Human Rights

France upholds the ban on paternity tests

Don’t worry! There’s no mistake in the title. It is true – French men are forbidden by law to attempt to find out whether the child they are paying for is in fact their child or not. In fact, it has been illegal for men to attempt to find out if their child is theirs for many years. But a few days ago, the ban was challenged once again–and the government upheld the ban.

Is it really a surprise that a socialist government disagreed that men have human rights too?

What’s even more striking is that there is NO mainstream media mentioning this, albeit the law is on the books and available for everyone to read[1].

In theory, paternity tests are still legal, but only under a court order, with the explicit consent of the mother and under a strict supervision by the State. Annually, the French courts issue roughly 1500 orders for paternity tests. 1500 – that’s it! And the number is going down as the courts become more and more reluctant to issue such orders.

To put the 1500 number into perspective, the International Biosciences’ website report regarding this situation reads as follows[2]:

Some statistics from the Nantes Atlantique Genetic Institute reveal that every year in the region of 15,000 French fathers go online and buy paternity testing kits. Furthermore, a Swiss lab recently said that 60% of the tests it performs are sent there from France. Meanwhile, a Spanish lab confirmed similar figures, saying that French men make up 80% of its customer-base.

So, 10 times more men than those allowed legally chose to break the law. Moreover, Swiss and Spanish laboratories make good money mainly from French customers who aren’t allowed to know whether the child for whose upbringing they pay for is theirs or not.

But what happens if you break the law? The website of one of the very few laboratories that actually make paternity tests (under a dubious legal regime) writes, citing the French legislation as follows[3]:

One should understand the risks involved before making a paternity ensuring beforehand that the delivery address is not subjected to the French law. If you order a paternity test via the Internet or by telephone in France, not only the shipment may be confiscated by the customs but you risk a year in prison and a fine of € 15,000 (Article 226-28 of the Penal Code ). The Supreme Court, the civil matters section, has sole jurisdiction to hear actions concerning filiation.

So this is it: if you are, let’s say, a white French man and you don’t trust your white wife’s words that the semi-Asian child is indeed yours – then tough luck! If she doesn’t consent to a paternity test and the state says that you should “man up” and pay, then that’s it.

Moreover, if you still do want to find out that, you risk a 15,000 Euro fine (20,100 $US) and you might also end up spending one year in jail. And of course, you still have to pay child support, even though the child is not yours.

The French government keeps this ban in place arguing that not allowing men to find out whether their wives cuckolded them or not preserves the peace within French families. Moreover, some ideologically driven bigots psychologists go as far as to say monstrous things like this[2]:

French psychologists suggest that fatherhood is determined by society not by biology.

Really? By that logic, I could bring a few kids from the street into my home and when I divorce my wife I can hold her accountable for child support, right? Because motherhood is determined by society and not by biology. And if you say “it doesn’t work like that” then you are nothing less than a bigot.

Study after study has shown that the illegitimacy rate in Europe is somewhere around 1 in 30. This means that one child in every classroom has a different father than the one whom he or she thinks is the father and in most cases, the natural/biological father has no way to know. And even real biological fathers may always wonder.

Paternity fraud is one of the very few crimes that indeed has a sex. Violence doesn’t have a sex. Rape doesn’t have a sex. Heck, not even breast cancer has a sex. But paternity fraud is a crime of deceit that has a sex – and it’s the female sex. It’s an offense committed solely by women against men and children. And it’s an offense that is not only legal almost everywhere, but actively encouraged by the French state by putting men who seek the truth in jail and making them pay huge fines (15,000 euros is earned by the average Frenchman in 4 to 7 months).

And what’s worse is that nobody in the mainstream media even mentions anything about this. Just like they’re also silent about the Istanbul convention. Moreover, Germany is now planning to do the same thing – to ban men from finding out the truth.

To override this nonsense will take years. In Sweden, for instance, paternity tests were legalized only in 2003 after a 55 year (!) long battle between a man and the feminist judicial system in Sweden. He eventually won. Ragnar Johansson fought from 1948 to 2003 to prove that he is not the father of the girl for which he paid child support[4][5][6]. He did not get a dime back from the money he was forced to pay to his cuckolding wife. But at least Sweden (and Norway) changed their law after this.

A few years ago, an acquaintance of mine was talking about the Cold War. And, while trying to say something whilst thinking of something else, she commenced a sentence as follows: “And the Soviet France then decided to…” We all had a great laugh at that point but now, “the Soviet France” might indeed be an accurate description of what’s going on in terms of the economic and individual freedom of Frenchmen.



[3] (in French)




Note: This article is also available in Italian.

This article has been translated into Swedish and it is available on the website of the publication named „Dissidenten” –

Denna artikel har översatts till svenska och det är tillgängligt på webbplatsen för offentliggörande som heter “Dissidenten”.

About Lucian Vâlsan

Hated by the local feminists and despised by most ideologues, Lucian Vâlsan is the Romanian guy that will tell you unapologetically that misandry has no language barrier. He is also the European News Director for AVfM, the host of The Voice of Europe radio program and the publisher of AVFM Romania.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Mike Buchanan

    Lucian, thank you for this important article. I believe that paternity fraud is FAR higher than 1 in 30 births (3.33%), some claim the actual rate is between 10% -30%. One of the objectives of our forthcoming party ‘Justice for Men and Boys (and the women who love them)’ may be compulsory paternity testing of babies at birth.

    No woman would be expected to work for 20+ years to support another woman’s children. Why should the same basic human right not be extended to men?

    Mike Buchanan

    JUSTICE FOR MEN AND BOYS (and the women who love them)

    • Stephen O’Brian

      Hi Mike I agree with what you’re saying here. I add that feminists bellyache about the rates of rape that exist. They overcook the stats we know, but there are a couple of points I wish to get across here. When you boil it all down rape is the use of somebody against their will. So if men are regularly being treated to paternity fraud by women, and in many cases cuckolded, divorced and forced to pay child support for up to two decades that means their labor is being fraudulently stolen – in effect their bodies are being used. It’s a kind of rape by deception of the male body then, no?
      Secondly, the levels of paternity fraud and the fact that certain countries such as France and New Zealand ban paternity tests under threat of draconian criminal prosecutions means there is more need than ever for the introduction to market for men of the various forms of male birth control pill.
      Your thoughts?

      • Mike Buchanan

        Another form of paternity fraud is, of course, committed by women who ‘forget’ to take their contraceptive pills then, after explaining they’re pregnant to their bewildered partners, say, ‘Well, no method is 100% reliable…’. And those men believe these women, because nobody has told them this is common.

        I agree, a male fertility pill would be at least a partial solution, Then men would have the intriguing option of taking the pill, but denying it to their partners.

        • Wendy

          When I was married, I would talk to other Marine’s wives about their babies (they ALL seemed to have babies) and they would inevitably tell me that it had been an “accident” and, after a little probing, they would say their birth control had failed. I never, ever thought, “Gee. . . birth control’s efficacy must be much lower than those wacky doctors think!” I always thought, “Wow, you’re either retarded or one lying b*tch.”

          • Mike Buchanan

            Wendy, thank you for your honesty and candour. You may or may not be aware that we’re in the process of establishing a new political party in the UK, ‘Justice for Men and Boys (and the women who love them)’. We plan to launch the party in March, and we’re debating our platform of policies, proposals etc.

            Just this morning we reached #19 – some will be removed, some added, no doubt – and I was just reflecting that 20 would be a nice round number, when I read your comment concerning Marines’ wives. So here’s #20 for our internal reviews, thanks for the inspiration:

            POLICY / PROPOSAL
            20. Paternity – the government should only require men to have financial responsibility for a child if he’s previously signed a legal declaration that he’s willing to support a child who results from the sexual relationship in question.

