Running Away And Being Selfish....

[RooBoy]

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.

You'll find your funny bone in the elbow, slam it against the wall a few times you might just get it

I think the other posters have said enough, preacher boy..

[TingTawng]

Yohan, these days if you describe yourself as anti-feminist, you are really describing yourself as anti-sexist. Whatever feminism's original goals were, the movement has for at least 25 years been co-opted by a bunch of man-hating thugs with equality the last thing on their mind. "Feminism" in it's latest guise (since the 70's) has been about fighting for better rights for women, regardless of whether that creates parity between males and females or better rights for women than men. It's simply about gaining as much rights as possible, even made-up ones. Responsibility has been thrown out of the window, and that's how we end up with scenarios such as the one in this thread.

[Yohan]

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 !

1- I am active against any form of 'radical feminism' - I do not remain silent as most men do, and I never post out of anonymity....

Some people do not like that:

a-

These are Western women, who are looking to press out advantages from men, solely based on the fact, that they are women.... considering man/woman relationship as a business....especially divorce.

b-

These are also some men, who are expecting advantages, if they co-operate...., male feminists, often based on racism - they do not like mixed race marriage...

2- If you like to read something funny about feminism, then go to

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...=15335&st=0&hl=

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=9736&st=0

Have fun, not all topics are so serious as this one......

Regards, Johann

[meemiathai]

Didn't the typhoon stop you from coming on line, Yohan?

[Yohan]

Yohan, these days if you describe yourself as anti-feminist, you are really describing yourself as anti-sexist.  Whatever feminism's original goals were, the movement has for at least 25 years been co-opted by a bunch of man-hating thugs with equality the last thing on their mind. "Feminism" in it's latest guise (since the 70's) has been about fighting for better rights for women, regardless of whether that creates parity between males and females or better rights for women than men. It's simply about gaining as much rights as possible, even made-up ones.  Responsibility has been thrown out of the window, and that's how we end up with scenarios such as the one in this thread.

I cannot say it better.

Let me ask you something:

What is the opposite of the word FEMINIST?

ANTI-FEMINIST? Are you sure? YES - It is (usually) for a man, so it must sound negative......

Why negative?

Why not to call me a MALINIST? or MASKULINIST?

Yes, to gain rights and more rights for women has nothing to do at all with equality....

And when they have all the rights, and it is not possible to gain more rights anymore, then next step is to reduce or remove responsibility......

This scenario here in this thread is still related to a man/woman relationship.

But as you correctly said, there are even made-up rights with scurrilous ridiculous demands...

Many women, who are not feminists, are acting cowardly and remain silent, because such made-up rights are made by women for women, and therefore they cannot be wrong....

As you see, in this and similar threads, very very few female posters are showing up to express their opinion.....

-----

Want to read something funny? This told me a female poster on this Thaivisa-forum.....Well, this is, what some women are thinking about me.

For <deleted>'s Sake, Yohan. You are so anti women. No, let me rephrase that. You are so anti everybloodything. Let me tell you something, from your biography, I forgot how much you give your wife. At least 80 per cent of your salary, as I remember. So, you can pay and you do. But guess what, I for one still call you an idiot. Open your eyes, you fool. Your ex wife took you to the cleaners and so what?

Men should be always polite to them, because they are ladies......

For ladies there is no obligation towards men to do the same....

What did you say: gaining as much rights as possible..... and this is a good example....

[Yohan]

Didn't the typhoon stop you from coming on line, Yohan?

I have an internet ISDN leased line 24h connected in my home, no problems.

But should I have connection problems, for sure in this thread there are remarkable many posters, who might replace me anytime....

Seems I am not alone with my opinion about 'radical feminists' -

What you read here, is really the Euro-Trash-Girl style.....deceives the boyfriend about contraception, gets pregnant and makes her demands, and then because it does not work out as expected, offers an abortion to get her boyfriend back ...

-----

Do you know now, why Western men are looking for Asian girls?

