down with HIV, yet I can name 8 people who “against all odd” just happened get themselves or their lovers knocked up… Seriously. 8.
Now, I suppose, you could argue that my gay friends are more careful because death is probably a bigger inconvenience that a child you don’t want and most likely won’t really give a flying fuck about anyway… But no, seriously… Apparently many straight people are just too dumb to use a condom correctly. Really, people. It’s not that fucking hard.
The risk of pregnancy if something goes wrong – broken condom, etc. – is significantly higher than the risk of contracting HIV, which is actually not all that contagious. Deadly, sure, but not highly infectious.
So the fact that none of your good friends have HIV (which is good to hear) doesn’t necessarily mean that they are more capable of using a condom than the heterosexuals you know.
Not highly infectious, huh? I’m not exactly sure that the one million people currently estimated to be living in the U.S. would agree with you, but I am fairly certain the 500,000 dead definitely wouldn’t…
Not sure what it is now, but when I studied it in college the chance was about 1 in 10 (if you had unprotected sex with a known infected person). Of all the methods, IV drug use is the most effective.
living with HIV…
Sorry, BGM. 🙁
Wait, whoops, no. To clarify, I am NOT living with HIV. I meant post “living with HIV” that as a correction in that I left the “with HIV” out of my previous post. Sorry for any confusion! 🙂
I thought you were disputing the comments about it being “not that contagious” by disclosing that you were HIV positive.
Sorry!
No worries. It was a vague post on my part… Made even more confusing by the fact that _jsw_ was posting at roughly the same time and then his posted first.
Well, there are more than a million people who have been unexpectedly pregnant in this country, so arguably those risks are higher.
And if your original point was that gay men are smart enough to use condoms but that heterosexual couples seem too dumb to do so, that 1M number implies you’re wrong.
I agree that condoms provide significantly better protection than not wearing anything. I just disagree that sexual preference has anything to do with how likely one is to use a condom all the time.
It is interesting that I have never met anybody with HIV who just “magically” got that way… Instead, they have all been very upfront and honest about their mistakes… “I was careless…” Meaning they don’t claim have been wearing a condom when they weren’t. They don’t see the need to lie about it…
Meanwhile, my friends and I who haven’t gotten HIV all (surprise, surprise!) religiously wear condoms…
Idiots like the guy in the letter, don’t. End. Of. Story.
So then, to be clear, your point isn’t that gay men are more likely to wear condoms. It’s that they’re more likely to be honest about not wearing them when something bad results.
I think it’s more like HIV sufferers are more likely to be honest about how they got it because there isn’t a societal blind eye for bullshitting about your personal responsibility for ending up in the predicament.
No, I actually think that of us effectively use condoms… Most of the dumb idiots I know that knocked girls up all thought they were safe because they were told all was well, “I’m on the pill… PS. My biological clock is so, so ticking!!!”
I agree with the “magically” thing. Have you noticed how people sometimes own up to having unprotected sex, but it’s always when they didn’t get pregnant? I have never heard anybody going through an unwanted pregnancy say they didn’t take care. Everyone was always on the pill, or the condom broke and plan b didn’t work, or things like that. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but I find it hard to believe that people who don’t take care don’t get pregnant and every unwanted pregnancy is always the product of birth control failure.
Heterophobe.
Heterophobe, hmmm, that’s new one. And I am, I must admit. Your constant blatant disregard for others is increasingly more and more shocking… Plus it is only the heteros that are so steadfast and determined to keep fucking people like me over and over… All the while, claiming they want smaller government… Then get the FUCK out of my bedroom and out of my fucking life…
but all those prominent male politicians usually turn out to be gay and not hetero at all..
Plenty don’t. Actually, the most powerful and damaging ever — don’t… Gingrich, Cheney, Santorum, and Bush spring to mind.
I think Dan Savage an Santorum have some sexual tension though.
I showed up late to the hot debate in the comments (damn you work lol), but to put this in perspective for me, I was born to relatively young parents and now at 25, my dad is a few years older then this gem of a man in this letter. I would like to believe that someone near my dad’s own age would have more sense than this.
Sleeping with someone so soon after a breakup? Fine. Sleeping without protection with someone who you knew for “two minutes” ? LOL What? And the case for this man gets more and more ridiculous. LW, why in the hell would you want to get with this guy right now? This poor unborn child who I feel very, very sorry for already, is not the problem. It’s all the adults running away being irresponsible, generally stupid, and downright insane that make this situation such a mess. The fact that you are even considering getting back with this guy “right now” blows my mind.
Your dad of course has had 25 years of having a daughter and being a grown up to teach him to have more sense.
This man in the letter has spent those same 25 years being an ever-aging manchild.
First of all, they knew each other for two months, not two minutes. This desicion has nothing to do with you and everything to do with him. You can have a relationship with someone with a child but you have to be ready for it. Reading your letter, you sound really immature and not ready to be kn a relationship with a man that has a child.
Funny, he only came back to you after he found out the other girl was pregnant. Wether he likes it or not, she’s keeping the baby. He should have taken more precautions.
Get tested for an std too because your “love” obviously did not use a condom.
And MOA. This guy sounds like scum. No “man” would abandon a woman he impregnates. He doesnt have to have a relationship with her, but like it or not, if hes a real man, he will be there for HIS child, and even his ex.
Reading your letter, you are far too immature to handle this. MOA, ASAP.
I think the fact that he is angry at this woman for not having an abortion speaks loudly and clearly as to his character. While I am pro-choice, I would never have an abortion. If I got pregnant by a guy who begged me to have one, I would tell him if he doesn’t want this child he can just fuck off and I will raise him/her but I will not kill my own child for him.
I get from the tone of your letter that you are bitter. I totally understand. I’m currently going through a rough breakup with my partner of nearly 9 years, and if this happened to me two months from now I would be having angry, irrational emotions too. But you have to take a deep breath and be an adult about it, seriously. Tell him to fuck off; if he couldn’t live without you he should have figured it out before impregnating someone he can’t stand. Do what’s best for you, as difficult as that is. This asshole is not the answer.
