Stop equating feminism with anything that is bad for some people who are men. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of feminists do not want a system that blatantly scams men.
If a person has to pay money to support a child that was not theirs, that is wrong. It sounds extremely unlikely to me that the law would be so unfair as to disagree with that.
It's a nonstandard usage, but at least it makes more sense then using the word feminism to refer to gender equality. I mean it's right there in the name, FEMinism, FEMale, it's not about equality.
Just because it's got "fem" in the name doesn't mean it isn't about equality. If your argument is supported by only three letters, then you've got a very shallow argument.
Soooo, wait. You're claiming the "fem" feminism means something else? It's just a coincidence that the name sounds like it refers to the same group of people who predominantly subscribe to the ideology and whose interests it serves?
Not a coincidence, but it might as well be for all the importance it has.
Feminism was created many years ago when gender equality was more black and white. Men had more rights than women in pretty much all cases. Calling an gender equality ideology "feminism" would make sense in that time seeing as females had less rights across the board.
Now it's a left over term applied in the same way but to a wider group of people seeing as the scales are less unfairly balanced. As I see it, women still have a worse condition than men but it's more clear that men have an unacceptable condition in some areas too. Feminism serves men's interests in areas where men have an unacceptable condition. It's happening right now in this thread: I am a feminist, and I am defending men's rights right here.
I think you're putting too much importance on the word. It's just a word. Which letters appear in a word don't define the word's meaning.
I knew we're way off topic now but... At best it's kind of ironic though isn't it? Many feminists seem to agree language and word choice are pretty important.
I think we both know his argument has a lot more ground than just 3 letters. Associating it with equality really may not have started off the way its publicized but it's largely been dubbed and accepted as nothing more than a formality by both genders, unofficial as it may be.
I really disagree. I am a feminist, and I believe in equality. I know a lot of feminists personally, and every single one of them believes in equality. I'm sure there are feminists who do not believe in equality, but that isn't enough to debunk the fact that any academically rigorous flavour of feminism has equality as part of its ideological core.
Where are you feminists when society is being unfair to men? Where are you militants and activists when the government treats men as disposable tools and sperm donors? When something bad happens to women you manifest on the street or in the court, signing petitions and walking around with banners victimizing yourself. If you claim you're all for equality, why don't you get out on the street when injustice is being done to men? Because you don't want equality. You want privilege and supremacy. You fucking hypocrites!
Some non-bio "fathers" are liable for support if it is found that they acted as a father to the child for a long enough period of time, the child knows the man as his or her father, and if taking away the support and presence of the "father" would be detrimental to the child.
In support cases, an assessment is generally done prior to ordering DNA testing to determine if the court can just assign paternity based on the critwria I described above.
I think, in that case, it's more reasonable expect the father to pay child support even if he isn't biologically linked to the child. Especially if the mother didn't know the identity of the biological father until the test. The man is the father in all but biology, and I don't think biology is all that important in what makes someone the father. In that case, perhaps a system by which child support was split between the biological and non-biological father would be fairest.
I agree that the reasoning behind him being liable is sound, to a point.
This should not be happening to unwitting men anymore though and women need to be held accountable when they defraud men. Men, before signing the birth certificate, should be informed of their right to DNA testing and versed in these support laws. Men should have that courtesy!! Women should be held accountable for not disclosing the possibility of other fathers when filling out the birth certificate. Knowingly inputting false or incomplete information on the birth certificate application should be a crime taken seriously.
If you act as that kid's father for 15 years and the kid loves you as his or her father, I believe that makes you more the father than some stranger who had sex with the mother 15 years and 9 months ago. By that point, it *is* your kid.
I still think the biological father should have some responsibility. That's why I said there should be a split. It could even be a 60/40 or 70/30 split. I've not thought that deeply into it.
Is the paternity system feminist?
← View full post
Stop equating feminism with anything that is bad for some people who are men. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of feminists do not want a system that blatantly scams men.
If a person has to pay money to support a child that was not theirs, that is wrong. It sounds extremely unlikely to me that the law would be so unfair as to disagree with that.
--
EccentricWeird
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
3
3
-
Couman
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
4
4
-
Jim_Sochs
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Anonymous Post Author
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
But that's what feminism IS.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=define+feminism
--
EccentricWeird
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
It's a question of do as I say not as I do!