[Teach]

Getting to the crux of the matter Yohan, though I feel the moral issue is whether or not a male should abandon a child under any circumstances. The answer cannot be resolved, it is the decision of the individual, however as this thread has diverted to the moral behaviour of women I would have to say that it is not just Euro trash women who are capable of such despicable acts of treachery. The pre-nuptual agreement didn't surface just to protect against those, it is all ( western/ 1st world)women who have benefitted from and use their new found status to emancipate men.

I just hope that the Thai girls don't jump on the wagon, or we really will have to find friendlier clim's.

Teach

[Pudgimelon]

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

A) I never would get myself into such a situation.

If you take a girl to an s/t hotel and have REPRODUCTIVE SEX with her, then why are you suggesting that you aren't somehow at least PARTLY responsible for ANY outcome??

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

aaawwwwwwwwwww, poor baby!!! You mean to say you're upset to find out there are sometimes CONSEQUENCES to your actions and that you can't just go through your entire life as a hedonistic, permanent adolescent??

How sad for you.

even though the financial transaction that took place three days since was supposed to absolve you of all responsibility

How does a transaction using the modern contrivence of money, somehow absolve you of the MILLION year old moral, biological, and social DUTIES you have to support a child YOU created??

You would step up to the plate and fend for that child no matter what

Seeing as how only an IDIOT would get himself into that kind of situation, and seeing as how you seem to think that such a situation is somehow "normal", "commonplace" or "valid" (perhaps it is in your world), I wouldn't expect you to understand or comprehend my point of view.

Let's just say we exist in different worlds and leave it at that.

(Basically, what your suggesting is an impossible situation. If someone is dumb enough to get into that situation, it is unlikely that they'd be smart enough understand what is the right thing to do.)

isn't that likely to increase deviant behaviour, are there not enough back-door merchants around as it is

OK, anyone who wants to flame me for being a sexual prude please take a look at THIS quote ^^.

I'm only talking about people taking personal responsibility for their own actions, ANY action, I might add. If you run over a dog or spill beer on someone in a bar or knock up some girl you hardly know, you have to see your own role in that mess and clean it up. Period.

This guy, on the other hand, sees that as some sort of "encouragement" to get people to engage in "deviant behavior".

Sounds like someone has issues.

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.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry .

A) I highly doubt that taking personal responsibility for the babies YOU help make is somehow going to "turn us all queer".

YOU sound like you're already pretty estranged from women already. Otherwise you wouldn't even be discussing such an odd and unlikely situation as if it were commonplace.

C) Women may not tolerate YOU (unless you pay them), but I seem to get along just fine. Sucks to be you.

Look, the simple answer to your outrageously stupid hypothetical situation is this:

If you don't want crazy thai hookers knocking at your door demanding that you support the child you helped concieve..... THEN DON'T HAVE SEX WITH CRAZY THAI HOOKERS!!!

Geesh, that should be obvious to even someone as dimly-lit as you.

[TingTawng]

Pudgimelon, you keep going on about "stupid sex". Damnaam was having sex with his girlfriend. Is that stupid sex? If so, what do you constitute as not being stupid sex? Sex with married partner? Sex with only someone you've known for 5 years or more? Tell us all, oh-great-one. I guess you waited many years before you got to know the colour of your girlfriend's underwear. How many women have you had sex with? I would like to know just how much of a hypocrite you are.

Your ideological vacuum gives us great (inadvertant) entertainment.

[DerekinAsia]

Damnaam,

Just a thought. Assuming you're not anti-abortion, you could always go back to her until the act is carried out then hop it afterwards. Sure, two wrongs don't always make a right but she's hardly deserving of sympathy. Don't feel bad about doing what's right for YOU. At the end of the day, you have to be comfortable with whatever choice you make and be confident that you'll be able to look in the mirror in 20 years time without disliking what you see.

Hope it all works out well for you,

Derek.

[Ijustwannateach]

Heh heh heh... one of these days we're going to see a post under another username from someone with a style FRIGHTFULLY like Pudge's asking for help in avoiding a paternity suit of some kind; I just know it!

by the way, Teach, you seem to have odd ideas about gayness... I don't think the fear of pregnancy has done too much for the past few million years to stop men and women from having sex, no matter how duplicitous the process was... and most gay guys are gay not because of some weird fear of women, but because they like other guys.