MOST IMPORTANTLY. It’s “codswallop”.
I’m so glad SOMEONE pointed that out. Thank you, Roxy84!
Where’s Addie?
Is anyone else eagerly anticipating the update to this one? Oh boy.
Oh yeah!
I’d at least like a comment from the LW, since, as much fun as this has been, I do agree that it seems not unlikely that the letter is contrived. A LW comment would at least help me to believe it’s valid.
I’m the letter writer.
Good enough?
Not good enough. You’ve never used malarky in any prior comment, so I just don’t believe you.
Instead of re-commenting this in the 23 different places above where it applies, I’ll say it here (again):
Why is everyone assuming he didn’t use a condom? It is never said in the letter that he didn’t, and the apparent assumption is that, since the woman said she was on the pill, he must not have used one.
I’m not saying he did. I don’t know. But there’s a huge amount of anger here over the “fact” that he didn’t, even though there’s no statement by the LW either way. As others have said, she could have been on the pill and he could have used a condom and she still could have gotten pregnant.
Oh, please. There is an obvious reason why we are all pretty damn sure he didn’t use a condom — For starters, it’d have been the big leading point of the letter… “He so doesn’t know how this happened! Not only was she on the pill, but he wore a condom! It’s like the universe is all conspiring against us! Please help…”
The letter implies that the only protection used was the birth control. She says “the girl says she got pregnant while on birth control, puh leaaaaaaaaaase. I think she is just trying to trap my man, who is untrappable”.
Paraphrased of course. But I almost laughed out loud when I read “untrappable”. LMAO
Apparently the LW couldn’t trap him either since they broke up.
I honestly don’t care if he did or didn’t. He’s an idiot either way.
“He’s an idiot either way.”
Given that you’ve never met him, how is it that you can be so sure of that? If he wore a condom and if she was on the pill, he’s an idiot because… what? Because he had sex?
So, in your opinion, anyone who has sex without wanting to get pregnant is an idiot? I’m just trying to clarify the parameters here.
“Because he had sex?”
No. Because one of the known outcomes is happening to him and he’s pissed at someone else.
“So, in your opinion, anyone who has sex without wanting to get pregnant is an idiot?”
Again, no. But anyone who consents to sex and is then furious at their sex partner when a baby is the outcome is an idiot.
I got the impression that he was furious that she opted to keep the baby and quite possibly that she misrepresented being on birth control, not that she had the audacity to become pregnant after sex.
As others have said, arguably this is more denial and shock than actual fury.
However, sure, something unexpected and life-altering happened to him, and he’s upset, so surely he’s an idiot. If someone ahead of you slams on their brakes because they want to read a billboard and you hit them, I’d guess you’d be not be upset, because it’s your fault and you’re aware that cars ahead of you can stop at any point.
LOL. You don’t honestly believe that logic that applies to one situation should be applied to all situations, do you?
I really only mean exactly what I said. The LW said that he is furious that she’s keeping the baby. Not that he’s upset about the situation but “furious with this woman”. Not that she had the audacity to get pregnant after sex but ” for keeping the baby”.
The fact the option to abort or not is a woman’s right is no secret. Neither is that birth control is not infallible. Why he would be furious with anyone other than himself is beyond me.
“If someone ahead of you slams on their brakes because they want to read a billboard and you hit them, I’d guess you’d be not be upset, because it’s your fault and you’re aware that cars ahead of you can stop at any point. ”
Well…yeah. You shouldn’t be following so closely behind someone that if they were to suddenly slam on their brakes you wouldn’t be able to stop (for a billboard, for a kid running across the street, because they’re being dicks, ect). That’s why in rear-end situations, the second driver is liable, right?
Why are you so obsessed with sex? Seriously.
I know that everyone is focusing on that, but I think that the response would have been the same even if the LW had acknowledged this. Her boyfriend has tripped over the third rail of reproductive rights, which is the question of man’s obligations towards a woman who has become pregnant by deception. The LW clearly believes that this is the case, and an objective reading of the circumstances she describes suggests that it’s a legitimate consideration. Otherwise we’re looking at an extremely improbable event which the woman in question was able to predict with uncanny accuracy.
Pregnancy by deception? Like if the guy is unconscious or doesn’t know how babies are made?
“…an objective reading of the circumstances she describes suggests that it’s a legitimate consideration.”
This letter is written by someone who wasn’t even involved in the conception of the child, so I don’t believe there can be an “objective reading of the circumstances”.
.. but what if she did deceive him? Does that change your opinion?
I can’t even imagine how a grown man can be deceived into impregnating someone. Can you elaborate?
God, are you REALLY this dense? It’s fucking simple. It’s called lying. It’s as simple as saying you are on the pill when you aren’t. That is called deception. And as far as I can tell, it happens an awful lot…
When a woman tells you that she’s on the pill, whether it’s true or not, and you believe that means that you cannot impregnate her you are the idiot.
Having a man use that as his birth control would be as idiotic as a women using “don’t worry, I’ll just pull out’ as hers.
Pardon my French but if you’re going to stick your dick into a stranger, you need to take birth control into your own hands and not rely on her word alone. If he’s being deceived then he’s a willing participant.
Still, it’d be nice if so many women weren’t so often so shamelessly dishonest about this, wouldn’t it? Frankly, it astounds me more of you don’t think its a shockingly cunt-ified thing to do. But then it really IS all about needless solidarity on here as of late to be sure…
Clearly it is horribly wrong to lie about that but that’s not the argument here.
The argument is that “I’m on birth control.” is not the same as “I will not get pregnant from this sexual encounter.” You know how babies are made. If you choose to roll those dice against any odds you have yourself to blame if they don’t land in your favor.
BGM- multiple people disagreeing with you is not necessarily a sign of ‘needless solidarity’ that makes you sound paranoid. We do live in a world where your opinion on one thing may not in fact be the most correct or perhaps their might even be two sides, both reasonable and rational positions to take. it happens.
Wow, that was a super bitchy thing to say.
