Aw c'mon, you are in the "sue me state". Everyone has a lawyer here.
Is this guy smart or mad???
- Thread starter Da Game
- Start date
- Status
Aw c'mon, you are in the "sue me state". Everyone has a lawyer here.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
What can I say? I never go with the flow.
If the bimbo had the kid and put his name down on the birth certificate, then at some later date went on welfare? Yes, he would eventually win with dna test, but after months of trying to straighten the mess out with the state. He'd would lose wages through his employer that he'd probably nevr be able to recover, plus be stained as a deadbeat, a stain that wouldn't completly ever go away. Her actions would be forgiven by the state and everyone else as a mother "just trying to to do the best thing for here child". Best thing, is usually pick the "daddy" that makes the most money from all the guys she slept with.
Kestas
Staff member
I enjoyed that story. It's a story about a guy who beats the trap women usually set up for them. There's too many women out there that treat men as a source of sperm and child support, have no intention of entering and maintaining a loving marriage, and treat marrying rich like "winning the lottery".
Family law is written in favor of women. Many of the laws are a hold-over from the days of pre-women's-lib. The laws are changing, but ever so slowly.
Family law is written in favor of women. Many of the laws are a hold-over from the days of pre-women's-lib. The laws are changing, but ever so slowly.
Had a bud that was paying on "he's the closest thing to a father that the child ever knew". He made the mistake of moving in with a single mom and hanging around a few years. He did love the child and would have gladly helped out, but the idea of being forced made it hard. And knowing very little of the money went for the child made it hard to swallow.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
I'm sorry. I have no troubles with consenting adults engaging in any behavior ..including emotionally shallow and physically intense relationships. This wasn't this guy's first time to the rodeo with a woman with an insidious agenda. You don't get that cautious savvy in a vacuum of healthy encounters.
In the end, both got what they deserved. She got beat at her deception ..and he has to find another engaging female that doesn't require "commitment".
I never understood the notion that "men are afraid of commitment". It's not true. It's not fear. It's a total aversion to it.
"I can only love you if you're 100% committed to me for the rest of time ..otherwise ..I cannot be committed to you." ..sounds more like "show me yours and I'll show you mine doctor games ..except with more serious complications. This, invariably, causes more problems than it allegedly solves. It's effectively an ultimatum where the guy has to choose confinement or deception if he's going to remain in the gal's company. Naturally, at the same time she's attacking with chemicals and torture (pheromones, and hormones in action) ..and you, many times, end up in some Meatloaf song as the male surrenders to this most underhanded assault on his good senses.
In the end, both got what they deserved. She got beat at her deception ..and he has to find another engaging female that doesn't require "commitment".
I never understood the notion that "men are afraid of commitment". It's not true. It's not fear. It's a total aversion to it.
"I can only love you if you're 100% committed to me for the rest of time ..otherwise ..I cannot be committed to you." ..sounds more like "show me yours and I'll show you mine doctor games ..except with more serious complications. This, invariably, causes more problems than it allegedly solves. It's effectively an ultimatum where the guy has to choose confinement or deception if he's going to remain in the gal's company. Naturally, at the same time she's attacking with chemicals and torture (pheromones, and hormones in action) ..and you, many times, end up in some Meatloaf song as the male surrenders to this most underhanded assault on his good senses.
The child was already born before he met the woman, yet he had to pay child support after leaving her?
Can't explain it any better than that.
The original story has been making the rounds in certain forums, most notably those for men's rights, for several months now. I smell a hoax.
WileyE and Oilyriser, Washington state has a law on the books that says anyone who acts as a parent can be made to pay child support. Men in that state are being advised not to get involved with single mothers, or if they foolishly do, not to spend any time with her previous child(ren) for this reason. I also found a couple of citations in North Carolina for similar such rulings, even though that state has no such law. Most US states have rules that say that anyone acting in loco parentis in a relationship can potentially be required to pay support, though actual enforcement of this is rare. Washington state's law is more explicit and is enforced.
In addition, laws in Canada and Australia have made it common for stepfathers to be required to pay child support for nonbiological children after divorcing the mother. It is possible for both a stepfather and a natural father to be required to pay child support for the same child in those countries. These laws have also raised the specter of women with children having serial marriages and divorces to get multiple child support payments for the same child(ren) from a number of different men. In at least one Canadian case, a stepfather was ordered to pay child support to the natural father of two children after they were taken away from his ex-wife.
At least one state supreme court (I believe it was Massachusetts) has ruled that requiring two men to pay child support for the same child is permissible. Courts. Gotta love 'em. And this doesn't even address the paternity fraud mess, which is what that Internet story actually alludes to, since cupcake was going to trick the man into paying for a child who wasn't his.