As for the feminist stuff- huh?

This thread's moving out to sea....

"Steven"

[ThaiGirlTeen]

Do you know now, why Western men are looking for Asian girls?

Cos they like black hair?

[splitlid]

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

A) I never would get myself into such a situation.

If you take a girl to an s/t hotel and have REPRODUCTIVE SEX with her, then why are you suggesting that you aren't somehow at least PARTLY responsible for ANY outcome??

you continueously talk about reproductive sex...

and that sex should only be conducted for reproductive purposes.

so how many children do you have...this will let us all know how many times you have performed this sinful act.

"are you ovulating wench?"

"yes master"

"then lets get this over with as quickly as possible"

"and stop making that noise"

sexual frustration is the cause of your pain mate.

get out and get laid....might put a smile on your miserable mousch.

[OOLEEBER]

[Pudgimelon]

you continueously talk about reproductive sex...

No. I do not. I'm talking about personal responsibility for one's own actions. ANY ACTION. Not just sex. In this particular thread, the topic happens to be an unwanted conception, and therefore talking about reproductive sex is NECESSARY to make points related to THIS topic.

and that sex should only be conducted for reproductive purposes.

I have NEVER said this, nor should any comment I've made be construed in such a way.

What I have said, is that IF you engage in reproductive sex, then you CANNOT later complain that a pregnancy occurred. I don't give a rat's ass about any other mitigated circumstance, the INITIAL decision to "put Tab A into Slot B" was YOUR decision and YOUR'S alone.

Like I said, if you want to play poker for stakes with untrustworthy people, you can't complain about a rigged game after you've lost your shirt. Likewise, any FOOL knows that reproductive sex acts ALWAYS have a possibility of REPRODUCTION. That's biology, boys. And if you don't understand that, you should have stayed awake in Health class.

I guess what's really going on here guys is that you are talking about the "fairness of the game", while I'm talking about the "decision to play". You guys can debate endlessly about the "deception", the "reproductive rights", the "false sense of security", etc.... But what you are miss is that all of those issues come to life AFTER the initial decision is made: "Play or Don't Play".

Some of you seem to think that because I state the choice in that way, I'm some sort of fundamentalist fanatical prude. Quite the contrary. I'm just pointing out that you know that pregnancy is a POSSIBLE outcome when you set down at the "poker table" to play. Given that, you can't whine about it later when you happen to be the "unlucky" chap to "win the lottery". YOU played the game!

So all I'm trying to say is that IF you are going to engage in reproductive sex acts (even for the recreational reasons we all enjoy), then you HAVE to accept that the possibility of pregnancy DOES EXIST.

Therefore, you are STUPID if you have reproductive sex with someone you don't want to bear your children. And you are STUPID if you have reproductive sex outside of a long-term, monogamous, healthy, honest, and stable relationship.

That said, of course, we've all been stupid at some point in our lives. ######, I've probably had more stupid sex than most of the posters on this board, combined. Back when I was in college, I'd be "stupid" with a different girl practically every other day, (sometimes two or three girls in the same day :-P). So it's not like I'm standing on some moral high ground here, preaching to the heathens. I've been there, done that, but the difference is that I was TWENTY back then, and I know NOW that it WAS stupid and I was ###### LUCKY not to permanently screw up my life.

In other words, I grew up.

The real question is: "When are you?"

so how many children do you have...this will let us all know how many times you have performed this sinful act.

Why do you equate sex with sin? I don't.

Do you have some sort of anti-religious hang-up??

I can tell you from personal experience that there are plenty of people who manage to find a balance between faith and lifestyle without resorting to knee-jerk fundamentalist dogmas.

For example, back a few years ago, I dated an Episcopalian priest (they can be women and they can get married). We met in a gay bar where I was photographing a show my drag queen friends were putting on. She was a great gal: open-minded, intelligent, absolutely f'ing HOT, and partied like a rock star. So I know for a fact that there are some deeply religious people who also happen to be pretty cool.