Just like we trust people when they say they got tested? If you’re going to have casual sex, there are some things you can leave to the goodwill of others and some where you’ve gotta be a little bit proactive. Like condoms until you actually know you can trust them.
I don’t know…Maybe I’m looking at this from the perspective of being an adopted child or having witnessed a friend’s situation, but I don’t think this guy is the world’s worst person like everyone else (but he’s still an asshole). Blood is not everything. I think he’s an asshole for sleeping with a woman he can’t stand without using a condom. If the woman in question is also 40, I highly doubt her birth control failed. But it happened. The baby is coming, the product of a two month relationship. He’s obligated to financially support the baby, which he is willing to do. He’s not obligated to be there emotionally, especially if he made it clear to the woman that he did not want this baby in the first place. If he suddenly decided to emotionally ditch this woman when she was five months pregnant or after the baby was born, I’d been singing another tune. I feel no connection to my biological siblings, even though they desire a relationship with me. I don’t owe them a relationship just because we have the same DNA. I have a friend in somewhat related situation. He had a FWB relationship with a girl and always used condoms. He found her annoying but still slept with her…I think this was pretty assholish behavior. Anyway, he ended the relationship with her and surprise, she’s knocked up. Turns out it wasn’t even his kid (that’s another story), but she showed up at his work, called him repeatedly in the middle of the night, and physically assaulted his friend’s girlfriend in a parking lot. I can’t imagine what my friend would have had to deal with if that was his child and he had to have dealt with her for 18 years.
Now, I highly doubt the LW’s boyfriend’s baby mother to be is psychotic as my friend’s former hook up. Nevertheless, if you choose to sleep with a guy that you are not in a relationship with or have only known for two months, without doubling up on the protection, and get pregnant and decide to keep the baby…Then I think you should be aware that a situation like this may happen.
DAMN! what a good read.
wendy, i love you for leaving the crazies to us!
and its even BETTER the second day!!!
we are making DW history, here, people!!!
OK, this is going to be longer than it should, but I have reactions to several things.
1) Like it or not, men have one point where they can decide whether or not to risk becoming parents (ie before sex, they choose the degree of risk based on what, if any, precautions they take). Women have two- before sex, and after they find out they’re pregnant. It’s just biological fact- unfair probably, but not something we can change. If someone decides to risk becoming a parent by having sex, especially unprotected sex, or by letting a pregnancy continue to the point where a baby is born, they are consenting to be responsible for any child that is produced.
2) A woman having an abortion is not the same as a man refusing to have anything to do with a child. Abortion does away with a potential baby- a life that will grow into a child if it continues to grow over the next several months-, and the other is walking out on an actual human being. As we established earlier, men don’t really have the option to walk out on a fetus, because the fetus doesn’t need anything from them yet (although certainly dads-to-be provide a lot of support to moms-to-be in most cases). A better comparison would be a woman abandoning her child in a shelter, etc- and while I’m happy there is an option for truly desperate people (who often have major issues, mental illness, abuse, etc), I do think that doing that rather than going through a traditional adoption channel is a pretty scummy thing to do.
3) A parent leaving their child with the other parent, especially one they barely know, isn’t the same as putting a child up for adoption. The adoption process has a pretty involved vetting procedure- meaning that birth parents can reasonably assume the child will be cared for by the adoptive parent or parents. There is no such assumption in this case- it’s more like handing the baby off to some nice-looking person he met in the grocery store and hoping for the best. We have no guarantee that the mother will be as good a single parent as those mentioned in this discussion. All we know is that she wants to have the baby- maybe because she’s prepared to be a wonderful parent. Maybe because she wants something to love. Maybe because she wants a tie to the LW’s boyfriend. Maybe she doesn’t want the baby at all, but it seems the least unappealing choice to her in this scenario.
4) The boyfriend, especially given his age (and that this can’t be blamed on youthful impulsiveness), doesn’t look the best in this scenario. Yes, he could have done worse by refusing to pay child support and not wanting to be in the child ‘s life… or being an alcoholic abusive parent, or what have you. But he’s no knight in shining armor because he is willing to bare some legally minimal level of responsibility.
5) What bothers me more than anything is the LW’s attitude. First of all, she seems to think her boyfriend’s reaction is completely reasonable. It would be one thing if he just lashed out in momentary anger/shock, but soon came around to a more sane discussion of options, etc. Instead, the LW seems to validate and support his furor, demands of an abortion, etc. Wanting nothing to do with his child, which like it or not seems to be coming, is not acceptable- and a mature girlfriend would help him to see that these are the cards he’s been dealt, and that he now has to work with them. Secondly, as PPs have pointed out, the whole concept of “We can’t live without one another” is f-ed up. People in healthy relationships don’t say that. People who say that are codependent, melodramatic, or 15. People in healthy relationships say things like “despite the circumstances that broke us up, we realized our relationship was worth working past those things by doing xyz…” Finally, the letter reads as a teenager’s temper tantrum. You’re right, what your life has become isn’t fair- to anyone involved. Tough shit. Be a grownup, decide if this relationship is worth the less perfect, more dramatic parts, and act accordingly. (And a hint- if your boyfriend is as much of a mess as this letter makes him seem, it’s not- no matter how much of a mess you are). Stop being a whiny spectator in your own life.
I might disagree to a minor degree with some of your points… although, re-reading your reply, I don’t really think so… but that’s a great summary, and also completely out of place in this thread because it’s so rational.
Thanks. I came back to re-read because I was worried my reply would be disjointed and confusing (I wrote it tired last night, with a fever), so I’m glad that while it’s not going to win any literary award, it wasn’t totally nonsensical! 🙂
A voice of reason! Thanks, Meg.
