Yohan Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Pudgimelon, May I ask you, 1- How do you justify, that you simply overlook the fact that this man was deceived into thinking his girlfriend was using contraception? 2- Are you sure, he is really the father? You did not write anything about ...... You think, he just should go back to UK and work and pay for the child? So what do you think, he should do if he is not the father? Or should he not even think about to check it out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OOLEEBER Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 This topic has deteriorated to the point that it no longer deserves a reply which will put it back at the top. Oooopps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damnaam Posted August 30, 2004 Author Share Posted August 30, 2004 Pudgimelon - you have all the facts at your hands, I imagine you've read the bit about me probably being able to get some TV work out in the far east - on the cricket tours out that way and the asian tour golf too - these pay more than the B1000 a day I've earnt in the past as a dive guide there..... I agree that there is no 100% effective method of contraception but you're out of your mind if you think I'm the only guy ever in the world who thought that the girl he 'stuck his dick in' was on the pill, so that should MASSIVELY reduce the chances of her conceiving. Even then, she stopped taking it. I certainly didn't know about that! Yes, you have all the facts available to you, but still you choose to make an uninformed, knee-jerk, and I'm sure you're familiar with the term JERK, reaction. I don't have a problem that you disagree with me and criticise me. I'm open-minded about what may happen here and will definitely be making the 7 hour drive up to Scotland to try and make the birth, if I get there in time, because I owe the child at least that much and also need to find out if I really can walk away from this but your reasoning just doesn't make sense. You're a waste of 'virtual paper'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudgimelon Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 1-How do you justify the fact, that you simply overlook the fact that this man was deceived into thinking his girlfriend was using contraception? 2- Are you sure, he is really the father? You did not write anything about ...... You think, he just should go back to UK and work and pay for the child? 1) Deception or not, the pill only REDUCES the odds of getting pregnant, it doesn't negate the possibility. By the way, there's nothing moralistic about this. It's simple biology. While it may be a lot of fun to shag just for the ###### of it, the primary biological purpose of that action is reproduction. And therefore, if you do the deed, you are tacitly accepting the possibility of conception. If you can't deal with that (or if you're not prepared to deal with that), then the only real option is to abstain. This guy has made it a point that "for personal reasons" he was not ready to become a father (and I've got no beef with him on that, he certainly sounds like he's not ready). But if he's NOT ready, why is he engaging in the one act that is the ONLY way he CAN become a father?? If he's not ready, he should have abstained (or stuck with anal and BJs), because so far, science has not created a 100% effective contraceptive (aside from getting neutered). 2) Get a paternity test first. If he is the father, he should go back, because there is no way he can support a kid in the UK on a Thai salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OOLEEBER Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 C'mon Guys. Let it go. This has nothing to do with a forum on Thailand. Take your arguments elsewhere. PLEEEZZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damnaam Posted August 30, 2004 Author Share Posted August 30, 2004 C'mon Guys. Let it go.This has nothing to do with a forum on Thailand. Take your arguments elsewhere. PLEEEZZ Ooleeber - you're right. This topic has achieved its goal, in my mind. I thank everyone who took the time to post intelligent replies and bid this topic farewell. I'll now stand back as it sinks gracefully into oblivion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 The girl was wrong, saying she's on the pill & then not taking it is deceptive but as the old saying goes, it takes two to tango & boy did you get screwed in this dance. After reading that she has some problems with her fertility, I can sort of understand that she was just trying anything to get pregnant & you happened to be the unfortunate donor! Emotional blackmail after that, promising to abort the child if you come back & be with her is the nastiest thing I ever heard & marks her as a bitch, in my book. She probably didn't think beyond the getting pregnant stage & is now scared thinking about her life as a single mother. It's not an easy life & being the main parent for a child is a usually thankless & emotionally & physically draining task. That said, you did the deed with this girl & obviously had/still have feelings for her, so why not wait until the baby is born, have the paternity test & if it's yours, agree some sort of access & support (it doesn't have to be much) & get on with your life. She will realise what a mistake she made trapping you but the child will make up for it & she wil eventually move on & meet someone new. Not the best situation in the world