Sounds to me like you have some anti-religious bigotry you need to deal with. Perhaps you should open your own closed-mind a little bit before you condemn others for that same trait.

sexual frustration is the cause of your pain mate.  get out and get laid....might put a smile on your miserable mousch.

Again, let me repeat my stance since some of you seem to be a bit slow on the uptake: I'm not "against sex". I'm against "STUPID sex".

What do I mean by that? Well, if you sit down at a poker table and expect to win ALL the time that's a good example of STUPID gambling. You MUST play poker with the understanding that the POSSIBILITY of losing EXISTS.

Likewise, engaging in reproductive sex (even with contraception), while at the same time denying the possibility of pregnancy--and fully intending to avoid taking responsibility for any offspring--is STUPID sex.

When I go to a casino, I consider all the money in my pocket to be "money spent". I don't go to a casino expecting to win all the time, instead I go there to PAY to play games and if I happen to come out ahead, great. If not, great. I had fun either way.

Likewise, since I grew up. Whenever I engage in reproductive sex with a woman, it is with full understanding that--inspite of our best efforts--a pregnancy MIGHT occur. But since I only have sex these days inside a long-term, mature, open and honest relationship, the issue is always discussed BEFORE sex, and we come to our own decision about what we'd do if that happened.

If we hadn't been able to come to a mutual decision, I would NOT have had sex with her. I'm too old to be making stupid decisions anymore, and so I'm not going to sit down at a poker table and "hope" that I don't lose my shirt. And unlike the permanent teenagers in this discussion, I'm not in any big hurry to get a girl into bed. If it takes a few months to sort moral/ethical things out to our mutual satisfaction, that's no big deal for me.

I understand that some of you guys NEED sex to boost your egos, and others of you see sex as some sort of game you can play without consequence. But I'm sure the ADULTS out there would agree with me when I say that sex is merely a PEICE of the equation, not the whole thing.

So if the sex part of the relationship is delayed while other important components (like trust, respect, and compatibility) are worked on, why is that a bad thing? In the long run, those things will be just as important to a healthy relationship as the sex. Personally, I'd rather spend my time building a strong foundation to a relationship, because I know from past experience that it's only in a trusting, loving relationship that you can find the BEST sex.

[RooBoy]

You're FARKIN boring pudgy, nick orf !!

[Pudgimelon]

You're FARKIN boring pudgy, nick orf !!

zzzzzzzzzzzzz..............................

[RooBoy]

zzzzzzzzzzzzz..............................

Thank god for that....

[Crush]

. But since I only have sex these days inside a long-term, mature, open and honest relationship, the issue is always discussed BEFORE sex, and we come to our own decision about what we'd do if that happened.

I think your long term partners are bored stiff and find someone a bit more exciting on the side.

I bet you are a real bundle of laughs

So boring.

[Pudgimelon]

I think your long term partners are bored stiff and find someone a bit more exciting on the side.

I bet you are a real bundle of laughs

So boring.

There are two types of possible partners: Quantity and Quality.

It seems that most people on this forum are infatuated with having a Quantity of partners. Somehow they equate that with "exciting".

But an equally valid perspective (even if it is an unpopular one here) is that a single, QUALITY partner can be just as exciting.

I wouldn't expect you guys to understand that, so go ahead and make a bunch of stupid, sarcastic remarks. It only serves to highlight your lack of comprehension.

There are certainly drawbacks to sticking with a single Quality partner (for example, not being able to shag every willing warm body that walks by), but I'm of the opinion that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

Just don't forget that there are disadvantages to a Quantity of partners too. A lot of the problems people talk about on these forums (being tricked into unwanted pregnancies, betrayal of trust, infidelity, theft, disease, irrational behaviors, etc...) can all be attributed to the fact that a Quantity of partners was the primary objective.

For example, one of the idiots responding in this thread made up the ludicrous scenario where some floozy uses a syringe to inject semen from a used condom into her vagina, impregnating herself (and somehow "trapping" the guy into marrying her).