Okay… Well, I don’t believe the LW has a right to be mad at anyone, simply because her and her boyfriend were broken up when this happened. As well, the LW has no right to call this other woman names, purely because it was the LW’s (ex?)boyfriend who got the woman pregnant. (i.e. “what if you were pregnant, LW” scenario that’s been mentioned). LW, your anger is misdirected. In fact, it may not even be anger you feel, but hurt or you feel threatened by this pregnancy. Or maybe you feel like you’re trapped between a rock and a hard place. Just something to think about…
At this point I don’t think it matters how this woman got pregnant: she did. End of story. But now no one wants to deal with it. Here’s the fact: LW, you don’t get a say in what this woman does, and neither does your boyfriend. If this woman wants to have the child, then she can have it: why is it up to you or your boyfriend to tell her she can’t? Personally, it doesn’t sound like she’s trying to trap your untrappable boyfriend into a relationship – YOU are trying to trap him, or get rid of him, by telling him he should stay with her because it’s his kid (and then you go around calling her (the mother of your BF’s child) scoat and such… very classy)!
He never denies the kid is his: he even offered to support the child, though he doesn’t want to be apart of the child’s life. Don’t force him to be. In fact, step aside from the situation (my advice to you). It’s not yours to deal with. If that means not being with your boyfriend for the next 9 months to a year, then so be it (I don’t think you’ll die without him). LW, you need to take time to look at what you want in your life. Do you want a man who doesn’t want to be in a child’s life because it means being with you? Yes? Then, fine; but you need to consider the possibility of having to deal with this “malarkey” for the rest of the time you and your boyfriend are together.
Sorry, that was long. That is all.
Well said.
Reviewing this the next day, I’m even less convinced that the letter is real – I’d be happy for signs otherwise – but assuming it is, that’s good advice. It’s still good advice if the letter his fake, actually, since there certainly are people in this situation.
Yea, it does sound even more ridiculous today. Kind of sounds like it was written by an extremely immature middle aged woman.
I’ve heard of stuff like this from friends of mine, where they’ve been in relationships and their BF finds out his ex got pregnant and blah blah blah… so take it as you will, I guess.
Why do you think this letter was faked?
I’m usually just a lurker here on DW, but the strong debate over this letter compelled me to comment. I’m quite late to the discussion, but I took a lot of time reading over the comments, trying to make sense of the two sides of the argument at hand.
I don’t understand the level of anger sparked by this man not wanting to be physically involved in this child’s life. Yes, it’s shitty. Yes, it would be nice if he were eager to become a parent. However, an absent father does not always result in an emotionally crippled child. He won’t be a “deadbeat dad,” as some have suggested. In my opinion, a deadbeat leaves his child, abandons the mother, and offers no financial support. He said he’s willing to give that support, he just won’t be there to actually raise his future child.
Furthermore, why does this child need two parents? Why does his/her future emotional health count on the presence of a father who wants nothing to do with parenting? Out of all the cries of “sexism” being thrown back and forth, that to me truly is sexist, assuming that a mother cannot raise a well-adjusted child by herself. It’s been done and will continue to be done, as long as accidents, divorce, and death happen.
Leaving the issues of the suggested abortion and unprotected sex aside (which have also been beaten over the head on this thread), that was what really struck me as I was looking through these comments. I’ve been silent on this website a while, and by and large tend to agree with most of what is said, but I could not sit quiet as people suggested to a) force this man into parenthood, and b) suggest that this woman is incapable of being a single mother.
Agree. I’m also a longtime lurker who was a little taken aback by all the vitriol aimed at this man’s head. Men AND women have walked away from children. Men AND women both have decided, well after-the-fact, that no babies is better than having babies. For all the reasons stated in the comments, women just cannot be forced into motherhood quite like a man can be forced into fatherhood. Why is he such a scummy, awful human being because he’s angry with the way this has worked out — that he’ll be on the hook for another human being until who knows when? Especially since, had he been the woman and felt the same way, he would have quietly aborted the child without inviting half the scorn he’s received here.
“he’s angry with the way this has worked out”
Except that he’s not. He’s furious with the woman for keeping the child. It’s not some big secret that women have that option and that men are legally obligated to provide financially if she exercises that option. He should be angry at himself for choosing to take his chances, knowing the possible outcomes.
He probably knows she’ll be a lousy mother. Hell, I don’t even know the “lady” in question, and I can tell that she’ll be a lousy mother, too. It’s painfully obvious.
As I’ve said upthread: a man who sleeps with a woman he believes to be on the pill does so with the not-unreasonable expectation that she doesn’t want to become pregnant. Notwithstanding the fact that birth control sometimes fails, he’s signing up for sex, not fatherhood. For the woman to turn around after the fact and say, “Whups, knocked up! But even though I led you to think I didn’t want to become pregnant, I’m going to keep the baby and thereby obligate you to two decades of child support,” is, while totally within her rights, still a massive breach of the pre-coital understanding, express and implied, between the parties.
That is why he is pissed off at her.
Imagine lending your new car to a friend who led you to believe they just needed to make a quick run to the Piggly Wiggly, only to have them return it to you totaled after having taken it on a weeklong bender in Vegas. Now imagine a bunch of people calling you a scumbag for having the temerity to be angry at your friend, arguing that the situation is of your own making since you should have known this was a possibility when you lent out the car.
“he’s signing up for sex, not fatherhood”
Only a valid argument of you’re completely unaware of how babies are made and that birth control does not prevent pregnancy but only reduces the likelihood.
How do you even know that his man was actually, really furious? We’re looking at this situation through the eyes of his ex who’s pissed off that he knocked up this other woman but seems pretty bound and determined to get back with him. It makes sense that she would do everything she could to convince us that this other woman wanting to keep the child is the worse thing ever because they’re obviously meant to be and this child’s existence is a testament to the fact that their (former and/or current) relationship wasn’t/isn’t perfect.
And we don’t really know that she actually said she’s on the pill or if she is indeed really pregnant or if the lw truly wants him to go off and marry the other woman.
I’m simply responding to the information in the letter because, not knowing these people personally, I have nothing else to go on. I could hypothesize all day and comment on all kinds of things that might be happening but there’s enough crap in this letter that it hardly seems necessary to make any up.
Yes everyone went bonkers. If he’s such an awful scumbag, why would you want to force him to be a father. It doesnt make sense.
You know, if he was tricked it’s not surprising that he would say these things. You shouldn’t expect him to bow down and praise the woman. Anyone would be angry in this situation.