but keeping freindly should make the childs life easier in the future. A lot of people have said, what a bitch, leave her, forget about her etc & yes, she was out of order to stop taking the pill, but as another poster said, no form on contrception is 100 percent & the responsibility shouldn't always be on the girl. If your gonna stick it in, then be ready for the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yohan Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 And therefore, if you do the deed, you are tacitly accepting the possibility of conception. If you can't deal with that (or if you're not prepared to deal with that), then the only real option is to abstain. It is not the only real option. Another option is to use a condom or to agree with the partner, if it really happens, what to do....abortion or birth.... If he is the father, he should go back, because there is no way he can support a kid in the UK on a Thai salary. Who says so? Why not insist, that the child should live in Thailand, too (with or without mother?) - and there are foreigners, earning better in Thailand than you might expect.... There are foreigners, living with foreign wife AND their children in Thailand! I see no reason, why he should not continue to stay in Thailand. And why should he not marry his Thai girl friend? Somebody said in this thread, that this all has nothing to do with Thailand.....???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudgimelon Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Pudgimelon - you have all the facts at your hands, I imagine you've read the bit about me probably being able to get some TV work out in the far east - on the cricket tours out that way and the asian tour golf too - these pay more than the B1000 a day I've earnt in the past as a dive guide there.....I agree that there is no 100% effective method of contraception but you're out of your mind if you think I'm the only guy ever in the world who thought that the girl he 'stuck his dick in' was on the pill, so that should MASSIVELY reduce the chances of her conceiving. Even then, she stopped taking it. I certainly didn't know about that! Yes, you have all the facts available to you, but still you choose to make an uninformed, knee-jerk, and I'm sure you're familiar with the term JERK, reaction. I don't have a problem that you disagree with me and criticise me. I'm open-minded about what may happen here and will definitely be making the 7 hour drive up to Scotland to try and make the birth, if I get there in time, because I owe the child at least that much and also need to find out if I really can walk away from this but your reasoning just doesn't make sense. You're a waste of 'virtual paper'. a) a job that pays more than $25.00 a day? and that's supposed to be a good thing? while that may cover the cost of living in Thailand, it certainly doesn't cover the cost of raising a child in the UK. I recall reading something that the cost of raising a kid for 18 years worked out to around $160,000 (US), not including college tuition. That works out to around $800 a month. You'd then also need to get life insurance (so you don't leave a dependent without support) and start saving money in a college fund. And then, of course, there's always the unexpected expenses like braces, broken bones, and nasty things like asthma and allergies that can raise that average cost quite a bit. So bare minimum, you'd need to be sending/saving at least 50,000 to 60,000 baht a month (between the money you send back to the UK and the money you spend on insurance and future tuition costs), which means you'd need to be making somewhere in the neighborhood of 80,000 baht or 100,000 baht a month to support both yourself (in Thailand) and a kid (in the UK). So even if your "TV job" in Thailand pays you a lot more than $25 a day, is it going to pay you THAT much more?? She stopped taking the pill, so this is all her fault? Is that your line of reasoning? Sorry buddy, but that doesn't wash. Your dick. Your sperm. In her. Pill or no pill, you're gambling. Just because the odds are "MASSIVELY" reduced (as you put it) by the pill, doesn't mean you're suddenly except from responsibility if the pill doesn't work or if she stops taking it. If anything, you are at least at fault for chosing a sex partner who could not be honest with you about something important like that. She certainly sounds like she was being irresponsible and perhaps a bit childish and selfish herself by going off the pill without telling you (especially if she knew you didn't want to have a kid). However, YOU CHOSE that person as your sex partner, so just because she didn't act ideally doesn't absolve you from responsibility. If you can't find emotionally mature, responsible and honest women to have sex with, that's your own ###### fault. c) Call me a jerk if you want. I'm just pointing out the piece of this equation that you seem to be over-looking: YOU. You say I have all the facts? Well, then let's review them: 1- You said you didn't want to have kids. 2- Yet you still engaged in vaginal intercourse, the ONLY sexual activity that produces kids. 3- She went off the pill without telling you. 4- She got pregnant. 