            Some women deliberately cause contraception methods to fail, unknown to their partners, in order to become pregnant. This is a form of paternity fraud, and men shouldn’t be expected to bear financial responsibility for the consequences of these women’s decisions.

            Mike Buchanan

            (and the women who love them)


          • Stu


            If I may add my two cents. I just love dabbling with the laws of other countries you know, it’s a hobby :)

            In conjunction with policy no. 20, or even instead of would be better then nothing, the government provide funding or other incentives towards the development of the male pill. Also, that pill be subsidized to the same degree that the female pill is.

          • Mike Buchanan


            Government funding of a male contraceptive pill – a great idea! We’ll give it some thought.

    • Stallion

      I think that this ruling is somewhat irrlevant to the plight of French men and boys anyways. More like a symptom of an underlying disease.

      Although I’m not entirely sure, but I doubt that gaining access to a paternity test would help a man in France get out of paying for a child that isn’t his.

      Other countries have also determined that fatherhood is societally, or whoever the state says, determined and not biologically.

      Is it unjust? Absolutely, but even if the ban wasn’t upheld it would have been meaningless in the big picture. I have a feeling men in France know exactly where they stand when it comes to marriage and fatherhood. Good luck trying to get them to toe the line.

      I’m looking forward to the upcoming bachelor tax that will need to be imposed as less and less men decide to marry. It will provide women and government with a means to steal their assets that will no longer be an option from divorce settlements.

  • gateman

    Isn’t there a way around this?
    If a French man gets a paternity test done on his child whilst on holiday in Spain is he still breaking French law?

    • Stu

      And if he finds that the kid is not his……what then. They don’t care if he’s not the father……he pays anyway.

  • Zerbu

    The idea of banning paternity tests is absolutely stupid. It’s obvious it’s a result of feminism, because for what other reason would they ban them? If there are any possible reasons besides feminism and misandry, I want to know.

    • Stu

      The law, and the courts job, is to ban the truth, and hide facts…..don’t you know?

      • Kimski

        Who else but the man would be able to pay for raising the kid?
        Her?? -Without government funding???


        The majority can’t even make reasonably sane citizens out of their offspring.

    • Raudskeggr

      The logical question to ask is, who benefits from suppressing very important information? So then, it follows that whoever passed the law stands to benefit either in this direct way, or was heavily influenced by those who do.

      And Feminists still claim that they are the oppressed ones.

    • Bev

      It shifts part of the money burden from government to the father. Government does not care who pays just so long as someone does. Justice does not count.

    • corbyworld

      Especially since such a large proportion of men who seek them have their doubts confirmed. Denying their right to know the truth, and the right of the child as well.

  • feeriker

    Any childless Frenchman who doesn’t immediately go out and get a vasectomy is an idiot.

    • Wendy

      French guys need a sympathetic French fertility doctor. Pretend infertility by getting a vasectomy, whilst having your sperm stored with the doctor. Go to the doctor and he’ll tell your wife that the best bet is to do IVF and voila. . . baby is biologically yours. It’s the only way to be sure.

    • Near Earth Object

      I have wondered if this is one of the hoped for outcomes with this legislation.

      I don’t know what’s crazier …
      feminists, or the things they think, and then talk about.

  • gateman

    How is this not a violation of the child’s right to know who it’s father is?

    • Mike Buchanan

      Gateman, you make a very good point. This is just one of many state-sponsored abuses of the rights of men and children, at the behest of militant feminists. One day people will march in large and angry demonstrations against their governments, in protest against such abuses. That day can’t come soon enough for me.

      • Bewildered

        Another French revolution is in the offing ! The shenanigans of the feminists and their supporters has gone OTP. WTF ? Fatherhood is not a biological fact and is societally determined ? Can’t this nonsense be challenged as a human rights violation ?

  • Ben

    So, if the woman says he’s the father of her child, he has no right to a paternity test? Can a woman in France have a child and then get out the phone book, turn to the business pages, find the most successful attorney or surgeon in her city (whom she has never actually seen in person), write down his name and his home address where he and his wife and kids live, declare that he is the father, and use police, judges, and child support agencies to destroy his marriage and extract 18 years of.child support from him, while the said successful attorney or surgeon has no right to a paternity test? And this isn’t on the news and there is no concern from men on this issue?

    • scatmaster

      To answer all your questions Ben.
      Yup. Yup. Yup.
      Sick isn’t it.

      • Kimski

        Misandry is alive and doing quite well on Planet Earth.

        I hope there’s intelligent life out there, ’cause there sure as hell isn’t much to be found here.

        • Bombay

          I have not heard that one before. LOL Nice.

          • Murray Pearson

            It was certainly said, at least in the form, “and pray there’s intelligent life out there in space — because, Lord knows, there’s bugger-all here on Earth,” in the 1980s by Monty Python.

            “So, can we have your liver, then?”

          • Kimski

            @Murray Pearson:


      • Ben

        I guess it’s all part of a woman’s right to choose. Indeed, sickening beyond comprehension.

        • Bewildered

          Though they have gone overboard with it, Islam knew the female psyche well and has had restrictions in place to prevent them from going wild and destroying society.
          Equality ? My foot! Unabashed gynocentrism seems to be the order of the day and instead of being called out those idiots are being humoured !

      • zuismanm

        i do not think so. At least in Israel – it is only for a males that are already officially registered as “father” of spoken kid (or in case of officially married couple. if it is unmarried female that claims that guy X is father – she will have to agree for test – if he will ask for it. But, if he believed her, and agreed to register kid as his, and after some half a year see – that kid is to similar to her ex – he got screwed. Now he will need her permission for test.

      • feeriker

        Hey, this is France we’re talking about. Should this really surprise us?

  • TheUnknown

    “French psychologists suggest that fatherhood is determined by society not by biology.”
    That sounds like the perfect set-up for a return argument, “Well I guess any child not in my custody isn’t my responsibility then, because even if the child is biologically mine, I don’t have full social fatherhood.”

    If this was just about making sure children get the appropriate post-divorce care (I assume this mostly concerns men not consenting to responsibilities for the child that would be inherent in a current marriage) they could simply make a law banning the results of paternity tests in civil court. Instead they’ve declared what we in America would call a “War on Paternity Tests” targeting men who by default can’t use the results for anything beyond their own knowledge. This unarguably shows a deep contempt for the reproductive rights of men.

    • Mateusz

      The problem is that society will determine that whatever man the mother decides has the deepest pockets will be her personal ATM. It’s all based on what society decides, and society is openly hostile towards men.

      • Bewildered

        So accelerate its destruction, no one seems to care for it anyway!

    • Robert St. Estephe

      Normal persons (non-charlatans) suggest that French psychologists who promote such drivel kiss our hind ends — and go get an honest job.

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      „targeting men who by default can’t use the results for anything beyond their own knowledge.” – This, of course, provided that they do not get caught, arrested and fined whilst attempting to obtain this information.

  • Mark Trueblood

    Thanks for this. I plan to write a blog post on the topic of paternity testing over the weekend and these links will help.

    • Stephen O’Brian

      I look forward to reading that. Please link it here at AVfM.

  • Mateusz

    At what point will these misandrist countries just decide to drop the pretenses and legally declare men underclasses, whose labor legally belongs to women?