A forty year old man who can be tricked into believing that intercourse, with birth control or not, cannot lead to a baby is an idiot.
To be fair, the pregnant woman could be an idiot too but the only info we have about her is that she participated in sex with the LW’s bf after knowing him a short time, says she was on birth control and is now pregnant and planning to raise the child.
We don’t even know that this other woman told the bf that she is pregnant. She may have just dumped his ass and now he wants to temporarily get back with LW and knows what to say. He seems to be playing into a lot of her fantasies, plus providing a ready excuse why he’ll never have any money.
I’m late to this, but WHAT THE FUCK. What the fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck.
I don’t usually ever think letters are fake, but this one MIGHT be fake. It’s not the situation, but the way it’s written. It sounds glib, and I mean, “malarky”?
But anyway, in case it’s not fake… if this guy isn’t lying about only knowing this woman “for two minutes” then yeah, she’s an idiot for wanting to keep the baby. I’m NOT saying she should abort, just that she’s an idiot & she shouldn’t expect a one-night stander to suddenly be a father. I’m pretty sure we can all agree on that?
Regardless, this guy obviously doesn’t seem like anyone you want to be in a relationship with. You can’t “bear life without each other” yet he’s “untrappable”? Both of those things can’t be true, LW. I know you’re just trying to tell us that the “little scroat” won’t be able to trap him, buttttt it looks like you can’t hold onto him either? (you’ve already split for two months, for reasons you didn’t even mention)
“I have tried to encourage him to stay with this woman soley because of this pregnancy…” How generous of you. I’m PRETTY sure you only included this to make yourself sound like a selfless person.
And sorry if this is harsh, but JESUS, I can’t even be nice about this one.
“I’m NOT saying she should abort, just that she’s an idiot & she shouldn’t expect a one-night stander to suddenly be a father”
The only one who we know is expecting him to be a father is the letter writer.
Knowing him for two minutes is not significant at all to a woman who feels that abortion is morally wrong for religious reasons. The prohibition against abortion is taken far more seriously by some than the religious prohibition against non-marital sense. If this is the case with this woman, then she may well not be at all thrilled to be pregnant and not expecting anything from this guy. Most guys with the level of responsibility that he is showing don’t pay child support, anyway.
LW says they were separated for two months. There was a reason for that. She should think long and hard about that reason and not take her former bf back. She seems proud of his bad-boy ways and his current claim that she is the only woman who can tame him into marriage. I’ll bet if LW gets pregnant, this guy is gone just about instantly.
“…she may well not be at all thrilled to be pregnant and not expecting anything from this guy”
That could very well be true– I just tried to answer the letter as if whatever the LW said had some truth to it (like that the other woman was having the baby to purposely lure the guy into a relationship with her, etc.) I think the whole situation is a mess though, & you’re 2nd paragraph (“She seems proud of his bad-boy ways and his current claim that she is the only woman who can tame him into marriage”) is spot-on.
your* AHH
I think the LW here should wash her hands of this whole mess and stay away from the drama.
As for the whole “man’s right to not be a parent to a child” thing, I agree with _jsw_. I think it’s pretty unfair that women have the choice to abort or not, and the man gets no say in that, not really. Personally, I think they should be given a one-time option to “opt-out” if the woman wants to keep the child and the man doesn’t. Especially if ever precaution was taken (birth control, condoms, etc.). I think this would cut down on a LOT of “baby mama” drama with regards to accusations of women “getting pregnant on purpose” or “trapping me with a baby.” Because no matter how much we feminists on here hate that bullshit, it DOES happen.
Whether this guy decides to be a part of this child’s life or not is up to his conscience.
Oh, and I really dislike when every accidental pregnancy letter we get on here because a huge fest for people throwing around “you were too stupid to use a condom” or “you didn’t try to prevent pregnancy at all,” when we really have NO information regarding what precautions they did or did not take. But then, I guess I like giving people the benefit of the doubt.
Yeah, I’m with you, pretty much on all counts. This discussion sure got crazy though! It’s such a heated issue, because everyone knows someone that has some sort of baby-mama-drama on one side or the other.
MOA, and wash your hands of the whole thing. Whose idea was it to take a “break” anyway? His? Mmmhmm, I thought so. Let him deal with the consequences of his own actions without relying on you to “rescue” him. Find someone without “baggage.” You deserve better.
Is it “Dear Wendy” gender wars with the emotional females leaping to conclusions and bullying the open minded fair males who dare to object to name-calling and double standards? Or is it Dear Wendy gender wars where the men stick together to excuse bad behavior of men while the women cry foul? oy.
Run. Run like the wind. Run as if your life depends on it because it does. Well, maybe not your life, but your happiness and security do depend on it.
Honestly, why would you want to put yourself in a permanent relationship who a) has encouraged his “baby mommy” to abort the child for the sake of convenience and 2) who has sex with people he cannot stand?
His character and judgment are awful. The good news is that yours are a little less awful.
I am amazed at people who think abortion is wrong for religious reasons, but have no concerns about coitus with people outside of matrimony with people they ‘just met’ for two minutes.
And more amazement with people who ‘just can’t live without’ a relationship with someone who has no concern about coitus with people outside of matrimony with people they ‘just met.’
Of course there are the people who assert that others have no ‘right to an opinion’ regarding birth control, abortion, or other actions. Of course we have a right to an opinion, even if our opinion is that dirty sluts shouldn’t breed. Putting that opinion into action with either government or private coercion is that to which we have no right.
I would suggest that the man under discussion would not be ‘sponge-worthy’.
As a dude, this letter brings up several thoughts.
First, if you “can’t live without” someone, why did you need a break? He’s so full of sh*t, I bet his eyes are brown. And if this woman buys that line, she’s a moron too.
Second, regardless of what sort of cretin this dude is, the baby mama is no better. Paternity laws in this country absolutely suck. Men are stupid and do stupid things, but so are women. But when it comes down to it, men have *zero* say in anything having to do with the child – how it is raised, where it lives, etc. Just shut up and pay the bills, right? Women have figured that game out, and it sucks. And yes, women do use the laws to trap men into financing their lifestyle of choice (as a single mother). Abortion is safe and legal, right? If the woman chooses to take on the responsibility of raising the child alone, she ought not have the right to force the indentured servitude (financial or otherwise) of the father against his stated wishes. That’s a dude’s view.