5- You think it's "not your fault" and you want to shirk your responsibility and flee to the ass-side of the world to avoid the mess YOU helped make. That about sum it up??? It's pretty obvious that you both are emotionally immature and probably not ready for parenthood, but ######, nobody is ever ideally READY for parenthood. But let me ask you one question: Setting aside the issues of "fault" and "responsibility", what did this baby do to deserve to be abandoned?? Just because it had the bad luck of being the product of irresponsible parents doesn't mean that it's "at fault" for this situation. So why not cut the kid some slack and give him/her the support (financial definitely, emotional if you can manage it) he/she will need to have a good life. It's the least you can do. And the most too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RooBoy Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 What a high and mighty wan.ker you are, lets see, we could look at it this way, we are all animals, other than being able to reason, we are no different on this planet. As most all other male species pretty well piss off at the first sign of offspring (thats if they dont try to eat them first) then we should follow what is purely a natural, millions of years old subconcious instinct. Could we guess on your background pudgymelon? Born again christian do gooder, spent time in Pakistan trying to convert all the heathen muslim children to the true faith, never had sex because it is a dirty sinful act worthy only of animals (see above) and recently heard about Thailand and its immoral behaviour, deciding that is the place to be, lots of sinners there to lord over with your christian values. obviously noone likes to be judged.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TingTawng Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 Pudgimelon, a few things for you to consider:- 1. Women in the western world have a right to reproductive choice 2. Men in the western world do not have a right to reproductive choice (other than abstaining from sex altogether). Your argument underlines no.2 (you say he should have abstained). However, this is a more nuanced problem. No.2 simply gives the choice for a man NOT to be a father. It doesn't give him a choice to BE a father (women can have abortions without father's consent). Similarly, a woman can decide unilaterally to get pregnant, by stopping contraception without telling her partner. This has denied the male sexual partner his choice in whether he wants to become a father or not. The pill is widely accepted as a very effective means of preventing pregnancy. Even if it fails, there is abortion to consider. You may disagree with this, but no women should get pregnant unless the (prospective) father agrees. Why? Simply because a child has a better chance in this life if both of his/her parents actually planned to have him or her. Men have reproductive responsibilities without any rights. Women have reproductive rights without any responsibilities. By overlooking this Pudgimelon, your argument exists in a vacuum of ideology; it has nothing to do with the real world laws and (lack of) choices men face when they have been duped. If you were arguing for the ban of the pill or even a complete ban on sex outside of marriage, I would actually respect your opinion (even though I'd disagree). However your posts are a mix of schadenfreude and moral judgement; there isn't any point to your posts other than that (if there was a point, you would come right out and say something like you disagree with sex full stop or you are against all forms of contraception because none ON THEIR OWN are 100% effective). What is the point you are trying to make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartender100 Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 C'mon Guys. Let it go.This has nothing to do with a forum on Thailand. Take your arguments elsewhere. PLEEEZZ Lets listen to an experienced guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartender100 Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 C'mon Guys. Let it go.This has nothing to do with a forum on Thailand. Take your arguments elsewhere. PLEEEZZ Lets listen to an experienced guy The guy wants to leave his preg girl friend and come to Thailand.Maybe he will do the same here and go to Phillipines,that makes it a thread about Thailand. It might be your girlfriend that he does it to,if you actually live here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghengis Posted August 30, 2004 Share Posted August 30, 2004 My ex-wife got pregnant 6 months after we split up back in 1996. This was a mistake as it was a short-term fling and she about to split up with him as he was a bit of a jerk. The father wanted her to have an abortion, which she refused and would not pay maintenance until the CSA forced him to. She decided that he should pay less and not see the child (which he was never interested in anyway). She later got remarried and then wanted the new husband to act as the 'father' of the baby. The moral of this story: Staying together for the sake of a baby may not be a good idea. In the long term the biological father may be surplus to requirements when the mother funds a new partner. Some people are not suited to the role of father. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudgimelon Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 What a high and mighty wan.ker you are, lets see, we could look at it this way, we are all animals, other than being able to reason, we are no different on this planet. As most all other male species pretty well piss off at the first sign of offspring (thats if they dont try to eat them first) then we should follow what is purely a natural, millions of years old subconcious instinct.Could we guess on your background pudgymelon? Born again christian do gooder, spent time in Pakistan trying to convert all the heathen muslim children to the true faith, never had sex because it is a dirty sinful act worthy only of animals (see above) and recently heard about Thailand and its immoral behaviour, deciding that is the place to be, lots of sinners there to lord over with your christian values. obviously noone likes to be judged.. Is your view of the universe really that simplistic? Or are you intentionally ignorant? I favor accepting personal responsibility for one's own actions. I am against "playing the blame game" and pointing fingers. And I am against people who shirk their responsibilities. Most of all, I am against adult-adolescents who value their own selfish motivations above the interests of the children they harm. ------- Can you please explain to me how that position is the exclusive domain of Christian fundamentalist and sexual prudes?? I fail to see the connection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudgimelon Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Pudgimelon, a few things for you to consider:-1. Women in the western world have a right to reproductive choice 2. Men in the western world do not have a right to reproductive choice (other than abstaining from sex altogether). Your argument underlines no.2 (you say he should have abstained). However, this is a more nuanced problem. No.2 simply gives the choice for a man NOT to be a father. It doesn't give him a choice to BE a father (women can have abortions without father's consent). Similarly, a woman can decide unilaterally to get pregnant, by stopping contraception without telling her partner. This has denied the male sexual partner his choice in whether he wants to become a father or not. The pill is widely accepted as a very effective means of preventing pregnancy. Even if it fails, there is abortion to consider. You may disagree with this, but no women should get pregnant unless the (prospective) father agrees. Why? Simply because a child has a better chance in this life if both of his/her parents actually planned to have him or her. Men have reproductive responsibilities without any rights. Women have reproductive rights without any responsibilities. By overlooking this Pudgimelon, your argument exists in a vacuum of ideology; it has nothing to do with the real world laws and (lack of) choices men face when they have been duped. If you were arguing for the ban of the pill or even a complete ban on sex outside of marriage, I would actually respect your opinion (even though I'd disagree). However your posts are a mix of schadenfreude and moral judgement; there isn't any point to your posts other than that (if there was a point, you would come right out and say something like you disagree with sex full stop or you are against all forms of contraception because none ON THEIR OWN are 100% effective). What is the point you are trying to make? Your points are valid and I agree with most of them (although personally, I am against abortion, I still view that as a CHOICE people have a right to make TOGETHER). I wasn't ignoring the points you raised, I was simply narrowing the scope of my post. You are absolutely right, it is a bit unfair that women have a greater right to reproductive choice, but then again, they do bear the greater burden in many (not all, but many) cases. So while the laws and social norms may be schewed against the man in this situation, that STILL does not excuse him from his own responsibility. Reproductive choice is certainly a matter that we can debate, though I'd suspect that we would agree more than we would disagree on that point. But my post was focused mainly on the issue of personal responsibility, and while one can moan and wail about the "unfairness" of it all, the simple fact remains that nobody forced him to stick his dick into THAT hole. He could have just as easily NOT done the deed or stuck his dick in another hole if he really needed to stick it in something. But the minute he puts his dick into the "repro-hole" he IS making a reproductive choice, whether he "wants" the consequences or not, he IS making a choice that MAY result in reproduction and he has to understand that sometimes when you gamble, you "lose". No matter how fair the game is and no matter if the house cheats or not, if you place a bet, you are doing so with the understanding that you may lose your money. So the only real choice is to place the chips on the table or scoop and walk. But once your chips are down, you can't complain later that the game was rigged. That was a chance you took when you sat down at the table, and the house is still going to take your money, no matter how much you whine about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudgimelon Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 C'mon Guys. Let it go.This has nothing to do with a forum on Thailand. Take your arguments elsewhere. PLEEEZZ Why? Do we have to turn off our brains just because we live in Thailand? This is an issue that some of us would like to debate. AND we live in Thailand, therefore, it is a debate that people living in Thailand WANT to have. And therefore it is perfectly at home on a Thailand-based forum. We live here. We think about issues. We debate about issues. Therefore this topic