    • Stu

      Never, you see if they do that, men just give them the finger and don’t labor anymore. Then they try to use force, but the only force they can use is other men, and those men eventually abandon the plantation too. They have to maintain the illusion no matter how obvious the truth has become. And the reason they can maintain it, is because men can’t bare to look in the mirror, and see a pathetic owned slave…….so they will buy any bullshit to avoid the truth. It’s easy to sell bullshit to someone when they themselves can not stomach the truth…..and seek out bullshit to delude themselves

      • Mike Buchanan

        Stu, you make a very good point about men not being willing to look in the mirror. For the best account I know of about this phenomenon, I recommend Esther Vilar’s classic, ‘The Manipulated Man’ (1972). This isn’t a women v men fight, it’s an (alpha) men v (non-alpha) men fight. But non-alpha men outnumber alpha men 100:1, and we live in democracies, so the answer’s obvious…

        Mike Buchanan

        (and the women who love them)

    • Bombay

      Yes. Formally recognize that men are utilities.

  • Stu

    On the other hand, a woman can force a man to take a paternity test for the purposes of establishing that he is the father, to get at his wallet.

    But wait, if fatherhood is determined socially, then knocking up a one night stand doesn’t men you are the father……right?

  • Steveyp333

    just a quick typo to point out in the article “The French government keeps this ban in place arguing that allowing men to find out whether their wives cuckolded them or not preserves the peace within French families” – it should be “not allowing”, right?

    I like the exchange between Stu and Mateusz above this post. It’s true – society aka the female imperative sees us as obligated to protect and pay for females, but cannot admit so. It will twist and destroy language and logic to reach its goal, but it will never admit what it’s up to.

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      You are right. I added the missing „not”.

  • Roland3337

    If I were a Frenchman, I’d be getting a vasectomy just to eliminate the possibility that I could be cuckolded.

    • Ben

      That wouldn’t work, if I have understood this correctly. She can say you are the father anyway. A woman you have never even met can say you are the father and off to jail you go for back child support, apparently.

  • MGTOW-man

    It is coming here, in the USA too; just a matter of time. This is the mindset of feminist run government, the epicenter and epitome of the radical, irrational female mind, which like it or not, is shared, more or less, by most typical women, complete with their distortion of reality, warped by their feelings. That is the only way to explain how such bull-laws like the one in France can come into existence and be upheld time and again.

    To further illustrate this, females here already
    –control procreation, and think that is fair and equal.
    –punish an accused rapist with full exposure in the media regardless of innocent until proven guilty but hide her identity even if she is a false accuser, and think such is fair and equal.
    –hit men for non self-defense and get away with it, while refusing to admit that their own violence is violent, and think such nonsense is fair and equal.
    –exploit affirmative action designed for minorities in which women have never been, and think it is fair and equal.
    –exploit the natural dynamics of male-female interaction in order to make superiority-grabbing gains, and think that crap is fair and equal.
    –dispose of fathers/men from families while robbing their wallets… yep, fair and equal.
    –dominate the media, operating under the radar, and essentially censuring men and dissenting women from their right to speak (and be heard), while insisting such treatment is fair and equal.
    –bully our lawmakers into hate legislation such as VAWA, and think that is fair and equal.
    —operate with a vengeful retaliatory attitude that punishes men who had not a darned thing to do with the rules of yesteryear, …fair and equal.

    The list could go on for several pages.

    With so much atrocities happening from the hands of misguided but powerful women who have punishment as number one on their minds, why would anyone think that anything is exempt from actually happening. It is just a matter of time….

    And lazy, horny, and cowardly customer-men-puppets, just keep on wallowing in their stupidity, allowing such hate-actions to permeate and destroy our society, the society they are supposed to be protecting. Some “men” they turned out to be. They are acting like herds of pre-programmed, spring-loaded wind-up dolls who have not a mind of their own but are controlled by their supposed “hard wiring”. Then they have the audacity to call themselves “men” even though they are selling their own boys down the river at an astonishing and alarming pace.

    Bad women will get away with whatever they want as long as (traitorous or at least duped) men help them, then continue to allow it.

    It makes no sense but France, in time, WILL be our reality too. Just stay tuned and see for yourselves if there aren’t real threads of behavior that bind most women. You’ll see. Lie to yourselves all you want…but be very sorry for it too.

    Think what you want, but there is no hatred in me for being honest. Most of us men have lived with women and when/if we get together, we will and do use the same adjectives and descriptions to define the behavior of most women. Such is not a coincidence or a deliberate attempt to stereotype, but based on real observations most all men have made.

    Trust me, if something isn’t done to stop it, France-mindset WILL be USA soon especially if Hillary Clinton becomes our next president—which she will (we all know why).

    Disagree? Then answer this: With so much of the population in France women, why do you think such laws in France are allowed to exist…actually shoved in people’s faces Hint: it isn’t because women are apathetic.

    Answer that question correctly and you’ll answer a hundred more.

    Now do not shoot the messenger!

    • gwallan

      “affirmative action designed for minorities in which women have never been”

      A caveat. Late seventies, early eighties I worked in an environment where AA was warranted. The mistake was in not applying a cessation date.

      • MGTOW-man

        I agree with you. However, cessation dates are never installed when feminist hype is put into law. Heck, a 1000 years from now, they will still be whining, sniveling, and manipulating and still in an aura of mental oblivion. They will still be collecting the special preferential treatment stuff while also simultaneously saying that they are oppressed and “hurt” by men. Those poor, poor pitiful women; they have it sooooo bad!

    • Dopesauce42

      I like this list a lot. But I think the one about our politicians being bullied into passing VAWA is a case of ‘tail wagging the dog’.

      This is not how politics work. Feminists are useful idiots. They are not calling the shots. They have been given power, partly because anything they do will land them more flak than it will the government that appointed them. Also, because what they are trying to do, which is subjugate half of the population, is exactly what governments find appealing, and need no convincing about it’s appeal. Anything that makes people less powerful, less tightly connected, makes the state and corporate elite stronger.

      Biden may look like an idiot, but that is a con job, just like Bush playing dumb. It is a deflection tactic.

      VAWA is the answer to the question ‘how?’ The ‘what’ has already been decided by the ruling class. The ‘what’ is destroying solidarity wherever it is, in whatever forms it takes. There is a war being fought against all ordinary people. That war is the class war. The class war is not a fight over money or control of resources, rather, it is a fight over which values should shape society; equality, democracy, and compassion, OR dog-eat-dog competition, greed, and inequality. AVfM is pretty firmly on the side of ordinary people. Biden, and Corporations are firmly on the side of the ruling class, and wish to institute as much oppressions and repression as possible.

      Our fight here at AVfM is about so much more than men’s human rights. As if that was not big and worthy enough. The fight we are engaged in at AVfM is on a continuum with every fight to make the world a fair and decent place. Our enemy is the ruling class in whatever form it takes. Revolution is our only real solution. We need to slay the beast, not just it’s regenerating tentacles.

  • Raudskeggr

    Because of course feminist rhetoric states that men, and not women, are the frequent cheaters.

    When in fact marital infidelity is pretty well even.

    • Kimski

      “When in fact marital infidelity is pretty well even.”

      Agreed, but men don’t bring someone else’s child into an already established marriage by deceit, thereby forcing the spouse to pay for that child’s upbringing for 18 years.
      I would think that makes one hell of a difference to anyone, even women.

  • Near Earth Object

    “French psychologists suggest that fatherhood is determined by society not by biology.”


    The more they move us along this path—kicking and sometimes screaming—the further they alienate us from our very nature—human nature.

    I don’t know what’s crazier …
    feminists, or the things they think, and then talk about.

  • Rick777

    So a french soldier can be away for a year or so, come home and find out his wife is about to give birth and he will be declared the father despite the obvious fraud being perpetrated? And he will have no recourse?

    • zuismanm

      If they are officially married – it is exactly what will be. Even if he will come after 4 years and find her with 3 kids- he will pay for all of them. Exactly same in Israel…

      • Mike Buchanan

        Looking into the male contraceptive pill (Stu, thanks again) and just spotted this on Wikipedia. The male pill may be just two years away. Go, Bar-llan University, go!!!