Now maybe this guy thought he was giving some brilliant rebuttal of my previous comments, but actually he's just highlighting the fact that he can't concieve of a world in which a Quantity of partners is NOT an option. To him, the main purpose of a "night out with the guys" is to hook up with some strange new pussy. He's not REALLY out having fun with his friends, they're just part of the wolfpack to given him confidence on the hunt.

But the REAL answer is that if he was in a relationship with a QUALITY woman, then he'd never have to worry about some stranger doing insane things to trap him and take his money. So while I agree that stranger-sex can be "exciting" (for a while), it is so fraught with peril that it just doesn't seem worth it.

All the attending bulls--t that goes along with stranger-sex just doesn't seem worthwhile. And that's why I call it STUPID sex, and while most of us go through a phase of stupid sex (hopefully while we're still young), but eventually most of us (except for an obvious group on these forums) grow out of it and realize that a single woman can be far more exciting and mysterious than a hundred strangers.

[RooBoy]

But the REAL answer is that if he was in a relationship with a QUALITY woman, then he'd never have to worry about some stranger doing insane things to trap him and take his money. So while I agree that stranger-sex can be "exciting" (for a while), it is so fraught with peril that it just doesn't seem worth it.

AaaaHAHAHAHA, are you for real?? Have you ever had a long term relationship?? Did it last, IE are you still in it??

No?????

So then, HOW THE <deleted> can you sit there and sprout off your nonsense?

Did it not occur to you that the guy might have been in a QUALITY relationship with the woman, might have thought everything was fine, at the start, then she started showing her true colours, he decided this could not go anywhere, so instead of just sticking with it so he could get his end wet, he decided to end it and walk away.

Christ man you seem to think everyone in here is running round banging a different bird every night. Bit of a myopic viewpoint, makes me think you know Sweet FA about the place.

FACT is, many of us have been in QUALITY relationships in the past, maybe lasting 6 months, maybe lasting 6 years, time is not the factor, the FACTOR is we all thought this was a good sort and we went into the relationship hoping it would work out. The FACT that it doesnt always work out DOESNT make us irresponsible by agreeing on certain precautions with said partner at the time. FACT is if a woman deliberately stops taking the pill WITHOUT your knowledge or consent, then SHE is the one breaking the moral and ethical obligations. If the man does not want to be a father with this woman, ABORTION should be the number one choice, and in this world of EQUALITY, where women want equal rights and a level playing field, SHE should have to have an abortion, especially in this situation.

[Yohan]

The FACT that it doesnt always work out DOESNT make us irresponsible by agreeing on certain precautions with said partner at the time. FACT is if a woman deliberately stops taking the pill WITHOUT your knowledge or consent, then SHE is the one breaking the moral and ethical obligations. If the man does not want to be a father with this woman, ABORTION should be the number one choice, and in this world of EQUALITY, where women want equal rights and a level playing field, SHE should have to have an abortion, especially in this situation.

Correct, there is a difference between a woman,

1-

who takes the pill regularly for contraception and nevertheless is getting pregnant -

2-

or a woman, who deliverately stops to take the pill, but continues to have sex with the man, without informing him

in case 1- it is just unlucky, but the woman did nothing wrong....

in case 2- she is deceiving the man.

If it happens, beside ABORTION, another solution might be ADOPTION.

Seems that both, man and woman are now not happy about the child, but the woman feels bad to accept abortion.

ADOPTION directly after birth might be a good solution in this case. There are many parents out, looking forward for children, but fail to get their own ones.

Pudgimelon, openly said, sorry, I do not think, that your advices (religious moral teachings or feminist views or call it whatever) are offering any practical solution for anybody.

And I am still missing comments by female members.....seems very few women are willing to speak out their opinion, when a woman is deceiving the man.

[Ijustwannateach]

You know, Pudgi was whining on another thread somewhere about how poorly some of his customers treated him when he was a waiter/bouncer/etc. He seems perfectly willing to complain about how others treat HIM- it's just when someone else is in trouble that it's THEIR fault... so how about the Pudgi treatment for his waiting experience?

PUDGI- *You* made the decision to become a waiter. You KNEW that waiters were often treated badly- so what gives you the right to come on whining about how your customers act? YOU became the waiter, therefore, it was YOUR fault you had bad customers! Sorted!

