If Mort Divine ruled the world

[Nephilim96]

I think no woman should be forced to give birth, nor forced to abort. And I think no man should be forced to pay child support for a child he doesn't want anything to do with. If the woman doesn't want it and he does, he should find a woman that does want it and get her pregnant instead.

But god forbid society be logical.

I used to dislike you, but now I love you.

 

[Dak]

Probably because he introduced his genetic material into the woman's body willingly. It isn't like the function of sperm is ambiguous.

No, it isn't ambiguous. Neither is the function of the egg. Your argument doesn't simply go/end where you think it does.

But speaking of ambiguity, women can be ambiguous about their intentions with that genetic material. Or outright lie. Etc.

 

[Mort Divine]

Of course you leap to the argument that women are deceptive harlots.

As if men don't deceive women to gain access to their bodies.

 

[CiG]

Do you have mommy issues or something? The hatred can't be more obvious.

I was a feminist and an SJW for majority of my life. Nothing to do with my psychology.

The fact that the anti- crowd is so obsessed with "GOTCHA" moments is incredibly stupid.

You realise you're a part of the anti- crowd yourself, right? Don't kid yourself. Feminism is entirely based on GOTCHA moments these days.
The only difference between people like me and people like you is, when there is a GOTCHA moment I criticise it. You try to censor it.

Alot of anti-crowds just finds random fringe examples and makes a case about them as If they are axioms. Kinda tiresome to argue against that kind of logic.

Not true at all. Also, feminism is fuelled entirely on pretending that the fringe is the mainstream.

I'm sure that this is an unpopular opinion here, but pretty much anti-feminists and anti-SJWs are pretty terrible at seeing reality too.

Give some examples.

 

[CiG]

I love that we're allowed to assume the worst of potential fathers (given the option most won't pay) yet if we assume that most women are happy to get pregnant by a man entirely due to the fact that she'll have him paying her for the next 18 years (aka a meal ticket) you're a horrible sexist.

The fact is, beyond a condom a man has no reproduction rights, in my view correctly as no man should be able to force a pregnancy/abortion on a woman, but the woman has the right to drop her baby at a doorstep and wash her hands of it, a man has no such right and can be jailed if he refuses to pay child support for a child he never wanted. Which can be really unfair if the pregnancy occurred via an anomaly/deceit.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Aussie women aren't subject to paying child support in the case that the father takes care of the child instead of the mother?

 

[CiG]

I agree. Most men are horrible and wouldn't pay if given the option.

I love that Mort completely ignores this sexist comment to swoop in to defend women. Fucking see-through asshole.

Aussie women aren't subject to paying child support in the case that the father takes care of the child instead of the mother?

Obviously they are, but when they fall behind the penalties are so lax compared with men. The only real incentive to pay for women is a moral one.

 

[Mort Divine]

Sexism against men doesn't exist.

 

[CiG]

Sexism against men doesn't exist.

Says the feminist. Facts don't matter to you, this is entirely an ideological matter for people like you.

 

[Omni]

No, it isn't ambiguous. Neither is the function of the egg. Your argument doesn't simply go/end where you think it does.

But speaking of ambiguity, women can be ambiguous about their intentions with that genetic material. Or outright lie. Etc.

Men have the choice to not engage in reproductive activity if they don't want the associated risks. That is my argument, and you have yet to refute it because it's a fact.

Men are also just as likely to lie as women about their intentions regarding sex. Don't use stupid bullshit like this in a discussion when it goes both ways.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Obviously they are, but when they fall behind the penalties are so lax compared with men. The only real incentive to pay for women is a moral one.

Perhaps, but I'm skeptical of your depiction of penalties being nearly automatic and almost always turning into severe penalties for men. My siblings and I all have different fathers. Both my sister's and my brother's fathers were total shit heads and almost never paid child support. Legally, they were supposed to, but they didn't. They were also never penalized for it. The reason why is because my mother never actively attempted to make them pay by running to the court. She bitched about it, but there was never any subsequent action.

The parent who is supposed to receive the child support has to chase after the other parent to get it, if you will. Perhaps single dads do this less? I'm not sure. Maybe the laws are different in Australia.

 

[Mort Divine]

Says the feminist. Facts don't matter to you, this is entirely an ideological matter for people like you.

Says the MRA

Wow, easy game to play

 

[CiG]

Men have the choice to not engage in reproductive activity if they don't want the associated risks. That is my argument, and you have yet to refute it because it's a fact.

Men are also just as likely to lie as women about their intentions regarding sex. Don't use stupid bullshit like this in a discussion when it goes both ways.

The point is, it does go both ways but only one gender is defended against this generality and the other is asserted endlessly without care.