        One goal of research is to develop a male oral contraceptive, a male contraceptive that can be taken in pill form by mouth, similar to the existing oral contraceptive pill for women. Calcium channel blockers such as nifedipine may cause reversible infertility by altering the lipid metabolism of sperm so that they are not able to fertilize an egg. Recent Research at Israel’s Bar-Ilan University show that as of June 2010, such a pill may be five years away. Testing it on mice has been found to be effective, with no side effects.

        • Stephen O’Brian

          Hi Mike,
          check out my two articles on the male birth control pill here at AVFM for even more encouraging news –

          • Mike Buchanan

            Stephen, thanks for pointing me to your strong articles. It’s obvious now you’ve articulated the matter (and over a year ago!) The male pull could be a HUGE game changer. One of the feminists’ worst nightmares, I’d have thought. Combine it with paternity testing of babies at birth, to catch THAT variant of paternity fraud, and things are looking up for men at last! If you’ve no objection, I’ll put links to your articles on two of my blogs:

            (and the women who love them)




            Many thanks,

            Mike Buchanan

          • Stephen O’Brian

            Yes of course go ahead with those links Mike. I’m delighted that word about male contraceptive developments will spread further and agree entirely with your comments about how empowering they will be alongside DNA paternity testing.
            BTW a donation to your campaign will be on the way as soon as I figure out how to get that done from my ex-pat secret location!

          • Mike Buchanan

            Stephen, many thanks, posts now ‘live’.

            Thanks too for the offer of a donation. Interestingly, we’ve seen a marked increase in donations since we revealed we’re forming a political party – maybe something that should encourage people in other countries? One donor said the party could be a ‘game changer’. So that’s three of them on the horizon – a new political party, the male pill, and compulsory paternity testing at birth. It’s all starting to look brighter…

            Mike Buchanan

            (and the women who love them)


  • Bombay

    I do like your articles and how it gives perspective for a part of the world for which I have not previously seen much MHRA exposure.

    “Paternity fraud is the one of the very few crimes that indeed has a sex. Violence doesn’t have a sex. Rape doesn’t have a sex. Heck, not even breast cancer has a sex. But paternity fraud is a crime of deceit that has a sex – and it’s the female sex. It’s an offense committed solely by women against men and children. ”

    Very nice observation and no wonder it is not recognized as a crime by government. If murder had a sex whereby it was committed only by women upon men, then that would not be a crime either.

    Does anyone know of a “crime” that is committed solely by woman that the government will recognize as a crime?

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      I have been thinking at your question since you posted this comment. It has been more than 24 hours and I am still unable to come up with a decent example.

      At first I thought about abortion in former communist countries (yes, in Romania, Hungary, Poland and Bulgaria, abortion was banned before 1989) – but then I remembered how many men (doctors, enablers, cops that turned a blind eye, etc. etc.) went to jail or were executed for enabling a woman to conduct an abortion illegally.

      So I just do not know any crime that has a female sex and it is considered a crime by any government somewhere in the world.

  • Codebuster

    I like Mike Buchanan’s initiative – form a political party, provide an alternative for men to vote for. There’s always opportunities in adversity. There’s a business opportunity here, getting involved in politics:

    (and the women who love them)

  • DeclanLyons

    Surely this backwards law could be challenged in the EU. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg must surely be the ideal place to challenge this type of BS.

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      „The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg must surely be the ideal place to challenge this type of BS.” – Well, 4 years ago, maybe 2 years ago, I would have agreed with your position and I would have contacted a Frenchman prior to writing this article and already helped opening a lawsuit against the French state.

      However, at this point, in 2013, I no longer believe that ECHR is a right place to challenge this crap.

      First of all, the ECHR is in France and it works mostly on French taxpayers money and under the protection of the French government. But this is not the main issue.

      The main issue is that ECHR is a body of the Council of Europe (CoE) – the same CoE that drafted the infamous Istanbul Convention.
      Please read this article: (at the end of the article there is also a link with the entire content of the Convention in the English language)

      Now, after you read all these, do you still really think that a body of an institution that has already proven itself to be a misandric place would rule against a misandric practice?

      • Near Earth Object

        Given my understanding of the EU, Lucian, I arrived at your conclusion a bit earlier.
        Thanks for spelling out the argument in the post I am replying to … & thanks for your articles.

        I don’t know what’s crazier …
        feminists, or the things they think, and then talk about.

      • DeclanLyons

        Well, that was depressing.

  • napocapo69

    quote”French psychologists suggest that fatherhood is determined by society not by biology.”

    No fatherhood is determined by the decision of a man to be a father. If he has doubts about the biological aspect than he should be able to know the truth and then decide.

    Second; if biology does not matter, why men are forced in child support on the basis of DNA tests? Does that statement implies that a woman can cheat around and get “social fatherhood” from the husband/partner?

    This is pure spread of misandry, because the real reason behind this law is to give a stop at any reproductive rights claim by men.

  • mauvebutterfly

    Another issue that never gets considered when debating the merits of paternity testing is that of genetic disease.

    If a child inherits a genetic disease from the wrong father, the parents now have no way of knowing and treating it. Well, the mother, assuming she knew the other man well enough, might know, but would find it difficult to explain away.

    Alternatively, if the “social father” has such a disease, but the biological father doesn’t, could the child end up in some sort of treatment or therapy unnecessarily?

    Paternity testing should be mandatory for the good of the child. This legislation is once again pushing the interests of women above the interests of their children.

    • zuismanm

      There is another “small” issue…. Incest. There is a reason – that ancient societies infidelity was such a crime. One obviously – stability of family. if man was supposed to break his bone to keep his family satiated – had to know that it is really his family , his children. Otherwise – he just would no do it…
      But second reason – prevention of incest. When priest (or whoever in some specific society was authorized to register marriage) was registering marriage , he had to ensure that they are not close relatives. It is of cause impossible without knowing for sure who are real parents.
      By the way – it is exactly reason – that in Israel paternity tests are prohibited. In IL – state recognize only only religious marriage. Jewish religion ban bastards from marriage. No Ravine will give marriage license if one from couple is bastard. So – main “argument” of feminists when those law was pushed through Knesset, was , that tests “creates bastards” and traditionally their human rights are violated in IL society. Everyone some how missed that bastards are created by cheating females and not by paternity tests. And if law prevent form registering them as bastards, they do not stop to be bastards – people that no one knows – who is their father, and so – who are are their brothers/sisters. Such people are ticking genetic bomb – danger that they will marry (without knowing it) their relatives , or it will happen in next generation/generations. People for thousands of years banned bastards from society , not because they were barbarian. They did it for simple reason of society self-preservation.

  • gwallan

    Previously a French man was successfully sued for refusing sex. Doesn’t seem to be much in the way of consent for any male on any matter related to sex or parenthood on the French landscape.

    At the level of it’s national government males are denied equality in the family. France joins others, such as Australia, wherein men are simply not seen to be a part of the family at all. It’s explicit in the actions and rhetoric of many nations.

    I wonder if there are any boys paying child support to adult women in France?

  • the hermit

    I’m pretty sure this one is in opposition with the EU civil rights laws.

    • Stu

      Men only have civil rights as long as upholding those rights doesn’t conflict with…….women first……women second….and women third.

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      Well, not exactly. And if the EU adopts the Istanbul Convention – then for sure nothing will change anytime soon.

  • donzaloog

    I’m so looking forward to the day when we have a male birth control pill. It will be a glorious day. I hope I live to see it.

  • TigerMan

    What is the most worrying about all this is that French men (and fair minded women) are NOT out on the streets over this.

  • Augen

    I could tell that the information in this article was going to be important so even though I got stopped at these words and took a break to walk around, do some chores and think about them, I came back, soldiered on and read the rest of the article – which was important. But the words that stopped me were: “Is it really a surprise that a socialist government disagreed that men have human rights too?”