is about US and our beliefs and anyone coming across this debate would see that people living in Thailand debate real issues too. If YOU are not interested, don't read. Nobody is forcing you to click on this topic. So piss off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teach Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Hail Pudgy, Though not agreeing with his general sentiment , I do agree with his last post. This is a real topic that concerns everyone no matter where they reside. Moralty - a subject that visits us all at some stage in our lives..and our lives are affected greatly by our own set of standards and the way we live up to them. I have noticed the quality of literacy has improved greatly since the demise of Ajarn's site, so I guess the moralists and general do-gooders are all over here now. No matter they may well add to the mix by giving an alternate view on social issues. To continue the debate... Extra-marital sex has been with us a long time. Sex outside of marriage was, and is still considered sinful...by those who felt better positioned to govern our lives (the same holier than thou people who now are undermining the church through their own deviant sexual behaviour)It must be wonderful to sit upon the pedestal taking the highground on an issue such as this. Anti-pre-marital sex protagonists have always forced their views on others in order to control the masses and corral their movement. "Let he without sin cast the first stone" Didn't BOTH these people engage in the sexual act, without planning for the outcome. Free of the responsibilities that followed. Did the act not take place BECAUSE precaution was (supposedly) in place. Did not the first party ignore the responsibility by engaging in the act knowingly that precaution was not present, and again for three days after the act. Does this act not smack of coersion on the part of the first party, and deception after the fact. Contraception was widely accepted and introduced by government to give liberation and sexual freedom to the FEMALE, and further, as the administration of such is time sensitive, is it not the responsibility of the taker to ensure its effective success rate. This woman had a moral duty to inform this man that contraceptive was not in place prior to the act and in not doing, took on the responsibility singularly by proceeding with it. It is easy for the do-gooders to cast morale indignation upon others from their self- appointed elevated social highground. Would they I wonder be prepared to contribute to the financial responsibilities that will ensue over the next 16 years and more, I think not. If this child is born to this world, it will enjoy the protection of our generous society, whether the farther involves himself or not. If he chooses to play a role, financially or otherwise, it must be for his own selfish/personal reasons. If he chooses not, that decision too must be respected for his own reasoning. For the bible bashers of this world who believe in the will of God, he may well have other plans for this guy that serve humanity more. As for the woman, drag her into the street, 10 lashes and the mark of a thief embrazoned on her breast, and while we're at it 10 lashes each for her parents for not raising a worthy child. Teach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Teach, I like your last paragraph. Sure, there was deception involved but then, knowing that the relation will not last he should have used his brains as well. In general I say both sides are equally participating when a child is sired. Most of the posters mention to do 'the right thing' and pay. Perhaps true for Thailand, where equal rights are still on paper, only. It takes two to have sex and that act is together. We are no longer in a biblical age, where the woman had to follow the man and assumedly did not know what's happening. The latter would actual be an insult to her intellect. So, responsibility is to be shared equally. Liability and financial settlement: First solution if the child is unwanted, is an abortion, which is no longer a dangerous operation. Either party objecting to an abortion, for other than medical reasons, should be liable for the bringing up of the child and as well have custody. Second: Both parties want to have the child but do not want to stay together. Each partner to take care to the ability of her/his finances. Means who ever has a higher income or resources shold pay more, but both have to pay. Mutual custody, like 3 months with her, than 3 months with him a.s.o. unless one party gives up such right. The second solution for sure is not perfect, but is the best I can see for the child, who in any case will be suffering. Finally, I do not think it is the man, who willingly produces a child. In the case of this thread it was the woman who thought, to make her self a baby, money not so important the bastart must pay. Absolutely wrong, let her pay as well, although, I said it he was at fault as well not being careful enough, especially when thinking of leaving her anyway. I am sure she felt this intention as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudgimelon Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 For the bible bashers of this world who believe in the will of God, he may well have other plans for this guy that serve humanity more. I don't believe I bashed a single Bible in any of my posts. Nor have I gotten on a "moral high horse" and admonished