Post-feminism and BDSM

[minx1]

why should a man have to pay to financially support a child he did not "choose," by a woman he was never committed to? why should he be financially indebted for the next 18 years of his life simply because a woman "chose," on her own, to carry a pregnancy to term and then raise that child? i have never understood that logic. as the humans with the uterus, the onus DOES lie on us, sorry. if you are a single/unattached woman, do not have a child you are not financially prepared to care for.

Because he ''chose'' it as much as she did by not acting responsibly and not taking precautions.
I see it differently. Its not about a woman he never committed to...its about a child he is responsbile for.
Personally If I ever founf myself in that situation I would rather try and manage without the financial input of the man, but thats just because ideally I would prefer it that way. However if I was struggling or couldnt manage...why shouldnt he contribute.

He could always choose not to get into that situation.

 

[FurryFury]

Exactly. He chose to stick his dick in unprotected. That is HIS responsibility.

Because he ''chose'' it as much as she did by not acting responsibly and not taking precautions.
I see it differently. Its not about a woman he never committed to...its about a child he is responsbile for.
Personally If I ever founf myself in that situation I would rather try and manage without the financial input of the man, but thats just because ideally I would prefer it that way. However if I was struggling or couldnt manage...why shouldnt he contribute.

He could always choose not to get into that situation.

 

[PertPerth]

Exactly. He chose to stick his dick in unprotected. That is HIS responsibility.

I agree totally - and I also agree that it's payments for the child, not the woman. Having said that I feel mixed emotions towards the whole issue for so many reasons. It's complicated and I'm glad that I've not been in that situation.