It's a nonstandard usage, but at least it makes more sense then using the word feminism to refer to gender equality. I mean it's right there in the name, FEMinism, FEMale, it's not about equality.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Just because it's got "fem" in the name doesn't mean it isn't about equality. If your argument is supported by only three letters, then you've got a very shallow argument.
--
Couman
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
-
Anonymous Post Author
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Soooo, wait. You're claiming the "fem" feminism means something else? It's just a coincidence that the name sounds like it refers to the same group of people who predominantly subscribe to the ideology and whose interests it serves?
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Not a coincidence, but it might as well be for all the importance it has.
Feminism was created many years ago when gender equality was more black and white. Men had more rights than women in pretty much all cases. Calling an gender equality ideology "feminism" would make sense in that time seeing as females had less rights across the board.
Now it's a left over term applied in the same way but to a wider group of people seeing as the scales are less unfairly balanced. As I see it, women still have a worse condition than men but it's more clear that men have an unacceptable condition in some areas too. Feminism serves men's interests in areas where men have an unacceptable condition. It's happening right now in this thread: I am a feminist, and I am defending men's rights right here.
I think you're putting too much importance on the word. It's just a word. Which letters appear in a word don't define the word's meaning.
--
Couman
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I knew we're way off topic now but... At best it's kind of ironic though isn't it? Many feminists seem to agree language and word choice are pretty important.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Do they? I can't say I've noticed. Are you talking about being PC? I don't see the irony. Sorry :P
I think we both know his argument has a lot more ground than just 3 letters. Associating it with equality really may not have started off the way its publicized but it's largely been dubbed and accepted as nothing more than a formality by both genders, unofficial as it may be.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
I really disagree. I am a feminist, and I believe in equality. I know a lot of feminists personally, and every single one of them believes in equality. I'm sure there are feminists who do not believe in equality, but that isn't enough to debunk the fact that any academically rigorous flavour of feminism has equality as part of its ideological core.
--
YourMomSaysHello
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
3
3
Where are you feminists when society is being unfair to men? Where are you militants and activists when the government treats men as disposable tools and sperm donors? When something bad happens to women you manifest on the street or in the court, signing petitions and walking around with banners victimizing yourself. If you claim you're all for equality, why don't you get out on the street when injustice is being done to men? Because you don't want equality. You want privilege and supremacy. You fucking hypocrites!
--
Anonymous Post Author
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
-
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
... Well. You've gotta respect his honesty. Feminism has had a track record of only being about equality when it bennefits... well femailes.
Hmm.
Some non-bio "fathers" are liable for support if it is found that they acted as a father to the child for a long enough period of time, the child knows the man as his or her father, and if taking away the support and presence of the "father" would be detrimental to the child.
In support cases, an assessment is generally done prior to ordering DNA testing to determine if the court can just assign paternity based on the critwria I described above.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Jim_Sochs
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I think, in that case, it's more reasonable expect the father to pay child support even if he isn't biologically linked to the child. Especially if the mother didn't know the identity of the biological father until the test. The man is the father in all but biology, and I don't think biology is all that important in what makes someone the father. In that case, perhaps a system by which child support was split between the biological and non-biological father would be fairest.
--
Jim_Sochs
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
-
Mazlow
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I agree that the reasoning behind him being liable is sound, to a point.
This should not be happening to unwitting men anymore though and women need to be held accountable when they defraud men. Men, before signing the birth certificate, should be informed of their right to DNA testing and versed in these support laws. Men should have that courtesy!! Women should be held accountable for not disclosing the possibility of other fathers when filling out the birth certificate. Knowingly inputting false or incomplete information on the birth certificate application should be a crime taken seriously.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I agree that a paternity test should be default, and the birth certificate should be signed by the biological father after his identity is confirmed.
Okay I'm calling bullsh%t here. Not your kid, not your responsibility.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If you act as that kid's father for 15 years and the kid loves you as his or her father, I believe that makes you more the father than some stranger who had sex with the mother 15 years and 9 months ago. By that point, it *is* your kid.
I still think the biological father should have some responsibility. That's why I said there should be a split. It could even be a 60/40 or 70/30 split. I've not thought that deeply into it.
*criteria
Apparently it is. It's not an outright law as such but it is how the judicial system has always worked though.
And it's a poll. I didn't equate it to feminism. I just asked for the opinion whether it was or not.