"Steven"

[Boo]

yohan

And I am still missing comments by female members.....seems very few women are willing to speak out their opinion, when a woman is deceiving the man.

Whats being a women got to do with anything about this post. Maybe they can't be bothered to post as once again you are trying to turn it into your own personal war of the sexes. I posted my opinion on it on page 4, go read it. The girl was wrong, without having both sides of the story though, I think it's a bit much to expect anyone to make an informed response. If what the original poster says is true then she's a stupid bitch, plain & simple. It's got nothing to do with being western (or a femi-nazi) as I'm sure many other women of any nationality have trapped a man in a pregnancy before & it's got nothing to do with feminists, if she was a feminist, she probably wouldn't have told him about the baby in the first place & just got on with raising it as a single mother. It's about a single person, not a whole sex or race.

[kat]

The FACT that it doesnt always work out DOESNT make us irresponsible by agreeing on certain precautions with said partner at the time. FACT is if a woman deliberately stops taking the pill WITHOUT your knowledge or consent, then SHE is the one breaking the moral and ethical obligations. If the man does not want to be a father with this woman, ABORTION should be the number one choice, and in this world of EQUALITY, where women want equal rights and a level playing field, SHE should have to have an abortion, especially in this situation.

Correct, there is a difference between a woman,

1-

who takes the pill regularly for contraception and nevertheless is getting pregnant -

2-

or a woman, who deliverately stops to take the pill, but continues to have sex with the man, without informing him

in case 1- it is just unlucky, but the woman did nothing wrong....

in case 2- she is deceiving the man.

If it happens, beside ABORTION, another solution might be ADOPTION.

Seems that both, man and woman are now not happy about the child, but the woman feels bad to accept abortion.

ADOPTION directly after birth might be a good solution in this case. There are many parents out, looking forward for children, but fail to get their own ones.

Pudgimelon, openly said, sorry, I do not think, that your advices (religious moral teachings or feminist views or call it whatever) are offering any practical solution for anybody.

And I am still missing comments by female members.....seems very few women are willing to speak out their opinion, when a woman is deceiving the man.

I have no problems asserting opinions, whether it is about a woman deceiving a man, or otherwise. The only "problem" I have regarding this forum is that I have a life, and sometimes don't post or check in for weeks at a time. I have been away for awhile, and this is the first thread I am responding to since I've returned.

Here's a newsflash for you Yohan:

not all western women consider themselves feminists, and not all feminists attend some secret meeting in labialand to agree that all agreeement is always agreegable.

And if I was to take a wild guess, I would surmise that your former western wife had nothing to do with feminism, otherwise she would have never married you (and I don't mean this as an insult at all, but basic common sense). Unless, after so many years of marriage to you, she ended up a feminist, and you ended up as anti-feminist. And for those of you who want to post or email me about the injustices and inequalities of farangland for men, save your energy. I read your posts about the apparent demise of the patriarchy every day. I have listened to you and other posters on other threads. And some of your complaints have been absorbed. I have been able to see some merit in some of the things you say. But a large heap of it appears to be a bunch of self-serving crap. But have no fear, I am working on this last statement. When I have more time, I am actually going to research how far men's rights have degenerated in comparison to women's.

To weigh in on the questionable moral dilemma of this thread, here are my thoughts:

Yes, everyone has personal responsibility, and a woman is not a helpless victim. It is not wrong or anti-woman to recognize this fact. That being said, it is also realistic to recognize that there are obvious biological differences between men and women. A woman can get pregnant. If a woman stops taking contraception without informing a man of this change, this is deception. It is wrong, immoral, irresponsible, and high-risk. If the outcome is not to her liking, she must accept the consequences of both her deception and her risk.

[kat]

And although not directly related to this thread, but still on the topic of female responsibility and the question of feminists who don't speak out about other women, I would like this to go down in Yohan's checklists of tables and charts of feminists, western-women, and feminazis (but it won't, because it doesn't fit into his pre-conceived and rigidlly drawn ideas):

Any woman who lodges a fake rape or abuse case against a man should be arrested, convicted, and incarcerated. She is not only an obvious threat to men, but society at large, because she also imperils the ability of women who have been raped or abused to be received within a supportive social environment. Sorry, but these women are NOT feminists.