    Words such as these, reflexively attributing an anti-male posture to socialism, Marxism or nebulous “leftism” are fairly routine in articles in AVfM, routine in that specific nature, where the assertion is made, it is undefended, unexplained, merely asserted, then we move on as if nothing happened, as if everyone was on-board as to the obvious relationship between left-wing politics and misandry.

    A few things make this odd. One is that it is an argument by assertion. No doubt it is an argument by assertion with a large constituency and that’s why I find myself a regular gadfly on the point, but it is an argument by assertion nonetheless.

    For another, this is from the AVfM Writers Guidelines:

    “This is not a place for partisan politics. Period.”

    This is from the AVfM Editorial Policy:

    “Apolitical- AVfM rejects the current political paradigm, accepting that it is misandric on all fronts. AVfM will not endorse ANY political candidate, of any party, though articles may address misandry or the lack of it in certain political figures or activities. On this site, Republicans, Democrats, Labour, Conservative and Liberal parties are all viewed as equally worthless, and their partisan followers as equally brainwashed.”

    I am not a socialist. I note too that in 2013 USA, genuine socialists are very hard to come by.

    I do find though that the use of the word “socialist” or “Marxist” or “leftist” has almost NO productive value in a discussion other than as a word of exclusion, i.e.: “your politics are left of where we are so we don’t really want to hear about it.”

    In other words … the word does nothing to advance any other aspect of discussion. The word does, however, exclude.

    These words are used in the circles I keep by people who are uncomfortable dealing with the substance … substance gentlemen … of arguments and policies that were just 25-30 years ago, articulated for the first time by the Republican party itself.

    My point is this: particularly if you use the term as mere undiferrentiated assertion without other context, your use of the term is likely to be read by those like myself, who are not socialist or leftist, but who are “left” of libertarian and “left” of Tea Party … who happen to be a majority in a country that elected Obama to a second term of office, … it is likely to be read by us as a term of exclusion, because IF it had any other value, it would have a context and you would expand on it – not just assert it so the in-crowd can say “yeah” and the out crowd can wonder “do I belong here?”.

    Really … so “socialist” France, that also happens to be values-traditionalist in ways that don’t conform to an anglo-mix of values and economics, is misandric because of their economic socialism and not because of their values traditionalism? … any yet I find all the same misandry in the most neo-liberal Republicans right here in the US (

    Sorry … there’s some kind of contradiction there and just asserting “socialist” doesn’t make sense …

    Unless the intention is to exclude.

    So … if AVfM and NCFM and the MHRM think that they can prevail change on society while limiting its inclusive constituency to everyone to the right of the Tea Party and therefore finds use in retaining an editorial policy that really serves the positive interests of no one other than libertarians, Tea Partiers and Ayn Rand fundies … hell keep it up.

    On the other hand, if you are prepared to allow that ordinary folks who listen to NPR and watch CNN and occasionally get their news from the NYT and work their days and save their money and manage to care more about the unemployed veteran or the unemployed former factory worker than the wealthy fellow (who they hold NO animus against – they just aren’t as concerned about him) … or those same people who think affirmative action is ok but may be prepared to hear an argument that the same policies intended to help truly oppressed minorities from truly downtrodden circumstances are perhaps mis-spent on their suburban sisters who had and have every advantage they have … if you don’t need these people because they are too socialist and Marxist and leftist … just keep on violating AVfM’s own editorial policies and broadcasting that those folks are not welcome here with terms that have no other value. This is a libertarian club, didn’t ya know?

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      1. MHRM is not an American club – it’s an international club.
      2. The ruling party in France is The Socialist Party and the regime there is comparable with what my parents have seen in the Soviet Union and against which my grandfather fought against in WW2.
      3. Modern day political feminism IS LEFTIST. Even the American Left admits that:
      Stating the obvious fact doesn’t make (or anyone else for that matter) a member of the Tea Party or the GOP. I can’t even be a member of these organizations even if I wanted to.

      Does the political right have elements of misandry? Of course it has. But this doesn’t change the aforementioned fact.
      This is not a matter of opinion but it’s a matter of fact. Over 90% of militant political feminists in Europe are in some way, shape or form involved in leftist parties and the ideology itself in militant political form comes from Engels and Herbert Marcuse.

      I am sorry that the facts make you uncomfortable, but this is the reality.

      • Mike Buchanan

        Lucian, I agree with your analysis, and I think almost all MRAs would. I’d say virtually all militant feminists (including some feminist MRAs, e.g. Tom Martin) are firmly left-wing, and would-be anti-meritocratic social engineers by instinct too. But here’s an interesting thing. Many people in cohorts of people which might be expected to be left-leaning suffer gravely from the impact of feminism. Working-class men are perhaps the prime example. This is one of the reasons our poilitical party will be apolitical. The only people not welcome in our ‘tent’ will be militant feminists, whether female or male. 98%+ of voters will be welcomed with open arms.

        • Lucian Vâlsan

          Mike, don’t be naive. There’s no such thing as an “apolitical political party”. It’s an oxymoron!
          You stand for merit in business – in other words, let the individual choice and the free market decide, instead of the government. That’s a right wing perspective.
          You stand for individual judgement on DV and custody cases – instead of collective judgement (based on the Duluth model). This is also a right wing perspective.

          All people have a political ideology – regardless of whether they are in a party or not.

          • Mike Buchanan

            Lucian, thank you. I’ve been accused of many things in my life, but never of being ‘naive’. The point I was trying to make – not very well, apparently – is that people of one political leaning (e.g. left-wing) can be assaulted by others of the same leaning (e.g. feminists). I see no reason not to try to appeal to those people, e.g. working class men.

          • Steve_85

            I’d like to point out here that ALL governments are left-leaning, it is just the degree that changes.

            Our countries, states and even villages are too large now for a certain amount of ‘leftism’ to not make perfect sense. It is much simpler to have everyone pay a % of their earnings (or a flat fee, whichever) and have the government provide roads and street lights than it would be to do this piecemeal by individuals and/or companies providing roads and lighting in certain areas and trying to charge everyone who uses them.

          • Lucian Vâlsan

            „people of one political leaning (e.g. left-wing) can be assaulted by others of the same leaning (e.g. feminists). I see no reason not to try to appeal to those people, e.g. working class men.” – I get your point and it makes sense to appeal (to the extent it is possible) to voters both from the right and to the left. But this does not make your party to be an „apolitical political party”. It just makes your party to appeal to a certain extent to the left-wing voters too. That’s it.

            Think of the UKIP. They also stated (and sometimes still do) that they appeal to left-leaning voters, right-leaning voters and the libertarian conservative one (which are definitely the majority of the UKIP voters). But this doesn’t make UKIP apolitical. UKIP is a libertarian conservative party centered on local autonomy and divorcing from the EU, and Nigel knows it.

            The same will eventually happen to your party as long as you stand for merit in business (which is a right wing stance) and for individual judgement in family courts instead of collective feminist judgement (which is also a right wing stance). A greater extent of personal freedom appeals to modern day anarcho-socialists (including some working class men) and it’s good you are trying to appeal to them. But this still doesn’t make your party “apolitical”.

          • feeriker

            You stand for merit in business – in other words, let the individual choice and the free market decide, instead of the government. That’s a right wing perspective.

            No, actually, that’s a libertarian perspective. Both the left and the right would advocate some form of government intervention in all matters, social and economic, to one degree or another.

            Just wanted to be clear on the point.

      • Augen

        By such reasoning the modern-day political right is racist.

        Human rights are not right or left leaning.

        This is where AVfM will need to make a choice. It can either be a human rights organization, or it can align itself with the left or right.