WileyE and Oilyriser, Washington state has a law on the books that says anyone who acts as a parent can be made to pay child support. Men in that state are being advised not to get involved with single mothers, or if they foolishly do, not to spend any time with her previous child(ren) for this reason. I also found a couple of citations in North Carolina for similar such rulings, even though that state has no such law. Most US states have rules that say that anyone acting in loco parentis in a relationship can potentially be required to pay support, though actual enforcement of this is rare. Washington state's law is more explicit and is enforced.
In addition, laws in Canada and Australia have made it common for stepfathers to be required to pay child support for nonbiological children after divorcing the mother. It is possible for both a stepfather and a natural father to be required to pay child support for the same child in those countries. These laws have also raised the specter of women with children having serial marriages and divorces to get multiple child support payments for the same child(ren) from a number of different men. In at least one Canadian case, a stepfather was ordered to pay child support to the natural father of two children after they were taken away from his ex-wife.
At least one state supreme court (I believe it was Massachusetts) has ruled that requiring two men to pay child support for the same child is permissible. Courts. Gotta love 'em. And this doesn't even address the paternity fraud mess, which is what that Internet story actually alludes to, since cupcake was going to trick the man into paying for a child who wasn't his.
About the original story, if true: Moribundman is right about him, as this man didn't exactly have the most discerning taste in women. But his deception pales by comparison to her attempted deception, which was paternity fraud that would have forced him to pay for a child for 18 years.
A number of the men's rights forums have pointed out the growing trend of women being involved with thugs, bad boys, and losers alongside a relationship with a nice guy, getting knocked up (pregnant) by the thug, and then tricking the nice guy into believing that the child is his so he gets to pay while the thug escapes scot-free.
We are reaching a point where DNA testing at birth to establish paternity will become a necessity because of paternity fraud. Well, just look at the Anna Nicole Skank, uh, Smith case. You know she'll have to be buried in a Y-shaped coffin.
A number of the men's rights forums have pointed out the growing trend of women being involved with thugs, bad boys, and losers alongside a relationship with a nice guy, getting knocked up (pregnant) by the thug, and then tricking the nice guy into believing that the child is his so he gets to pay while the thug escapes scot-free.
We are reaching a point where DNA testing at birth to establish paternity will become a necessity because of paternity fraud. Well, just look at the Anna Nicole Skank, uh, Smith case. You know she'll have to be buried in a Y-shaped coffin.
ekrampitzjr, Thanks for looking that up about WA. Another good one we got here is if your paying support, and you re-marry, the x can go back to court and get the support raised based on your new combined income. In essence getting part of your new spouses income.
But if she re marries, his income means nothing unless he legally adopts the kids. So in the case of one of my buds, his x married big money and lives like a queen. My bud struggles to make support working a full day job and delivering pizza's at night, living in a 16' travel trailer in a cheap park. It's fn you get for the fn you got.
WileyE, that business of the ex-wife demanding more money after the ex-husband remarries, based on his new higher combined income, could and does happen all over the US. It's not just a Washington state thing. And you're dead right about if she remarries.
The time is ripe for serious revamping of divorce, custody, and child support laws. But that potentially gets into (gasp) political issues, which are verboten on BITOG. With generally good reasons.
The time is ripe for serious revamping of divorce, custody, and child support laws. But that potentially gets into (gasp) political issues, which are verboten on BITOG. With generally good reasons.
Male/Female relations in the US are borderline criminal. I think it has a lot to do with having their brains mangled by television programming more than anything else. The biggest part of self-responsibility is to make proper judgements especially when it comes to human character. Any hint of deceit in a woman and I walk away without looking back. I have known many people who have had their lives seriously screwed-up by their own bad judgement or the triumph of emotions over reason.
Lex, good points.
Relationships these days seem to be about point-scoring, both during, and after the relationship, rather than the achieving of goals together.
When the relationship ultimately goes #@$%!-up, then it's each parties job to destroy the other, rather than reach an amicable resolution.
(That being said, I've seen one break-up recently where they stayed living in the same house until he moved out. She took out a personal loan to give him the equivalent of 50% of the assets...it was amazing to see in the current world)
Relationships these days seem to be about point-scoring, both during, and after the relationship, rather than the achieving of goals together.
When the relationship ultimately goes #@$%!-up, then it's each parties job to destroy the other, rather than reach an amicable resolution.
(That being said, I've seen one break-up recently where they stayed living in the same house until he moved out. She took out a personal loan to give him the equivalent of 50% of the assets...it was amazing to see in the current world)
A sadly ironic story. In a perverse sort of way, I think these two sorta deserved one another.
Kestas
Staff member
I think it's a phony story. For one, the happenstance of events are too perfect. Plus, it was too well written. It was probably written by somebody who writes TV or movie scripts, which we know are often catered to men's (or women's) fantasies. Very entertaining though.
I agree. After all this is the Internet.
- Status
