my ex worked 80 hour weeks. Don't know when she's gonna die...maybe I'll outlive her, maybe not.

Of course there are differences...I've never argued that there aren't. Hence my argument about things not being equal across the board. But in some areas (like work), the gender-gap and glass ceiling are really *****ty...

As for custody matters, that is bs too. In a fight, the better parent should win, not automatically the woman. But things take time to change...

I still say that before anybody starts bleeding at the heart over women and how "unfair" this world is, they need to spend a couple days in family court to get a real perspective of how things are.

so it's ok to pay women less because they win in family court? How about we change *both*?

Equal, depends. Say two cars can do the same lap times, but one is mostly from engine power, and the other from tires? They are very different, and should not be driven the same way, but they are equal around the track.

A man does not equal a women, nor does a women a man, but they are both humans.

I'm just being the devil's advocate here. Most of you know I'm pretty old-fashioned about most things. I harbor no angst against women; hell, I've been married to the same one for 20 years. I'm fishing here; fishing for a reaction.

I find it rather telling that as far as our society wants to push gender neutrality that the topic of mens' rights, and fathers' rights, is still pretty old-fashioned. We champion all sorts of non-traditional relationships, but when push comes to shove, even the most liberal go back to traditional morals and values on this one. For a very vocal left that is routinely chastising society for "legislating morality", they sure stick to this one. I guess it's o.k. if it is their morality.

I find it surprising in light of their track record that liberals don't take the opposite stance from their conservative "adversaries". After all, being incapable of original thought, they just watch us and do the opposite. Funny that has not happened here.

Your right it's two different topics. I'm only talking about women in regards to fathers rights and judgements in child support cases.

I don't see what's so confusing. I'm all for men's rights...within reasonable parameters...just like I'm for "equality" within reasonable parameters. Maybe it's that I'm not thinking "liberal" or "conservative", but rather what makes sense *to me* from a fairness and personal responsibility perspective (give my experiences).

I think if a woman does the same job as a man, she should get the same pay.

I think that women have the right to chose what happens to their body.

I believe that once men dip their wick they are responsible for the outcomes...but that does *not* entitle them to force the woman to do what they want.

I think that women have to go through things during childbirth that men cannot imagine, and as such are not on equal footing in the equation regarding who has say over what.

I think that in the event of divorce or other separation, the children should be placed in the best situation for them, be it joint custody, with the mother, or the father.

Bottom line: if you want to play, you have to pay. And you never know what that price might be...but maybe you should think about it before you hit the sack.

I totally agree. The system is screwed up and favors women without basis other than gender. That is wrong.

I couldn't agree more. Maybe I'm just a grumpy old conservative Christian white boy and that colors my perspective. I do see our society, at least in its laws and in the name of "political correctness" adopting a stance that favors women's rights over men's. And minority rights over "majority" (who that really is is questionable in some regions) rights, i.e. us white boys. It all seems to be in the spirit of playing "catch up" for past (and admittedly very real) abuses emanating from that majority.

Maybe we should all fear the day when the right people decide it is time for true equality in this relationship. Maybe I'm not doing a very good job, but I am trying to point out how ludicrous it would be for a man to be able to legally shrug it off and demand an abortion, with the alternative being the woman supporting the kid. I see this as a very real possibility in our future. I find abortion itself repugnant enough when a woman decides to kill her baby. I can't imagine a man being able to tell her to do that. But, then again, the liberal agenda includes a lot of things I just can't imagine from a moral perspective. Then again, "legislating morality" should be out of bounds, according to those very same liberals. Should it really? Seems like most are on the same page morally on this one, so does that make it o.k. to legislate this particular morality?

I don't think anyone is saying men should have the right to demand an abortion in an unplanned pregnancy. We just want the ability, right, option to participate in the birth and support of the child. More specifically when the birth is the result of fraud or less than honorable actions of the mother. This also includes the scenario of a guy "dating" a single mother who suddenly finds he has been ordered by the court to support the children produced prior to his arrival to the scene, and sperm donors who are held financially responsible for the children created from their donation.
It's not a clear cut topic with firm and obvious boundry's. It's very easy to complicate the issue by presenting "gray zone" scenarios that lead the topic in self serving directions.

****** pathetic. Are you guys that damn weak, that you can't keep it in your pants? I have a solution: don't have sex with somebody that you don't want to have a kid with. It's pretty damn simple, sex = baby. Of course, that would require responsibility and self control. No, it's far easier just to kill the baby, make them pay for your stupidity. But nobody gives a $hit about that, they just care about themselves. What a sad, pathetic world we live in. I agree that the child support system could use some reform, but this is just sickening. Suck it up, be a man. If you father a child, you father it, end of story. People that refuse to support the children they father are about the lowest form of humanity in my opinion.

Matt, could you tell us how you really feel? You really shouldn't pull your punches... :p

Damn dude does your vagina itch or something? You sound like my effin sister when she's havin b!tch problems. NO ONE is talking about killin babies! Get back on the topic or get back to the kitchen and finish bakin your damn cookies. We're talking about an EQUAL VOICE in the matter of parental rights.

Maybe I need to reread every post. But I don't think anyone on this forum is suggesting they would personally bail on a kid. I know I certainly would not. I'd step up and be the dad no matter what. But I think there is a valid legal issue here involving equal treatment under the law. Any time one group of people gets different treatment from another, then our democracy suffers. And any time you give one group of people unequal power over another group, then, as sure as the rising sun, you will see it abused.

So I suspect we are all (or mostly) on the same page about the ethics involved in parenthood...but there is a non-trivial legal issue here that transcends gender, parenthood, etc

I got that sense from some, if it's not the case I'm sorry. I do stand by my statement though, I think in some ways it's an attempt to weasel out of parental responsibility. Woman tricked you into a baby? You still had to screw her, so it's your fault too. I agree that men often get screwed in child support cases, and the system needs to look at both parties instead of just the man paying out. Still, I agree with nostatic, it's not an equal issue. The guy gets some sex, he's done. The woman carries a baby for nine months, which didn't seem very pleasant when my wife was pregnant. Then she goes through a long painful birth. I, meanwhile, stood by and drank coffee, repeating "don't worry, it'll be over soon". I can't say that I did half the work in birthing our son. Now that he's out our parental duties are equal, but that's a different issue.

Nice comment about the sand in the pussy by the way. Sorry if my statement about being a man equaling taking responsibility for your actions rubbed you the wrong way. It's an opinion that seems to be going by the wayside these days.

Not to go too far off topic, but there is an argument to be made that the best thing for the kids in this situation is for the parents to stay together. Not to get preachy but...if a ballot question were presented to outlaw divorce in cases where the couple had kids...as a child from a broken home I might have to vote "YES"...

:(

I suppose it goes both ways, I had several friends who's parents divorced, they wished they'd done it sooner. I wonder which is worse, parents that fight every night, or divorced parents?

That's not preachy, just wrong imho. Many "broken homes" have both parents in them. In a perfect world I agree that both parents together is ideal, but life is rarely perfect or ideal. I know that my son is doing much better since my ex and I split.

But your both straying from the original topic of a birth being the result of FRAUD and DECEIT!

As opposed to what? The man has a responsibility. Period. The woman's responsibility is pretty much built-in...