Perhaps, but I'm skeptical of your depiction of penalties being nearly automatic and almost always turning into severe penalties for men. My siblings and I all have different fathers. Both my sister's and my brother's fathers were total shit heads and almost never paid child support. Legally, they were supposed to, but they didn't. They were also never penalized for it. The reason why is because my mother never actively attempted to make them pay by running to the court. She bitched about it, but there was never any subsequent action.

The parent who is supposed to receive the child support has to chase after the other parent to get it, if you will. Perhaps single dads do this less? I'm not sure. Maybe the laws are different in Australia.

Well, I never said that the court system pursues men in some hysterical manner (some assert it does though) but you hit the nail on the head. Women will take a man to court more often over falling behind in payments than a man will over a woman not paying at all. There was some data somewhere, I might try to find it. But for now I'll use anecdotal evidence.

My father paid child support to my mother, then when we lived with my father my mother didn't pay a cent yet my father never pursued her over it. It's seemingly cultural.
I do think in general there is a female bias in the family court system and this can be backed up by court system data such as: black men get the harshest sentencing, then white men, then black women, then white women. Besides the racial component I think it's overwhelmingly obvious that there is a bias here.

Feminists translate that as a form of sexism against women, that women aren't treated as adults. Non-feminists like me translate that as sexism against men, part of a larger theory known as Male Disposability.

Says the MRA

Wow, easy game to play

I'm not an MRA.
Typical feminist tactic, anybody that disagrees with me is probably an MRA.

Try again Mao fetishist.

 

[Mort Divine]

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc.

 

[Omni]

It must suck that almost all lawmakers, agents of law and elected officials in the entire developed world are men and almost all interpretations of laws and legal decisions are decided by men. I would hate to be a man since apparently men hate themselves and create laws and bias against themselves constantly.

Let's not even discuss how almost all societal expectations were also perpetuated by a male-led society throughout history despite those being a near constant complaint by males in regards to expectations of how males should treat females.

 

[CiG]

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc.

Increasingly MRA's are looking like women. Due to the utter failure of feminism.

It must suck that almost all lawmakers, agents of law and elected officials in the entire developed world are men and almost all interpretations of laws and legal decisions are decided by men. I would hate to be a man since apparently men hate themselves and create laws and bias against themselves constantly.

Let's not even discuss how almost all societal expectations were also perpetuated by a male-led society throughout history despite those being a near constant complaint by males in regards to expectations of how males should treat females.

That was the longest, most pointless point ever made.

 

[no country for old wainds]

the best thing about that feminist picture is the way its been so lazily pasted over something else lol, that really makes it.

 

[Omni]

You might think so, but it's also factual.

 

[Mort Divine]

Increasingly MRA's are looking like women. Due to the utter failure of feminism.



That was the longest, most pointless point ever made.

What does one looking like a woman have to do with anything? There are either more women MRAs or not. Looking "like a woman" is irrelevant.

Failures? In that it hasn't yet dismantled patriarchy, I guess that's a failure? but when you're up against a system of oppression that has existed since humans first started making long term dwellings maybe it isn't that easy

Otherwise any perceived failures are purely flaws in your understanding

 

[CiG]

You might think so, but it's also factual.

I never said it was false.
But it assumes that the genders have themselves in mind when they dish out privileges and favours. Margaret Thatcher bulldozed her way through the ranks of men in 1979 and onwards but what did she do for women beyond symbolism? If you adhere to Male disposability theory which I do, it doesn't at all suggest that men look out for men. Men overwhelmingly look out for women, as does society. It's simply a fact of evolution that this is the way things are and not until complex and philosophical concepts of freedom and rights came along that things started to seem very unequal.

For example: keeping woman in the home is a very simple idea, they're safer there. Since most women up until now had children with them most of the time, a safe woman meant a safe family. It's why women evolved to be much more sensitive to their surroundings because if they were cold, so were their kids.

What does one looking like a woman have to do with anything? There are either more women MRAs or not. Looking "like a woman" is irrelevant.

Failures? In that it hasn't yet dismantled patriarchy, I guess that's a failure? but when you're up against a system of oppression that has existed since humans first started making long term dwellings maybe it isn't that easy

Otherwise any perceived failures are purely flaws in your understanding

"Looking like a woman" as in, a lot of MRA's are women now and the percentage is steadily increasing. (You interpreted that comment in the most Mort way possible, I wasn't making a comment about ladyboys/crossdressers/trans/whatever lol.)
80% of MRM figureheads are female and even a few are transwomen. Feminism lost it's argument decades ago, especially when it became corporate and the controllers of millions of dollars. Read up on some Erin Pizzey.

The failures of feminism are blatant, patriarchy was essentially dismantled with no-fault divorce and the Tender Years Doctrine. Since then it's just been a wacky movement of cultural relativists, social constructivism and micro-management of people.

For all the endless conflating of feminism with "women" as a monolithic demographic, in the last 5 years the number of self-labelling feminists has gone from 28% to 18% and feminism has only become louder since then.