Third, I weep for that child. Sounds like it’s coming out of the starting blocks with two strikes against it in the gene pool department.
Fourth, this woman should run, not walk, from this dude.
I weep for the younger folks out there. I wouldn’t be single again for all the tea in china.
“Women have figured that game out, and it sucks. And yes, women do use the laws to trap men into financing their lifestyle of choice (as a single mother).”
And yet men still keep having sex with us. If they don’t want to be taken, then they should think before they poke.
TO: landygirl
RE: Heh
And yet men still keep having sex with us. If they don’t want to be taken, then they should think before they poke. — landygirl
Only the fools. And fools are welcome to the horror you and your ilk inflict upon them.
On the other hand, the intelligent men are just avoiding commitment and having ‘fun’ at YOUR expense.
In the long run, US ends up with what I like to refer to as the Feminist Mystake. Your ilk will perish from a lack of procreation. And what few you do procreate will become part of the growing criminal element, as they have no strong father-figure to teach them how to be part of successful society.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The feminist movement died one millisecond after the first impact. — Niven and Pournelle, Lucifer’s Hammer]
P.S. At which point, no matter what form the chastisement comes, feminists are going to be looking for REAL men…..and not finding them….
P.S. If they don’t want to be taken, then they should think before they poke — landygirl
Thanks for proving you and your ilk are out to entrap men to sustain your lifestyle by dropping as many babies as you can…..and living on welfare checks honest people pay for…..SLUT!
Oh dear.
I know, right? I think this post must have been linked somewhere, hence all the men defenders, out to protect a man’s right to have indiscriminate sex without consequences.
It’s been linked by Instapundit.
I’m surprised that you guys don’t recognize Chuck. He’s probably the worlds most prolific internet commenter.
Commenters on most websites just depress me – I don’t bother reading them anymore. The crazies on both sides just come crawling out of the woodwork.
Present company excluded, naturally.
It’s crazy how much abject hatred there is out there. And the internet is this perfect little anonymous bubble for people to shoot off their anger. The scapegoats aren’t really the point- women, minorities, the government, poor people, rich people- it doesn’t really matter. It’s always someone else’s fault. And I tend to agree that with certain situations, men end up with the raw end of the deal. But women and children, in the context of child custody and support systems, end up in extremely unfortunate and unfair situations far more often. That’s reality.
Life is unfair. It’s fucking unfair. Focus on that though, and you are going to have a miserable life. You can have a spirited and logical debate, and still keep it interesting and above board. Start sinking down in the gutter, and no, I’m not going to follow you there. It actually makes me very sad.
I think that the thing to keep in mind is that the angry ranters are really just a very vocal minority. And they seem to have a lot of time on their hands.
They don’t want to have spirited logical debate, they want to vent and lash out at people. So just ignore them, that’s what I do.
You’re right Leroy- the really crazy, dramatic ones are the minority and I tend to ignore them as well. The key if you do decide to engage- keep it as civil and reasoned as possible. You’re never going to persuade crazy, but other people reading can maybe read something interesting without getting too turned off by the insanity of one side. Plus I’ve noticed that the more calm and rational you keep your comment, the less likely the truly crazies ones are to even respond to you at all. Crazy likes crazy.
I think, Chuck, what she meant was that no one is forcing these men to impregnate strangers. She didn’t sneak up in the dark of the night and steal his seed and turkey baste herself, Chuck. She didn’t roofie him, Chuck. She didn’t rape him. So, Chuck, despite the fact that no one is denying the fact that there are some people out there trying to game the system, Chuck, the fact that she’s pregnant is equally their responsibility. You, Chuck, seem to think that this means that all women do that. Or you think that landygirl does that? I’m not sure. If you’re going to call anyone a slut, Chuck (which you shouldn’t, its really very rude) why not the dude who slept with someone he can’t stand and got her pregnant?
Landygirl, I think we should stop feeding the trolls.
Landygirl –
Having read some of the (ahem) well-reasoned responses to my post (and your response), I realize the interwebs are probably not the best place to argue the merits of paternity law.
However, I do find your mindset to be telling: “And yet you still have sex with us…” The implication being that if a man has sex with a woman, they should be prepared to pay dearly for it for the rest of their lives. However, if a woman has sex with a man, she can make all the choices and decisions, force palimony, and essentially treat that man as their financial slave for the next 18 years. Translation: men should think before they poke – but women can do whatever they damn well please. Is that pretty much it?
Again, if a woman chooses to have a baby against the father’s stated wishes (and the law of the land says this is completely and totally her choice), then that is her choice. But it also ought to be her responsibility. I’d like to hear your explanation as to why that should not be the case.
I have two young sons – I dearly hope neither of them ever come across a woman as conniving as you appear to be.
“if a man has sex with a woman, they should be prepared to pay dearly for it for the rest of their lives. However, if a woman has sex with a man, she can make all the choices and decisions, force palimony, and essentially treat that man as their financial slave for the next 18 years. Translation: men should think before they poke – but women can do whatever they damn well please.” Tim
Not exactly. If a man has sex with a woman he should be prepared for the possibility that it could result in child support payments. If a woman has sex with a man she should be prepared for the fact that it could result in her under going a medical proceedure, be it an abortion or childbirth.
Please let your sons know that, whether you agree that it’s fair or not, that is the way it works because if they end up whining about paying to support a kid with their DNA it will accomplish nothing but to make them look ignorant.
I’m not questioning the reality of the situation – I’m questioning the inherent fairness of the law today. I noticed you dutifully avoided addressing that.
But in some ways, you’re making my point, Francine. The woman can choose to abort the baby, even in the event the father desperately wants it, and is willing to raise and support it himself. The woman also gets to choose to keep the baby if she wants (even against his wishes), and gets the added benefit of forcing an unwitting and unwilling father into servitude for what is completely and totally her choice – by your own admission.