        Routine posturing that serves ZERO purpose other than to identify which side we think is correct, will let people know where you come down on this, and will have the effect of concentrating a balance of support. I think it is clear where Lucian comes down on this.

        The civil rights movement did not succeed by being a Democratic Party movement. It could only succeed by being a human rights movement that the Republican Party, by force of decency, came to support.

        Feminism is fully ingrained into Republican politics. I am sorry that you are resistant to acknowledging this fact. I could among other things reference the reasons why Republicans stall VAWA, all of which have nothing to do with concerns about misandry, but that would only be getting started.

        Affirmative action will not be reformed without Democrats, who are not socialists and who resent being called socialists, … without them and the better-than-one-half-of-Americans who sympathize with them, agreeing to reform it. Ditto that no-fault divorce. Ditto that child support. Ditto that due process rights.

        I am calling AVfM out. Be a-political and about human rights, as your editorial policy calls for, or keep winking and nodding at the right-most of the right using language of exclusion that implies agreement with assertions that the majority does not agree with.

        Civil rights and human rights stand based on appeals to moral decency, which are not the unique province of the left or the right. You can take the road of decency or you can take the road of politics. I have little doubt that there are plenty, maybe even a simple majority, who would be fine with politics. My warning to you is that if you choose that low road, you are choosing self-marginalization.

      • Augen

        “3. Modern day political feminism IS LEFTIST. Even the American Left admits that:…”

        For a moment I am going to talk about a number of things that would seem to have NOTHING AT ALL to do with misandry. Indulge me for a moment, there is a point to this.

        Here is a small list of things that I have found tend to connect me with people who lean Democrat or register Democrat.

        1. I believe the tax code should be simplified, enormously. I believe the corporate tax should be eliminated entirely, that most exemptions should be eliminated and the tax code should be made more progressive meaning at marginal rates (last three terms critical but I don’t the space to go into them now) that people should pay more, but at lower incomes people should pay less.

        2. I am very concerned about the fact that median and mean household income has stagnated since 1980 while income in the top 5% has skyrocketed in the same time … knowing one or two things about economics, I am concerned that this is an indication that the American market is not operating efficiently

        3. I am concerned about affirmative action. I understand in great legalistic detail exactly how affirmative action is designed to work and I am worried that the people it was principally intended to help are not benefiting very much from it, while people who absolutely do not need help are getting pushed to the top in large part on account of it

        4. I am concerned about the monstrosity called “free trade”. It bothers me every day that the very same rights of laborers that are protected in what all of us, left and right, agree are “free markets”, are thrown under the bus when we engage in free trade. I think it is vital to our national survival that we restore ordinary protections of a free market – which does not implicitly favor labor or capital – to international markets, so that laboring classes are not run over by capitalist classes (not ideology here: people who work – labor – versus people who have money – capital)

        5. I think that pollution is what English Common Law described as a “nuisance” … it is an imposition upon private property, as such I think pollution should be relentlessly, even mercilessly taxed, which is a long-standing tradition in the anglosphere for dealing with unavoidable nuisances that impose upon private property

        6. I care about the capital gains tax. It keeps me up at night, it really does and here is why. It does so because it’s been just 15% for a few decades, … which means if I’m a main-stream mom-and-pop company, I pay taxes at the income-tax marginal rate on earnings to owners and partners, … but that competes with publicly held companies whose shareholders pay taxes at the capital gains rate, which is likely less than HALF the marginal income tax rate … so in the battle between Main Street companies and Wall Street companies for investors’ capital … who do ya think wins, hmmm? Think about that the next time you go through a strip mall that looks exactly the same as the next 1000 strip malls from New York to Seattle. For 40 years after WWII small companies competed in free markets with big companies because they could form co-ops to neutralize big companies’ economies of scale and because they competed on equal footing for investor dollars. Since the capital gains tax went down to 15% … notice what happened to all those mom-and-pops?

        7. I care about the millionaire and the billionaire, I because I understand how markets work, and I understand they need capital to work … but I think that in 2013, they are ok. On the other hand, the bottom 50% is not doing so well, and the more we believe that corporate right-wing capitalism IS capitalism and “free markets” and its the only way to general prosperity and growth … I am convinced myself that is a fixed system … fixed to keep investor margins going up and up, but laborer compensation stagnant … and nothing in my understanding of capitalism requires that I pick the “right” side of that political break down. I care about the investor, and the laborer, but if I care more in 2013 about the laborer and that makes me “left”, then call me a leftist damnit.

        Now, on account of the temerity I have to believe and care about all of these things, which other than #3, having NOTHING to do with my feelings about the MHRM, or misandry, or feminism, I am forced to identify with people who for the most part self-identify as Democrats, because in 2013, there isn’t a place in the Republican party for a person who is concerned about those 7 things they way I have described my concern. We would be called, “RINOs”.

        I understand there are people even to the left of me. I understand they are so far left, they could legitimately be called, or would even self-identify, socialist or leftist.

        But when I have my MHRM hat on … I can’t think of anything about the seven concerns I have that force me or the millions and millions of people who share those concerns, that forces any of us to be misandric or feminist.

        But if it is your position that “feminism IS LEFTIST” and you wish to alienate and exclude us from MHRM because you simply lack the imagination or range of cognitive possibility to understand that “left is not feminist” any more than “right is racist” … then go ahead, keep it up.

        Like every single article you have published to date Lucian, throw in a gratuitous jibe at us Engels-lovin lefties who are chompin at the bit to take out capitalism and make everyone equal in outcome. See what a big movement you can make doing that.

        • Lucian Vâlsan

          This is the last comment I will post in response to your nonsense.

          As stated above, modern day political feminism is left wing. You can chose to ignore the facts – it is your choice.
          Everyone is entitled to their own opinion – but not to their own facts.

          But please don’t drag me into Democrat-Republican debate. I couldn’t care less about that. I am not American and the world does not revolve around Democrats and Republicans.

          If you can’t come to terms with that, then I am sorry for you.

          You are free to start your own place or to start posting articles on AVfM and bring your own contribution. It doesn’t say anywhere that all the people from the editorial board have to agree each other on everything.

          But, until then, I post here using my real name, whilst you are just posting nonsensical lengthy comments under the protection of anonymity. So sorry for not taking you seriously.

          Have a nice day.

          • scatmaster

            I was with you despite your rudeness but when you called out some one for posting anonymously you get a big Fuck You from me. If I was to post with my real name even though most of my comments boarder on the inane I would be out of a job not to mention the potential for violence inside the home.

            I suggest you have a word with the publisher concerning anonymity and how he feels about before you start shaming anonymous members. If you look closely on this website you will see an overwhelming majority are anonymous.

          • Bombay

            People’s comments could be used against them in court should they find themselves there.

            People with jobs are better able to support the AVFM.

          • Lucian Vâlsan

            Thank you for your „fuck you” scatmaster. But I think you are missing the point here.
            There are a lot of people here posting under the protection of anonymity, but those people we know – we have seen their activity and contribution. This is not the case of Augen at all.
            Nobody calls out SirKimski, you, Dr. F, KARMA MGTOW, Barbarosa (to name a few) for being anonymous. Why? Because we know them. We can attribute a name (even a bogus one) to their contributions or positions.

            This is the difference between a random newcomer who attempts to avoid reality and people that are genuinely involved and under genuine threat (hence the anonymity).
            Augen is not under this category. He is here solely to promote his political ideology and express his anger for having his ideology called out.

            I tend to be rude with people who try to hide the truth and think that I should give a flying fuck that they are offended by the truth. And Augen falls under these categories.

    • JohnNewton

      Augen, you said it better than I ever could. I agree completely.

      …except possibly for the affirmative action part. I think there are better ways to solve those kinds of problems. Still, a minor issue with a well-written post.

