Here is the thing – we hear constantly how men are deadbeats… Yet , when a woman entraps a man, or lies about paternity, is there accountability? She claims she did not know, but she always knew she had sex with at least one other man, in that period. She seems to blame him for walking away, but when we examine the reality that she simply decided for him, without regard for his life, what are we to think.
We need to understand that 25% of the tests for paternity done come back negative. However, far more importantly, we need to understand that feminism has ensured that she can’t be held to account when she defrauds him. Feminists have endlessly asserted this is very rare, nearly never happens, etc., yet ensure that when it does he is the one paying for her deceit. It is even when he discovers it, she has been nearly never held accountable, and often in the past it has been the man who has effectively been blamed.
https://www.facebook.com/ACurrentAffair9/videos/625487712706980
Note while listed on the birth certificate, he had no rights to enquire as to paternity.
It is as Karen Straughan has said – it is not that every women would, it is that any woman can. We hear how it is somehow misogyny if he does not trust enough to care to engage. The assertion that “not all women” is supposed to answer his questions. This when for decades the exact opposite approach was advanced by feminists around men. The angry reactions from so many women, the constant push to use historically based data from blood banks – that examines the reality of generations born before the 1970s, just acts to undermine trust. It is asserting men should believe the village grandmothers who really did slut shame still dominate, or their removal would have no impact. This is dangerously dishonest, as he knows the loud grandmothers of today are the women who pushed the double standards wherein only men are to be held to account. It is today’s loud grandmothers who pushed the narratives where only her consent was material. The narratives that asserted men had always been oppressors. Who pushed a sexual revolution but ensured a molested boy was deemed more responsible than his molester and pushed a dv narrative wherein “it did not matter what she did”. They are also the generation of loud women that pressed into existence Gender Studies, that frequently called for the mass reduction of men. These are the women who replaced the village grandmother who held women to account, that ensured women did not cheat. At the very least these new grandmothers silenced the women who did know to disagree around these issues, and we assert he should believe nothing changed? When those who meat out loud judgement deem him guilty when she hits?
Remember the feminist movement that most of that generation belonged to, fully accepted and embraced the college rape hysteria based upon an approach that made him the villain, when she had a single drink and coerced him into sex.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/campus-rape-myth-13061.html
A consent narrative, where even suggesting that his informed consent was also required – was rape apology.
The DV narrative they fully embraced was created by choosing to ask women only victim questions, men only perpetrator ones, and ignored the research that already existed, and that women in shelters when asked, often acknowledged they were as violent as their partners. It also chose to define domestic violence, by those in shelters, where there were only shelters for women, and asserted anyone who suggested a man could be a victim was a misogynist.
We should be especially disturbed that the courts enforce paternity fraud, even in situations, where it is transparent.
or that boys molested – are required to pay child support from the moment they turn 18, for a child created by an act they could not consent to.
this is based on the narrative of the “best interest of the child” but how is that really served, when it encourages predation by women on children? Note here – Sayer – was 15 – when he appealed his case of child support – due because he was molested by his baby sitter – a person in a position of authority over him. Note Olivas – paying for a child – that was the result of a criminal act on her part. We need to ask, what would be the reaction with regards to telling a raped girl she has to pay her rapist?
The cause of this continuing issue is very much the endless feminist narrative that these things do not happen to men, and that no woman would, in a space where women are doing so – and have been in similar numbers for a long time. There was a choice to bury this in the past. https://canadiancrc.com/PDFs/The_Invisible_Boy_Report.pdf
The cause of that burying, and by whom made very clear by the reactions to Michelle Elliot – the moment she chose to examine the female sex predator. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gmc6aJC46Q8 – that is the feminists loudly and angrily working to silence her.
Not all women – missing the point
We see men who decide they are not interested being shamed and attacked when they choose to drop out of dating, where the “not all women” line is loudly and angrily rolled out. We need to appreciate young men grew up hearing the poisoned candy bowl analogy the other way, as justification to suspect all men.
Remember until 2014 or so – the vast majority of women believed in feminism, which means if he is a young man, in his formative years cheering on abusive women – was the norm. Asserting that he was the issue, when she cheated was the norm. Blaming men, for the results of women’s choices, was the norm. The “it did not matter what she did” was the kneejerk around domestic violence.
He grew up understanding that even suggesting consent was a two way requirement — was rape apology. Where a discussion of male suicide – was a cause to label someone a “misogynist monster.”
https://rumble.com/embed/vwbx5p/?pub=4,
and suggesting consent should be two way, is rape apology.