this man for his "sins". Why is it that some people cannot separate the issue of "personal responsibility" from "religious morality"??? I'm simply stating the fact that this man engaged in a reproductive act and (DUH!) a pregnancy occured. Putting aside the issues of deception and emotional blackmail on the woman's part (frankly, I agree with most of what people have said on that issue), there is STILL the glaring detail that the only way this woman could have gotten pregnant by this man, was through reproductive sex acts. Therefore, no matter how much you guys try to wiggle him out of his responsibility to the child, I have not heard a single valid justification for why HE should not be held responsible for HIS sex act. As I said before, the house can stack the deck and cheat all it wants, but in the end, you're still the one laying the chips down on the table. So while the game may be unfair, nobody forced you to play it. And THAT is something that he can run away from. And THAT is something no one in this thread has been able to refute. Did she decieve him? Sure. Are contraceptives like that pill normally pretty effective? Sure. Is he not ready to be a father? Definitely. All of those points have been made and I don't disagree with any of them. However, given all those points, that STILL doesn't not absolve him from taking personal responsibility for HIS OWN role in this situation. Do we really need to bash a Bible to get that point across?? I don't think so. It's just plain old common decency, and just because I believe in personal responsibility that doesn't mean I'm out thumping Bibles on the weekend. It could just mean that I believe people should be decent to each other (even when someone does them wrong) and that people should own up to their own mistakes and clean up their own messes. Geesh, I thought that was basic kindergarten-level morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TingTawng Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 But my post was focused mainly on the issue of personal responsibility, and while one can moan and wail about the "unfairness" of it all, the simple fact remains that nobody forced him to stick his dick into THAT hole. He could have just as easily NOT done the deed or stuck his dick in another hole if he really needed to stick it in something. Pudgimelon, he "stuck his dick into that hole" under a totally false sense of security; if a guy knowingly uses a broken condom and the girl finds she's pregnant, she can choose to have an abortion; if she sees the broken condom on the night she can even go to the pharmacy the next day for the morning after pill - reproductive choice. Not so with the case we are debating here. Do you take the catholic view, that all sex is purely for the purpose of making babies? Are you against contraception? I would respect you more if you held these views as it would mean you are consistant in your view (consistancy deserves respect of some sorts). Your moral judgement is certainly black and white Pudgimelon....there is no wiggle room for any other point of view other than that you are against recreational sex completely. You can't be a hypocrite and be for recreational sex, yet against reproductive choices for men. Both points of view do not sit together at all. What about the mother's personal responsibility? When she hears her partner doesn't want the child (well he never planned for it, he was using contraception....or he thought he was), she will know she's bringing a child into the world with a strong possibility of not having a father. She also knows it's her fault because she made the decision unilaterally to get pregnant. Care to comment on that, or do you select who has personal responsibility by gender? Bottom line: we all have personal responsibility. With that responsibility comes rights. If we are not responsible, we lose our rights. I believe the woman was irresponsible because if she kept taking the pill she would undoubtably not be pregnant now - it was her choice, not his. I know you are commenting from the "ex post facto" view (what to do from now on)....even I have given advice saying that he ultimately should financially take care of the child if the DNA says it is his.....only for the child's sake. I am just against your hobbyhorse preaching; you are condemning the wrong person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pudgimelon Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 he "stuck his dick into that hole" under a totally false sense of securityThat still doesn't change the fact that he knowingly engaged in reproductive sex. This "sense of security" you talk about is irrelevent.Like I said before, at the very least, he's at fault for having sex with a deceptive and emotionally immature partner. If he can't put in the time to develop a meaningful and HONEST relationship BEFORE he has sex, then he's to blame for any consequences he faces as a result of that act. Take my gambling analogy again. If you're playing poker with your life-long buddies, it's a pretty safe bet that the game is fair and that your buddies won't cheat you (although, you're STILL going to be responsible if you lose). But if you walk into a seedy back-alley bar and sit down at a poker table with a bunch of strangers, IT'S YOUR OWN ###### FAULT, if you lose your money, even if you find out later that the game was rigged. Likewise, if this guy can't be bothered to put in the groundwork to develop an open and honest relationship, then is it really all that surprising that he was duped?? DUH!! So I'm not "against sex". I'm just against STUPID sex. Do you take the catholic view Again, and for the last frigg'n time. I AM NOT MAKING A RELIGIOUS ARGUMENT!!! that all sex is purely for the purpose of making babies? Are you against contraception?