  • Wendy

    Maybe if the guys who want the test happen to travel to another country, they could secretly do the test and send it from someone’s address there? For example, I live near Disneyland in California. I’d let someone use my address if they wanted to come for vacation and do the paternity test while they were here.

    • Mike Buchanan

      Wendy, thanks. You’re a star. Your tourist boards should expect a spike in the number of Frenchmen taking their kids for holidays in the US. By all accounts the French Disneyland is similar to yours, but without the sun. Well, that’s what happens when you site something in Northern France (or anywhere in the UK, to be fair). In the immortal word of Homer Simpson, ‘Doh!’

  • TPH

    This situation is simply about money. Family harmony be damned, this whole fucking mess is the result of feminism run amok. It’s bad enough men become victims of paternity fraud, but for the French government to openly piss on Frenchmen in such a public way says everything about how men are viewed: Providers of money and support and nothing else. I just wonder when men are going to wake the fuck up and figure out they have been sold down the river. Another perfect example of how men are becoming second class citizens in their own country, what makes it worse is that both men and women are actively making it happen.

  • Will of The People

    I commend you, Lucian, for bringing this story to people’s attention. It is an outrage that such a law would be in place, anywhere, at any time. But I do have one issue, and it’s one that I’ve seen on this site from time to time. It’s this quote:
    ” Is it really a surprise that a socialist government disagreed that men have human rights too?”
    Look, I get that many MHRA’s associate with the right of center side of the political spectrum. And I have zero problem with that. But, I have to say, being left of center no more makes one a man-hater than being right of center makes one a misogynist.

    I voted for Barack Obama, twice.
    I think single payer health care is a good idea.
    I’m a union supporter.
    I believe in having a strong social safety net.
    And I think misandry, male disposability, and inequality before the law based on sex, are absolutely and completely wrong. So please, don’t lump all us lefties into the misandrist camp. Doing so not only serves to alienate guys like me, but is also an inaccurate view.

    Just sayin’ is all

    • Mike Buchanan

      WotP, thanks for putting those points so well. I think many Lefties and most Righties share common ground on this topic. And it’s not often I find myself able to say that!

      Mike Buchanan

      (and the women who love them)

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      Why is everybody thinking that the entire world revolves around USA or English speaking countries for that matter?

      To be honest, I could not care less who you voted for – but I think voting for Obama you just helped instituting more misandry in the US.

      The ruling party in France is the Socialist Party. So it is the socialist government that disagreed that men have human rights too. This is the fact.
      Modern day political feminism is Leftist. This is a fact. Even the softcore Left from the USA admits it.

      Sure, one can be a leftist and a non-feminist – but leftism is generally including feminism. This is true everywhere in Europe. Literally: EVERYWHERE.

      „I think single payer health care is a good idea.” – I think it is the worst idea possible.
      „I’m a union supporter.” – I am not.
      „I believe in having a strong social safety net.” – I do not.
      „And I think misandry, male disposability, and inequality before the law based on sex, are absolutely and completely wrong.” – So do I

      „So please, don’t lump all us lefties into the misandrist camp.” – I did not do that. I just pointed the obvious fact that the socialist French government disagreed that men have human rights too. And this is the reality.

      „Doing so not only serves to alienate guys like me, but is also an inaccurate view.” – Feminism is leftist. We have seen it in Eastern Europe and my father and grandfather experienced it to the greatest extent first hand during the Marxist regime prior to 1989. So it is not an inaccurate view, it is a fact.

      And I will not stop from telling the truth because some people might not like it. I did not came here to be politically correct. I came here to speak the truth about European misandry. And modern day political misandry in Europe comes from the Left.

      • Falland

        Leftists are not always feminists but feminists are always leftists.

        The reality is that men are more economically productive than women and women are the gatekeepers for reproduction. This balance between cooperation and exploitation is what creates the drama between the sexes. In the past, this was handled on a personal level and the result were families with children. Now it consists of women who occupy the left hand of the bell curve, mining men’s resources through social transfer payments such as alimony, progressive income tax, affirmative action, government benefits, social insurance, medical insurance, etc. while attempting to monopolize sex and children.

        While the overlap between the left and feminism is not 100% both sides need each other for them to win a majority and have access to the right’s resources. This marriage of convenience requires a lot of willful blindness, demagoguery, and victim baiting to make it seem as if they really just one happy family. They either hang together or hang separately.

        • Stephen O’Brian

          Pure Gold Falland.
          Spot on.
          Of course feminists are always intrinsically leftists.
          For in their worldview they are engaged in a bizarro irrational class struggle – in which men are deemed to be the oppressor class, and women the victim class in a la la land system they call patriarchy.

        • Will of The People

          “Leftists are not always feminists but feminists are always leftists.”

          Too true, Falland. But not all misandry is feminist, either. And there is conservative misandry aplenty as well. Plenty of shaming and male disposability comes from both sides of the political spectrum. We just have to stick together with each other on the things that we do agree on, as MHRA’s.

          • Falland

            Fair enough my friend. No one is questioning your values or sincerity about what you feel is right. Neither the left or right will ever hold that monopoly.
            The financial rape that occurs to men are the victims of genetic rape is in a special class of its own and it needs to end. However, to ignore the political angle is foolish at best. When you have one side of the political body that is explicitly organized around gender and can dominate the other, you end up with laws like this one in France that have nothing to do with morality or doing the right thing and everything to do with protecting their core supporters. In fairness, that would be no less true if it were men who held all the cards. Attempting to hide the paternity of a child is now impossible. That genie cannot be put back in the bottle even if we wanted to. So the sooner we adapt to the new reality of DNA the less tears there will be for all of us.

            I would also agree about us sticking together. That is something we have not done well and it is the big reason we are underrepresented and behind. As long as the MRM stays organized around men’s rights and men’s interests and does not dabble in the incestuous politics of being committed to only one party or set of ideologies then we will grow, thrive, and be effective. If we lead and do the right thing, they will follow, even if some of them don’t like it.

      • Will of The People

        Lucian, none of our differing views on unions, health insurance, or safety nets have any bearing on whether we can agree that men and boys deserve to be treated fairly. That’s what I’m getting at. And while feminists are all leftist, there are more than enough misandrists on the right side of the spectrum as well. We can disagree on a lot of things, and clearly we do, but to say

        “Is it really a surprise that a socialist government disagreed that men have human rights too?”

        Is to imply that all leftists are misandrists, and that just isn’t the case. That’s my whole point.

      • John

        The world does revolve around the USA I’m sorry to say, you are typing in English, the rest of the countries have given up their languages and culture (unfortunately) to become like American’s. Every song that plays on our radios plays in Romania, Russia, etc. Not a single Romanian song or Russian song can be heard on a station here (that I know of). Not to mention all our TV shows appear in other countries (the walking dead, big bang theory, etc). Not single show or movie is played in here in America from Romania, France, or Russia.

        We invent almost everything in the USA the other countries just wait for the USA to do something then follow (unfortunately). For example, once 4g or fiberoptics is researched and millions/billions have been spent by the USA then the other countries buy the equipment and upgrade their systems or lay down fiberoptics. I would love for Russia, Romania, or France to make a workable quantum computer to change the world, but we all know that idea is a joke. The fact that the USA is the center of the universe is a sad sad sad thing, but that’s how it is.

  • MRA.

    Really? By that logic, I could bring a few kids from the street into my home and when I divorce my wife I can hold her accountable for child support, right? Because motherhood is determined by society and not by biology. And if you say “it doesn’t work like that” then you are nothing less than a bigot.

    Then, why not take every newborn and give it to random women at hospitals, hospitals are always making sure that women take home theirs own children, they can even get sued for making that mistake, yet men are suppose to “man up” and “deal with it”

    • Lucian Vâlsan

      Well that is good point.
      This got me thinking – what if a family raises a child that is not theirs due to a mistake made on hospitals? I should really make some research about that type of scenario.