Feminism created a period of hysteria, where “it is different” when a woman did it to a man, was the socially accepted norm – and women who questioned this were silenced. (see oft referred to Sharon Osbourne Penis rant), however this period of hysteria lasted a very long time. He will have heard from much older men (his father’s generation now) if he asks – how it was even in his day, that him touching her would be deemed sexual assault, but her grabbing him, could be asserted flirting, and it did not matter how he felt.
The problem is, that he can believe that lots of women saw this and were silenced, but never be able to know which ones. The fact is, that for those women to have been silenced many had to believe it did not matter what she did, had to believe that it was only really her consent in question, had to believe it was ok to lie to get pregnant, that it was ok commit paternity fraud. Why would he believe those who did believe have not merely gone silent, because those beliefs are now inconvenient?
If any woman can, and given there has been no consequences to her when she does (be it fail to get his consent, abuse him, or lie about paternity) why should he think today no woman would? Especially given that was the lie of choice? So what risks should he be prepared to take? Today we hear how it is his fault because “he picked the wrong woman” he just needs to be better at picking. Yet a selection criteria that would achieve this is never on offer. Since he can’t eliminate the risk, why are we surprised that some men simply conclude the risk is too great? What do we expect, when in the inverse, radically lower risks were asserted enough to dismiss even the possibility of an abusive woman and blame all men?
Consent – double standard – happy accident versus sexual assault
The reality that he will be charged for sexual assault for telling a lie, that he knows 42% of his mothers generation would have considered telling to get pregnant – https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/96-women-are-liars-honest-2509965, and she is permitted to call it a happy accident, and he is the bad guy if he falls for it, but is not happy about being so trapped, screams. The reality that he knows that 50% of his mothers generation acknowledged they would lie about paternity but his having doubts is misogyny, screams.
This double standard, along with a free ride when fraud is committed, reflecting a feminism that made it clear he was other, also means he has every reason to have serious doubts.
This double standard, and the reality that in the past, even women who suggested that men should be wary were demonized screams cause to have profound doubts. Remember “no woman would” was being loudly proclaimed around abuse as well – while women were bragging about being abusers. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4187912/Secret-Facebook-Bad-Girls-Advice-brags-domestic-violence.html and horrible sexual torture and dismemberment – was a source of humor, where her cause for anger – was that he wanted to leave the relationship.
So he should trust? Where he has seen masses of women – clearly support what would be deemed sexual assault or horrid violence, if done by a man? He has been given every reason to see he was othered, and understands how that changes the nature of risks. If does not matter – that not all women are like that, it matters that he deems this a risk he is not willing to engage in. The reality of asserting this is somehow misogyny, where blaming all men has yet to be owned, merely reinforces the impressions already made.
Remember far worse was not permitted to be deemed misandry, so it makes the lack of actual care all the clearer. Remember what he has been told are the advantages to marriage are – and how they are really about making him a more effective provider, not about his own life, so why take a risk? Why take a risk, when he has endlessly seen that he is disposable in marriage, and understands the only reason for care about the harm to his brain, education and opportunity, is that it has created a shortage of economically attractive men.
Remember he knows men (patriarchy) have been blamed for the gender norms mothers have been pushing https://csahs.uoguelph.ca/content/feature/mothers-push-gender-stereotypes-more-fathers-study-reveals.
He knows he is the terrible oppressor that kept women out of the workforce, and the horrid man, when he does not earn enough for her to stay home, when damaging his education and opportunity has been sport. https://archive.ph/JTzBQ. He understands that he is the bad guy, when he has doubts about her staying home, even if she endlessly asserted she would always want to work.
Yes – but the issue, that he is blamed for choosing wrong, and he has no way of knowing which way she will go, and she can’t be held to her word, or accountable when she deceives, that would be criminal if he did it, makes it misogyny, when he decides that for himself alone, these are not worthy undertakings.
Trust requires accountability.
Imagine how much easier it would be for her to build trust, if he knew she would be held accountable in the same ways he is. Consider how different his view might be, if he believed he would be able to verify paternity, and she would be criminally liable for a fraud, if she set out to deceive. Consider how much easier to build trust it would be if lying about birth control was a crime when she did it, as it is when he does? Imagine if her touch and his touch were held on the same basis, where her uninvited hug, was deemed sexual harassment exactly as his is? Consider, if when she grabbed his crotch he knew she could be charged, and he would be as protected from false allegations as she is. Imagine if his mother had given him the talk about women who entrap, and to be wary of abusive women, instead of the one where he needed to be careful about treating her right?
evenhandedblog 