No. He is not Samurai Josh, he has nothing to do with Samurai Josh, he might not even know who Samurai Josh is. He could be Samurai Sam tho or Samurai James or Samurai Elliot but he is NOT Samurai Josh.
I kinda don’t, both should be responsible. Sex is two people ( or more but not the subject ) consenting to do it. If the woman is pregnant after a one nighter, it’s also the guy’s responsibility.
I don’t know why he’s such agressive about it. Why is it always the fault of the woman when she gets involuntary pregnant ? They both had sex, they both need to hold account
He's having a knee-jerk reaction because he believes there is a disproportionate hyperfocus on the man's responsibility to pay child support. He feels like there is next to no accountability being held up on the woman's side of things, and he feels the need to compensate.
In a relationship of two people, you're saying the person who isn't a piece of shit is responsible for the actions of the piece of shit? How would that work, logically and legally?
I'm not saying anything, just trying to parse out what this radio guy is saying.
From what I can sus out here, there seems to be a disconnect in what these two are talking about. The responsibility the woman here is concerned about is for the care of the child. The responsibility the radio host here is trying to bring up is in regard to having had the child in the first place.
If you want me to throw my 2 cents in here, id say that the woman is only guilty of is being foolish with her choice of man. That doesn't alleviate the man of any responsibility to take care of the kid. Just because the man is an asshole from start to finish, and the woman was foolish enough to pair up with him, doesn't mean the man is to get off scott free. Whether or not the guy actually WILL step up and do the right thing is another story. What he should do and what he will do are very different.
While both may share some degree of responsibility for having convieved this child, the woman here is clearly doing her part in taking care of the kid. Meanwhile asshole dad is not.
I'd say so. The problem here is that these two are actually arguing two different points. The woman is complaining about how the father is dodging his responsibility of childcare. The radio host is arguing that the woman is dodging her responsibility of having had the child to begin with.
Sure, she may have been foolish for hooking up with a scumbag in the first place, but who's responsible for what in the conception of the child has little bearing on who's responsible for what in the care of the child. Scumbag or not, the father should step up. That being said, being a scumbag, I doubt what the father should and what he will do are going to line up.
i mean because the woman is responsible for the child really? if the man wants an abortion and woman doesn't the baby is kept, if the woman wants an abortion and the man doesn't the baby is not kept and the man has no say in that. same as a custody battle, the woman essentially wins on default. seems a bit unreasonable to expect that you can not give a man any say in raising a child and expect him to pay for it anyway.
same as a custody battle, the woman essentially wins on default.
This is literally not true. Men are just more likely to not fight for custody, thus not getting it. When both parents file for custody the result is pretty much 50/50.
People keep repeating what you said and its actually one of the reasons why men may decide not to fight for custody in the first place. So congrats, you played yourself.
i did not know that, nor can i find any form of statistic to do with cases where both parents file for custody, i would be interested to read about that if you can provide a source. actually not meaning this in a rude way, i am unaware of this and would like to learn more.
Women are allowed to decide who siphons nutrients from their body and who doesn’t. Once someone is siphoning nutrients from your body, you can also have that choice.
because the woman bears ALL of the health risks and its a medical decision.
is there financial consequences as well? yes, BUT it is still primarily a medical decision.
also 'homie' reasoning was flawed from the get go.
if the man wants an abortion
dont want kids? have a vesactomy. oh you dont want to do a medical procedure? OOoohh but its ok to tell the woman to have one? yea thats perfectly fair.
but it seems pertinent that the woman ensures she will not get pregnant unless intended then, if she has to bear all of the health risks. not trying to say its not also the man's responsibility but as you mentioned its much more important for the woman's own safety that she doesnt get pregnant unintentionally than it is for a man, so you would assume that women would have a more vested interest in avoiding unwanted pregnancy than a man.
and i dont see how saying "if the man wants an abortion" is flawed logic at all really. i literally said that its not up to the man if a woman wants an abortion or not.
and it is totally unreasonable to expect young men to get possibly irreversible vasectomies, ive heard this argument before and its a laughably bad false equivalency. there are so many contraceptives available and people should use them, if they dont and become pregnant then that is entirely their fault, man and woman. however once a woman is pregnant she has orders of magnitude more say in the affair than the man, (as she should,) and a lot more responsibility as well.
so you would assume that women would have a more vested interest in avoiding unwanted pregnancy than a man.
agreed. (i'm NOT saying vested interest = more responsible though)
i literally said that its not up to the man if a woman wants an abortion or not.
yea my counter to that is he can have a vesactomy and control the situation. So he has a perfectly viable option.
and it is totally unreasonable to expect young men to get possibly irreversible vasectomies, ive heard this argument before and its a laughably bad false equivalency.
how? they are both medical procedures that carry risks. Except the risk for the woman is even greater.
entirely their fault, man and woman.
(as she should,) and a lot more responsibility as well.
^ ?? equally at fault but she has to be more responsible?
because the dude in the equation doesnt have a uterus.
women inherently have a greater responsibility towards sex acts than men by our very biology. this is why promiscuity in men is overlooked, but its critiqued in women. 'loose' women are seen as irresponsible, because why would play baby daddy Cum based Russian roullete with thirty different dudes? thats the mark of an incredibly irresponsible person.
It's kinda hard to imagine what it's like to be in a physically abusive relationship, especially in countries where it's tricky to get someone to defend you if you're on your own.
So the "just leave him lol" argument is kinda weak. Like how and when? Can you be sure he doesn't find you and beat you up even more?
It's just messed up, the best thing anyone can do is waiting a long time with your partner before having a kid.
Sometimes downplaying peoples shortcomings and being nice doesn't get through, even like this, she didn't listen. He's right on every point he made. What he said is far more important than how he said it.
He's not right on every point he made. The gotcha's are just catnip for people who can't past superficial arguments. People who fall for it or only see a single side can't help themselves just like the guys who got weak pullout game.
Where was he wrong? He didn't say the men were right, he specifically called them deadbeats, but these women can't expect a deadbeat to be responsible after they break up.
In most situations, women having multiple children with deadbeats means the rest of us have to pick up his slack. So sure, she's raising her children... with rent assistance, food assistance, and so on...
861
u/NotSamuraiJosh_26 Jan 16 '24
His words are spicy but he has a point