Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Checkbook Daddies

by Smitty

Here are two intelligent ladies going on and on about women who become pregnant under coercive circumstances.
Amy: Your best bet is not to sleep with them
Crucial questions that neither one seems capable of addressing are:
  1. Why are we here? and
  2. How does your answer to #1 drive your approach to sexuality?
I'm being unfair to the ladies, becuase they are beginning post facto on the point. The bundle of joy has arrived. The man has not been consulted, yet will legally be held financially accountable for a couple of decades.
The point to be made here, in terms of attacking the general problem, is that neglecting the root causes of issues is the modern approach to generating a "self-licking ice cream cone" situation where the problem can be maintained indefinitely. Expanded. Books, conferences, careers.
Amy: I just want it to be fair
Amy, fa(re|ir) is what you pay to ride a bus. Manhood is about more than stand-up urination and upper body strength. If a boy is getting busy with a woman not his wife, with whom he's not fully ready to enjoy the consequences and the pleasure, then a man he's certainly not.
Amy and Helen, your seeming disinterest in even considering marriage and faith as important inputs to the discussion is symptomatic of societal decline. Let me help:
He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?--Micah 6:8
One only reason this problem seems so intractable is that you haven't started where the solutions begin. ;)


  1. Amen, Rev. Smith! But you forgot to tell the ungrateful bastards ... er, I mean, the faithful congregation to hit the tip jar ... er, I mean, to give generously to support our ministry!

  2. Yeah. Because men who want equality under the law are wimps.

    I'm familiar with this modern version of chivalry. I call it the take-it-up-the-arse version. It goes like this: a manly man takes it up the arse from women, and the larger the strap-on she can use, the more pain the man can take, and the less he shows it --- well the more manly he is.

    That's stupid.

  3. Jeff, your comment is something of a non sequitur, eh? I'm not sure what you're reading into Smitty's argument. It seems to me he's saying basically that screwing around is a bad thing. If you wish to argue that screwing around is a good thing, that's something else. But strap-ons and anal sex have zilch to do with it.

  4. Well, sure, if my comment is taken literally it's not relevant. But it's intended to be a revolting image of a modern man who turns servile acceptance of female fraud and abuse into a virtue. Was it over the top? Probably. If it failed to get the point across then it was a failure. My bad.

    I don't think Smitty is just arguing that screwing around is a bad thing. He's also arguing against men having more equal reproductive rights with women. There are men who have been assessed child support after women fished used condoms out of the trash can and injected the contents into themselves. It's not necessary that men "screw around" for this kind of fraud to be perpetrated on men.

    The right answer is not a pre-birth-control sexual ethos. This will simply fail. Women dress and act out more, more and more sexually. Modesty is over. Done. Men and women are going to have sex. The only solution is to update men's reproductive rights, just as women's have been.

    Men must also have the right of choice. Men cannot coerce women in their "choice" to have or not to have a child. women should not be able to coerce men either. During the term in which a woman can legally have an abortion, a man should be able to terminate his rights and obligations to the unborn child.

    Today, women have no incentive to select decent men with which to mate. They only need rich men, because they can take the child and a paycheck unilaterally. When men can terminate their rights and responsibilities, women will have a strong economic incentive to select better mates.

    And make no mistake: the problem is women and their choices. Women are the one's who decide if they get pregnant. It's their choice, so it ought to be their responsibility. For a warrant, I need only appeal to the commonplace that rights and responsibilities are concomitant. Today, men have absolutely no reproductive rights.

    Smitty's smatter about what it means to be a man is about 60 years out of date. Birth control radically changed the incentives for women, and the laws were updated to reflect it, but the laws still hold men to feudal standards.

    We have modern, sexually liberated feminists calling for men to behave like 19th century gentlemen. Smitty's doing it, too. That way lies disaster. Just look around you. It's already a disaster.

  5. Jeff-

    If your definition of "fairness" doesn't take into account the laws of physics, then you might conclude they have an unjust author. But just maybe if you accept reality as it is and not as some scale of self-centered reward & punishment then you could base you judgments not on the uneven distribution of statistical probability but reserve it to human action.

    You can't legislate around the fact that women get pregnant from having sex with men. Act according to known principals, or educate yourself if you are unaware of them. Or didn't you parents ever tell you about the birds and the bees? If not it's their fault, not the school system's whp they delegated it too but did not follow up on.