###### no. I love sex. I'm just not stupid enough to believe that contraception is 100% effective. So if I got a girl "in trouble", I'd own up to it and do the right thing. Old-fashioned, maybe. But fundamentalist? Phftt..........You can't be a hypocrite and be for recreational sex, yet against reproductive choices for men. Both points of view do not sit together at all. Reproductive choices is an entirely different debate, in which I'd be more than happy to defeat you in another thread. But even sticking to the issue of personal responsibility, it can still be seen that this guy DID make a reproductive choice. He engaged in reproductive sex. The "security" of contraception and the deception of his partner are NOT excuses that allow him to make that choice without consequence. Moan and wail about the "unfairness" of the situation, but it still doesn't change the FACT that the only REAL reproductive choice men (and women) have is: "Do or Don't". Modern conveniences like contraception and abortion DO NOT change the fundamental biological choices that are being made. What about the mother's personal responsibility? When she hears her partner doesn't want the child (well he never planned for it, he was using contraception....or he thought he was), she will know she's bringing a child into the world with a strong possibility of not having a father. She also knows it's her fault because she made the decision unilaterally to get pregnant. Care to comment on that, or do you select who has personal responsibility by gender?I'm not debating that point at all. As you can see from my previous posts (and this one), I AGREE with the points that she decieved him. And none of my comments should be taken as absolving her of HER personal responsibility. OF COURSE, she probably bears the lion's share of blame in this situation, given that she knowingly conceived with a man who didn't want it.But like I said before, he knowingly sat down at her table to play poker. Nobody forced him to play. Nobody forced him to put his chips down. So now that he finds out that the "house" had rigged the game, it's too late to complain. He should have known better than to play poker with a (relative) "stranger". I believe the woman was irresponsible because if she kept taking the pill she would undoubtably not be pregnant now - it was her choice, not his. While I agree with you that she was irresponsible, I think you're absolutely foolish if you think the pill is 100% effective. This woman certainly did make a choice to conceive with this man, and that's probably a pretty stupid thing for her to do. We all seem to agree on that point. But the BABY certainly didn't set out to decieve this man. And so if it turns out to be his, he's going to have to take responsibility and support that kid. Is it unfair? Yes. But my point is: SO WHAT!?!?! Since when does life HAVE to be fair?? We've all done stupid things in our lives and we've all had to suffer the consequences. So why is this guy different? Just because he got "fooled"?? Well, boo-f'ing-hoo. Sometimes you sit down at a rigged poker game and lose your shirt. That's life. Suck it up and quit being such a baby about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OOLEEBER Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Hi Pudgimelon & Bartender and all, I stand corrected folks. I've read your opinions on my post and I put my hands up and say I was wrong and you are right. "piss off" was a bit strong though. I just thought, at the time, that this thread was more appropriate for a marriage guidance forum. Thats all. There are a lot of angry people out there. That I've learned from just one posting. Chill a bit guys. Most of us live here so lets drop the agression and be nice. Cheers Ollie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ijustwannateach Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 One of the things I've often noted and admired about Pudgi is how he empathizes with other people- it's scary, almost as if he were in the situation himself and knew how it felt. You can see this in his noble, compassionate responses to other person's mistakes or problems. Anytime there's a question of other people manipulating a guy or deceiving him, messing up his life because of what they do, Pudgi's got the answer: IT'S HIS OWN DARN FAULT AND HE DESERVED IT!!! As an alternative scapegoat, I suggest that it's the fault of almost every modern society that a baby is allowed to suffer from having incompetent/dodgy parents. A mainstay of any constitution should be that children will be taken care of, no matter what kind of ####s the mother and/or father have turned out to be. Realistically, I say if the mother lets the baby come to term and be born without an abortion or the consent of the father to help raise him/her, it's her burden. "Steven" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TingTawng Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Pudgimelon, so it seems I was right: you are using this thread so you can get on your hobbyhorse and pull faces....fine, just wear a flak jacket my friend, or don't act