But I am.

[TingTawng]

Any woman who lodges a fake rape or abuse case against a man should be arrested, convicted, and incarcerated. She is not only an obvious threat to men, but society at large, because she also imperils the ability of women who have been raped or abused to be received within a supportive social environment.

Yes, but this is obvious. I am happy you understand this, but it's something society needs to catch up to - a common sense that shows woman have responsibility for their actions

[kat]

No, apparently, this is not obvious to men who consistently lump all women or feminists into the same pile.

And I'm not sure if you've been watching, but the Kobe Bryant rape case was a long, drawn-out process that also revealed some very ugly and unflattering information about his accuser. I don't think anyone gets away lightly in the West for erroneously accusing someone of rape. Of course, the definition of rape is another matter.

[TingTawng]

No, apparently, this is not obvious to men who consistently lump all women or feminists into the same pile.

kat, I was agreeing with you. And "men who consistantly lump all women or feminists into the same pile" DO find this obvious too - that making up an accusation of rape is a seriously awful thing to do that should be punished to the same extent as rape itself. This is obvious because an innocent man can be put behind bars for 15 years or more for something he didn't do - in my mind, this is far worse than rape because at least a rape victim can get therapy and has the chance to move on with her life - not so the man falsely convicted of rape.

I don't think anyone gets away lightly in the West for erroneously accusing someone of rape.

Erroneously? That's a very loaded word. I would tend to use the word "deliberately" myself. It's not rocket science. If you consented to sex, it's not rape. If you didn't consent but were forced to have sex, that's rape. Saying "stop!!" at the moment the guy is climaxing doesn't count by the way! If anyone knows a more nuanced version of the law, by all means let me know.

So, what's happening to the woman who accused Kobe of rape? Is she being prosecuted? No. She got off extremely lightly. The evidence was so flimsy, the case collapsed. Notice the accused has no anonymity but the accuser does. Only when her name was known did the prosecution start to have doubts over the strength of her case. Lo-and-behold, she has a reputation for this kind of trick.

Correct, there is a difference between a woman,

1-

who takes the pill regularly for contraception and nevertheless is getting pregnant -

2-

or a woman, who deliverately stops to take the pill, but continues to have sex with the man, without informing him

in case 1- it is just unlucky, but the woman did nothing wrong....

in case 2- she is deceiving the man.

If it happens, beside ABORTION, another solution might be ADOPTION.

Seems that both, man and woman are now not happy about the child, but the woman feels bad to accept abortion.

Yohan, I agree entirely with this. When women accept responsibility for their actions completely, only then can their rights be observed. It is totally impossible to have any rights if you renege on your responsibilities. Some women have played the victim card all their lives and now people are jaded by it.

[Pudgimelon]

Did it not occur to you that the guy might have been in a QUALITY relationship with the woman, might have thought everything was fine, at the start, then she started showing her true colours, he decided this could not go anywhere, so instead of just sticking with it so he could get his end wet, he decided to end it and walk away.

Christ man you seem to think everyone in here is running round banging a different bird every night. Bit of a myopic viewpoint, makes me think you know Sweet FA about the place.

FACT is, many of us have been in QUALITY relationships in the past, maybe lasting 6 months, maybe lasting 6 years, time is not the factor, the FACTOR is we all thought this was a good sort and we went into the relationship hoping it would work out. The FACT that it doesnt always work out DOESNT make us irresponsible by agreeing on certain precautions with said partner at the time. FACT is if a woman deliberately stops taking the pill WITHOUT your knowledge or consent, then SHE is the one breaking the moral and ethical obligations. If the man does not want to be a father with this woman, ABORTION should be the number one choice, and in this world of EQUALITY, where women want equal rights and a level playing field, SHE should have to have an abortion, especially in this situation.