Given that fact base, why wouldn’t a woman who wanted a baby (but not a husband) entrap a suitable donor? Is it any wonder that 40% of the kids born today are bastards? That’s precisely the incentive structure feminism (and the paternity laws that followed) have created. I’d argue the country is not any better off for it, either. Neither are the kids, but that’s beside the point where feminism is concerned, right?
And don’t worry, my sons will have the good sense to stay away from your daughters.
“I’m questioning the inherent fairness of the law today. I noticed you dutifully avoided addressing that.”
Doesn’t interest me. Go on about it all you want though.
“totally her choice”
The choice to get pregnant was mutual. I can agree with you that the decision about which medical proceedure she under goes after that point is totally hers.”
“Is it any wonder that 40% of the kids born today are bastards?”
I think both sexes can own that one (although your estimate of what % of children born today are born to single patents is inaccurate). I don’t doubt that “Sure Baby, I love you. I’ll never leave you. We’ll be together forever no matter what.” is thrown around just to get in some dumb girl’s pants just as often as “I won’t get pregnant.” is thrown around to trap ignorant dumbasses.
“Neither are the kids, but that’s beside the point where feminism is concerned, right?”
“And don’t worry, my sons will have the good sense to stay away from your daughters.”
And finally we see what you’re doing ranting about paternity laws and men’s rights on a relationship advice site. All I can say is therapy. Lots of it. Whatever happened to you to make you hate women doesn’t have to mean a lifetime of whiny bitterness.
Nice try. I’m not a woman hater – happily married for 15 years, and I love my mother, my sister and even my mother-in-law. But it is probably fair to say I hate the over-the-top modern feminism you appear to espouse.
The entire point of my post(s) is that the paternity laws in this country (which is a central consideration of the letter and the story) are out of whack and unbalanced to the point of being unfairly punitive to men. Equal protection under the law, etc, etc…
Since you obviously can’t formulate a cogent argument on the merit of these laws in response to my questions (as it doesn’t “interest” you), I wonder why you keep going out of your way to engage this conversation. I will chalk you up as being an internet hairpuller. You add nothing to the conversation but name-calling.
Makes me wonder if you’re happily married like I am, or just a bitter divorcee who clings to feminism and man-hating as a knee jerk reaction of having been wronged. Or perhaps you’re a world-wise know-it-all 19 year old who heard everything you regurgitate here from your Women’s Studies professor – bitter after falling for the same “sure I love you baby” slickster line you mentioned above.
Whatever the case, you’re not adding to the discussion. “Change the subject and attack” is not debate and makes you look pathetic. Please do better.
Okay, Tim. I’ll bite. It really doesn’t help the LW at all and doesn’t belong here but here we go….
The time prior to conception is the only time this can be anything close to fair. It’s not anyone’s fault, there’s no one to blame. It’s biology. It’s not a mystery. Everyone knows it. That is the point when an intelligent person makes their decision. I make no exception for men or women. If a pregnancy results after you do the very thing you know can cause pregnancy you have no one to blame but yourself and whining about your lack of choices or the burden of what you must now do is unproductive and frankly, a little too late.
Why you waste any time belly aching about how unfair it is, is beyond me. No law can change the fact that whatever choice a man or woman in this position makes, the woman has the burden of actually carrying out the birth or abortion. It will never be equal.
How on earth do you propose to make any of this even for everybody, including the child?
Imagine the following scenarios. Imagine that you get to design a law that will allow fairness no matter which of these happens…
1. Jimmy and Susie are in love. They’re young but are certain that they’ll be together forever. Susie is on birth control but they still discuss what names their eventual children will have. They’re both opposed to abortion but they’re being safe, right? She takes her pill every day at the same time. And if by some chance she does get pregnant it’ll be difficult but they’re going to get married someday anyway so they’ll just start their family earlier than planned.
Then the unlikely happens. Susie is pregnant with Jimmy’s child. Turns out that the bout of food poisoning she got after their anniversary dinner and the diarrhea that came with it messed with the effectiveness of her birth control pills. Who knew?
What sounded nice in theory is not sounding so great to Jimmy in reality. He’s just not ready to start a family. Susie can do what she wants but he wants nothing to do with it.
Susie is lost. She and Jimmy were going to raise their children together. Abortion and adoption are both horrifying thoughts to Susie but she has no choice. She can’t afford a child on her own. Jimmy has made his choice. He’s walking away and Susie will give birth or have an abortion alone.
How does your law make this fair? They can both make a choice but only Susie must physically implement the plan.
2. Scenario 2. Susie and Jimmy find themselves in the same predicament only Jimmy is thrilled because he’s enlisting and being deployed overseas. The thought of a child waiting for him at home makes going away so much easier.
But Susie is looking forward to going away to college. The baby will be due right in the middle of the semester. She wants to live in a dorm with her friends and no way is she missing weeks of school to give birth. She wants to abort Jimmy’s baby.
They’ve both made their choice. How does your law see that both get what they want?
There are so many variations on how the parents choices can conflict but no choice after the fact will make it even for both mother and father. Even when they both want the same thing. That’s nature, Tim. Do you have a law to fix that?
Are you kidding me?
1. You have a guy who knew someone for like “two seconds” and jumped into bed with them. That’s certainly the type of person you want as your husband.
2. He wants nothing to do with his own child.
Why would you want someone like this?
TO: All
RE: What a Bunch….
….of F****** Idiots. And that’s a double entendré.
Just feeding on each other and leaving a trail of human wreckage in their wake. Especially the children.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. Think of the children. What a laugh. Liberals only think of themselves. And the children are either ‘damned’ or murdered.
[The most dangerous place on Earth to live is in an American womans womb.]
P.P.S. These people are the REAL ‘zombies’…..
Wow, you’re a real piece of work, aren’t you.
60+ years on this ball-o-dirt and witnessing the madness going on around this place, as well as being an honest-to-God Christian….
….yeah….
….you can call me whatever you like. But that doesn’t change the fact that these people are eating each other alive.