so surprised when many people find your point of view highly hypocritcal, given that you engage in sex for recreational purposes yourself. Read my last post: we agree on the course of action the guy should take, but you are choosing to go one step further and climb onto the highground and start judging people. The same situation could easily happen to you, given that you enjoy sex and realise that contraception isn't 100% effective. It's easy for you to say you'd look after the child if your partner became pregnant against your wishes, but until that situation happens in reality, you don't really know how what you'd do. Ideological vacuums and theories tend to get blown apart when reality knocks on your door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teach Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 So therefore Pudgy, if - and I'm sure you never would, it came to pass that after a night of wonder with your mates down the pup/bar you took one of the girls to a s/t hotel, had the most amazing safe sex, only to find that three days later she is knocking on your door (with her father) demanding that you do the right thing by her. Be that marriage, Thai or any style, or a lifetime of finiancial support that unfortunately puts an end to the future plans you had coz now you have the responsibiblity of a child to raise, even though the financial transaction that took place three days since was supposed to absolve you of all responsibility. No excuses -broken condom, she said she was on the pill, I though I was sterile. You would step up to the plate and fend for that child no matter what??? If we all conclude to that act of vaginal sex is only to reprocreate isn't that likely to increase deviant behaviour, are there not enough back-door merchants around as it is. Your stance is high, can it sustain without demonizing it. Would we not all become estranged from woman herself, turning us all queer by nature in the process. Thus self removing the only thing that woman need tolerate us for. Teach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teach Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 Further still, the real malicious cow who after safe sex, and the disposal of the condom, nips into the bathroom ( supposedly to clean up) fills the contents of the said condom into a syringe, then injects the contents into her <deleted>. Later in the month when she's supposed to menstrate she hugs your head and tells you what a virile man you are. "You're going to be a daddy aren't you happy" What are you going to do then?? Teach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damnaam Posted August 31, 2004 Author Share Posted August 31, 2004 ..... Ideological vacuums and theories tend to get blown apart when reality knocks on your door. Right, as you may have noticed, I was prepared to step away from this topic, believing it to have run its course, But TingTawng's quote here really, and I mean REALLY hits the nail on the head. This is where I am right now, using the analogy of the shit hitting the fan alongside reality knocking on my door. I'm reluctant to reply to PudgyMelons points any further because, as others have pointed out, I feel this poster is, to a large degree, almost hijacking this topic to his own ends, regardless of the reality. Save to say, to reply to an earlier post which pretty much accuses me of being very naive , the work I have lined up out there can bring in way over B10000 a day, depending on length of contract etc. I've made it very clear I'll support my child financially. As for the taking care of the broken bones and education of which you speak, well, these are free in the U.K, the last vestiges of a once decent society, the few visible reasons why I pay my taxes. I wasn't having sex with a partner I was thinking of leaving, things turned sour... The one thing I will agree with you on is that I was wrong to not use a condom. I will forever regret this but I don't see myself as 'moaning, wailing etc, just trying to gauge the groundswell of opinion at a difficult time that's all. TingTawng's comment really should be the epitaph to this topic. I note, also a couple of very valid posts Teach has just added. Amen.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yohan Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 "piss off" was a bit strong though.I just thought, at the time, that this thread was more appropriate for a marriage guidance forum. Thats all. There are a lot of angry people out there. That I've learned from just one posting. Yes, a lot of angry people out there.... Never heard, that a pregnant woman - regardless, if the couple likes children or not - is causing such a problem here in Asia, as you can read in these postings concerning women in Europe. I rarely read such kind of discussion (pregnant Thai woman - Farang husband - contraception problems) about couples living in Thailand. Should be a reason for that.... By the way, is still anybody out there, who is complaining about my very long and anti-feminist postings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sleir Posted August 31, 2004 Share Posted August 31, 2004 do you describe yourself as an anti-feminist poster yohan ? without any further knowledge about you or your position i think you made some valid points here ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.jpg.a649cacedeeccbc218adc073bf668ef2.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now