First, your rebuttal contains a lot of "might haves". We can all speculate endlessly about what "might have" happened, but if you're going to contradict my SPECIFIC statements about the difference between "quantity" and "quality", then you're going to have to lay off the speculation and stick to the facts.

Fact is, the attending bulls--t that accompanies stranger-sex just doesn't make it worthwhile, IN MY OPINION.

If your opinion is different, good for you.

I don't see why you get so bent out of shape when I "spout off my nonsense". I'm entitled to an opinion and I speak it with conviction. I don't intend to convince you that I'm right, and quite frankly, I couldn't give a flying rat's ass what you think.

If you disagree with me, fine, that's just wonderful. I'll think you're a frigg'n idiot, but I won't pretend to CARE about whether or not you spend your remain days in ignorance, because I don't care.

You, on the other hand, seem to be getting quite upset about the things I'm saying. Is it because your feeble brain detects some truth in what I'm saying and it threatens your precious "carefree" lifestyle?? Or is it because you feel threatened whenever someone disagrees with you because your precious world-view cannot tolerate the existence of alternate viewpoints??

Either way, I recommend that you stop reading my posts as they seem to be needlessly upsetting you and you don't want to have to go back on your meds, right? (Lithium is your friend, buddy).

Oh, and by the way, your last example there was particularly feeble. You obviously have never met a QUALITY woman in your entire life, so I guess you have a hard time imagining what they are like. But Quality women don't "show their true colors" after a few months. If a woman "shows her true color" then it goes without saying that she was NOT a quality woman, and therefore your entire example is horsesh-t.

Let me guess, your idea of a good way to find a quality woman is to spin the wheel and hope some random girl you bring home from a bar will turn out to be "The One", and you'll live happily ever after.

We'll, let me clue you in on something: that's a STUPID idea.

Oh, and let me clue you in on another thing: If a man doesn't want to be a father, then he shouldn't engage in reproductive sex, becaus the pill is NOT A MAGIC PILL. And if you think it's 100% effective contraceptive, you're about as dumb as I think you are.

By the way, you're awfully flippant about abortion. You make it seem like it's no big deal and that a woman can just pop in to the clinic to get her pipes cleaned with the same amount of concern as if she were dropping off her dry cleaning. But the fact is that abortions can be a fairly risky procedure and there is always the possibility of permanent damage to her reproductive system (and overall health), especially if it is not her first abortion.

I think that was even mentioned by the original poster of this thread. The woman he was with had a lot of problems with her ovaries, and there was a risk that an abortion might prevent her from ever having children. That's a pretty heavy deal, and certainly not something that can easily be dismissed. Even if the situation is all her fault, that's still not an easy thing to ask a woman to risk. So while the man may not want the baby and the woman may have been wrong to "force" him into fatherhood, asking her to risk permanent sterility as a "punishment" is a bit much.

But in a broader sense beyond this specific situation, you need to remember that abortions are MEDICAL procedures and therefore not to be treated flippantly (then again, neither should reproductive sex be treated so flippantly).

Likewise, the Pill is no aspirin tablet either. It has some pretty serious side effects and it can also lead to permanent reproductive damage in some women. Therefore, if a woman decides to go off the pill, she's not necessarily trying to force a pregnancy (of course, this particular woman probably was doing that, but I'm talking in general). Sometimes she may be trying to protect her health.

One time, a woman I was dating decided to go on the pill. But the pill triggered her period and it wouldn't stop. She bled for an ENTIRE MONTH, and finally had to take some medication to force it to stop. That's a pretty serious side effect, and many women experience similar (or worse).

What if there were a pill that men could take that would prevent pregnancy?? Would you take it?? But what if there was a small risk that that pill would also make you permanently sterile?? Would you be so flippant about taking it then??

Fact is, you seem awfully eager to tell other people what to do with their own bodies. And while you may THINK men and women have equal reproductive rights (and maybe they should in modern, legal terms), the simple biological FACT of the matter is that the ultimate reproductive choice belongs to the woman because it IS her body, and she DOES have a right to decide what medical prodecures she endures and what pills she takes.

Or are you one of those throwbacks who doesn't think women have a right to OWN their own bodies??