P.S. What’s the matter? Don’t care to be properly identified?
They’re eating each other alive, and they’re doing it up hill both ways, in three feet of snow, with no shoes on!
Frostbite is a REAL killer.
I know of a jumpmaster who lost his nose and ears for being too bold doing the one-minute door check in severe cold weather. Just 10 seconds in the slipstream at 175 mph…..
P.S. I almost lost the fingers on my right hand from it. Chopper jump on another severe cold day with the right hand exposed to activate the reserve chute. When I hit the ground, I jumped up, pulled the safety clip off the release assembly and slapped it.
My hand felt like someone smacked a block of ice with a hammer. The hand and fingers were all bright red and black-and-blue under the nails.
My hand has never been ‘comfortable’ in cooler weather ever since…..
Didn’t ask you, but alright.
What the bloody hell?
At a minimum LW needs to take a wait and see attitude. If the other woman decides to have the baby, her now boyfriend will be liable for child support, which will significantly impact his finances (and their finances if they marry for the next 18 years. Also, if the other woman keeps the baby, this is going to provide significant insight into her boyfriend’s character that will help her make her decision.
Any male after the onset of puberty can make a baby. It takes a man to be a father.
For what it’s worth, I’m a married guy and a father. Which keeps me pretty busy, and I’m married to my daughter’s mother.
“Cod wallop?” Is that like “poppycock?”
Dump this creep. Now. You don’t want his problems.
You can get pregnant on birth control! Medications interfere with birth control, not taking it at the same time and whole other host of reason why she could have legitimately gotten pregnant on birth control. That is how we got our first kid. My inclination would be to run away from this guy as fast as you can. If he isn’t willing to be there for his kid, wanted or not, then what happens when you get pregnant? If he is 40 years old and still acting like a child chances are you’re going to be stuck holding the bag.
1. Consider that this is the kind of guy that has casual sex with people he doesn’t really know/like while on “break” from a relationship with someone he “can’t live without”.
2. Consider that this child should be the most important thing in his life, more important than you.
3. Consider that this man is 40 years old, but still immature.
4. Consider that this child will be a drain on his resources, and possibly yours as well if you marry.
I’d drop this guy in a heartbeat. I have no idea why you two took a break if you can’t live without each other, but honestly, neither one of you is mature enough to be in a committed relationship.
Whoa whoa whoa… “this kid should be the most important thing in his life, over her”? Hold the phone.
I have no problem with single people with children who put their kids above the girlfriend/boyfriend and at the beginning of the adjustment period, over the new spouse. That’s the way it has to be. They came first. BUT. I vehemently disagree when it is not in that order. I am not entirely sure how this applies when the kids are not the product of both people, but when it is mom, dad, junior and junette… junior and junette do not always come first, always. Your FAMILY can be the most important thing in your life… not just your children. Marriages (or partnerships) are not secondary to parent-children relationships; nor are they primary. The family structure is dynamic and without balance, falls apart.
She came first. He has to fit the baby into their life, not the other way around. Of course, there are adjustments to be made, but babies do not mean that all other relationships become secondary. The primary relationship in someone’s life is allowed to (and should) remain the primary relationship, even after the later appearance of children. That base of support is crucial for serving the child best.
I get what you’re saying. I don’t agree with it, but the beauty of being an American is we both get to have our views. But let me make a few suggestions Steve. IF men want to engage in condomless sex and want a choice (which women DON’t have btw, we don’t TELL our bodies when we want our eggs fertilized and when we don’t, I WISH we could that would be such an intelligent design feature!) in whether or not a child is a result here is what all you men should do at like age 18 or whatever. Freeze your sperm and get a vasectomy. That way you and only YOU get to decide which woman you deign to procreate with. Problem. Solved. Your welcome.
Oops this was meant as a reply to Steve up there!
But then I’d be haunted with the thought that I could have frozen BETTER sperm than the sperm I froze before tying the tubes and will always wonder if my children could have been better….
Hey I have a novel idea. How about getting to know one another really well before having sex? I’m an okder Dude but that’s what we used to do. That way you will know things like what you both agree to do if she gets preggers, and how soon you jettison him if he goes and has sex with someone else ad knocks her up.
He is no good, move on.
Are you sure you are not living in a cheap novel? Everything is he: He is in love with you, so in love that he humped another woman; so in love that he wanted to kill a baby to be with you.
Talk about malarky. What a door mat you are! He basically put you out of his mind, then he wanted you to assume his guilt. If you have any self respect, dump the sob. Oh, may be you should marry him and fantasize what kind of fun he is having whenever he’s late coming home, or fearful he would leave you when you, like that woman, passed 40; or be told to get rid of your baby who is inconvenient to him.
So this guy sleeps with the first gal that catches his attention, but he only has eyes for you? He gets a girl pregnant and then tells her to get rid of it because it’s an inconvenience for him to have to deal with it? And you want to marry this guy because….why? He sounds like a conceited, arrogant, narcissistic a-hole. You want to be a slave to a prick like him? Because believe me–he’s not into anything but what he wants and what he likes. And it won’t be you for very long.
Wow…..two mintues…when did he realize he couldnt stand her before or after the two minutes? Why should she abort the baby I mean come on. I dont know what he told her within those two minutes but obviously it worked cause now yeah. You know what bothers me, if the lady wasnt pregnant would he have told you of the affair? Might he have continued sleeping with her? Its only when a baby is involved is when men come to their senses and then have so much things to say like “I didnt mean to hurt you”, “I barely knew her”, or the famous line “I was drunk”. Women why do we allow men to sleep with us while they are drunk again…..my god….I wont say dont continue your relationship but it will be hard. Its now you, the man, the other lady and a baby involved in this situation and as far as I can see thats too much people involved already.
Whatever you do, leave the future children or the pregnancy out of the equation when it comes to your relation. Don’t get me wrong, the child should be taken care of and taken responsibility for but it can never be the reason why you do or don’t stay together – that decision should be based purely on the possibility for a good relationship between you grown ups.
What ever happened with this situation?