      • MRA.

        As far as I know, every time a hospital make that mistake, shit hits the fan, hospitals have done a lot in making sure that women are given their own newborn, because they know they are accountable and responsible for making the error.

        That is why they started to implemented many measures, nurses were fired, hospital get sued, money was payed to the mother.

        Once you make someone accountable they start to take responsibility, even if they don’t want to.

  • Grunt

    After reading stories like this, and many others just like it, we can see why marriage and birth rates are plummeting.

    At some level one has to wonder if the powers that be, bankers, politicians, etc, could not effectively wipe enough of us out with toxic vacinations, endless wars, and economic insanity, so they decided to turn our females into stark raving lunatics.

    Also sheds a little light on why the devil chose Eve, as opposed to Adam, as his partner in crime.

  • Falland

    This issue, more than any other, is the one that will end up coming back to haunt the feminists and it will be their downfall, mark my words. Paternity fraud is rape! It is morally indefensible and has never been and never will be acceptable to men. Up until this point, society has had to make legal accommodations to deal with the fact that men could never really be sure if a child was theirs but with the advent of DNA all that is irrelevant now. It will probably take another 20 years for the laws to catch up with the science, particularly where feminists and white knights hold sway but they are definitely on the wrong side of history on this one.

    • Stu

      Typical case of the courts being involved in hiding the truth, rather then seeking the truth, when demanded by feminists.

      • feeriker

        Which does nothing but undermine the legitimacy of the courts. Given the types of government with which most of us are now burdened (the courts being the weapons said governments use to abuse and oppress us), that’s not really a bad thing either.

  • zuismanm

    Everything is question of point of perspective. In Israel for paternity test made with no permission of mom , you can be penalized for up to 1.2 million dollars and get 3 years in jail. So – from point of view of ordinary Israel male – low in France is very liberal and merciful…

    • Falland

      The sad thing is that it should be the other way around. Women who have “genetically raped” their husbands and the biological fathers should have to pay the wronged party. It is called paternity fraud for a reason. In any other type of fraud there would be civil and criminal penalties. Set penalties for financial losses and emotional damages to where the cost is crippling. Add compound interest so the longer the fraud was perpetrated the worse the penalty becomes. That will change things.

      The State has an obvious interest in covering this up because 9 out of 10 times, if the assumed father does not provide for the child, the State will. All this non-sense about protecting the privacy of the child or that it is not in the child’s best interest is window dressing to cover up the uncomfortable fact that it is women who are defrauding men that are being protected. It is always in the child’s best interest to know who his actual father is even if the same cannot always be said for mom.

  • Turbo

    Ok, so according to the femos, women never lie about domestic violence, but they argue against women being convicted of purgery if proven that they lied. Why if it does not happen.

    They also state that women never lie about paternity, but they argue vehemently against paternity testing. Why if it does not happen.

    They are a joke, push on gents and ladies, because decent folk want justice.

    • Mike Buchanan

      The more I look into paternity fraud, the more I’m convinced of the merit as having as one of our party’s key proposals, compulsory paternity testing at birth, with the results physically handed to both parents within a week of a baby’s birth. And if the test is a ‘fail’, both parents will be told of the fact (no throwing of unopened envelopes into bins!) Have learned in last day or two:

      – paternity kits from leading laboratories on sale in the UK from £99.00. Presumably the price would drop substantially if and when the NHS starts buying millions of them.

      – As far back as the 1950s (long before DNA testing) researchers looking at the population of a small English village in South East England discovered – as a result of other analyses – that 30% of babies were not the offspring of the men who thought they were the biological fathers. It was an accidental discovery, they were looking for something else. Hardly surprisingly, the research was never published.

      2. Paternity fraud is a criminal offence in the UK. For many years the Child Support Agency collected money from men for their supposed offspring, and of course some of these men demanded paternity testing. In 2008 the Agency reported it was aware of over 1,200 cases of paternity fraud. Not a single British woman has ever been convicted of the offence.

      To my mind the case for compulsory paternity testing at birth is a no-brainer. But the government wouldn’t want to introduce them even if the tests were free, because the financial burden of providing for the children would then often fall on the state, i.e. taxpayers, mainly men.

      I’ve put a Freedom of Information Act request into the tax authorities, seeking data on the relative %s of income tax paid by (a) and (b) women.

      Mike Buchanan

      (and the women who love them)

      • Kimski

        “But the government wouldn’t want to introduce them even if the tests were free, because the financial burden of providing for the children would then often fall on the state, i.e. taxpayers, mainly men.”

        And I’m absolutely certain that if the governments refused to pay to hold women responsible for their individual choices, we’d see a substantial rise in offspring-killings within a month. Just like I’m certain that only a small percentage of these women would actually be held accountable for their crimes.

      • Turbo

        Hi Mike, thanks for this reply, some good info there.

        Yes I fully support your idea that compulsory paternity testing at birth should be one of your parties key platforms. I have believed this for a long, long time, and yes it is a “no brainer” IMO too.

        “But the government wouldn’t want to introduce them even if the tests were free, because the financial burden of providing for the children would then often fall on the state”

        Correct, and that is why child support came into being in the first place. After introducing “no fault” divorce, divorce exploded and many women and their children were on welfare so the state needed to find someone else to pay the bills.

        But no person should compulsorily have to pay for someone else’s children, which is why it should be a key platform of yours. We need to shout this in their ears till they and the people hear us. There is nowhere in society where women are forced to pay for another mans children.

        What is the argument against compulsory, or even requested
        paternity testing. Why has France and other countries banned it. What possible logical argument can be put forward other than the fact that we want to continue to allow women to con men in our society. There is no other logical explanation, if anyone can give me one, please do.

        Keep up the great work Mike, cheers.

    • Kimski

      With that you get my vote of the week for best comment, Turbo.

      Let me add that the femos also claim that women never lie about rape, but none the less there’s a huge uproar in those circles, whenever 1 in 103 false rape accusers get a month in jail in this country. The rest gets away with the usual slap on the wrist.

      Maybe what we need is an easily accessible link to female domestic violence statistics, along with stats on paternity fraud, child murders, false rape accusations, and the huge differences in sentencing between men and women, to show the average citizen to which extend ‘equality’ really goes.

  • Turbo

    Cheers Kimski :-) Thanks.

    Yes their hypocrisy can be breath taking.

  • Europa Phoenix

    WHAT ???!!!

    I can’t believe this… I have to go here, on an American website, to learn about this law…

    I’m French, I live in France, and I didn’t hear about this non-sense. TV, press, internet… NO ONE talk about it.
    The French media is nothing but a pile of rubbish. No wonder they are all bankrupted. Incompetent cowards.

    We are over saturated with the “gay marriage” debate. But at the same time this law is completely ignored.

    The actual government won’t last. They try to distract us, and turn people one against the other, but they know we are more than angry. We are following the path of Greece.
    The ambiance is very heavy. I won’t be surprised if we have some major civil unrests this year.

    I’ll inform all my friends. Thank you for the information.

    • Jerry S

      Don’t you worry, my French friend. Sharia law will rule in France. It will happen sooner than you think. When that time comes, You, the man, will be the God of your household.
      True, your wife will need to wear the Burqa in public, and they will mutilate your daughters genitals, but at least your wife won’t cheat on you.
      If she does, she’ll be stoned on the steps of the Trocadéro!

  • Leinadro

    In theory, paternity tests are still legal, but only under a court order, with the explicit consent of the mother and under a strict supervision by the State.
    By chance where did you get this bit about needed the mother’s consent? I found it once but for the life of me I cannot find the source for it again.

  • LR

    Well, French women are known to be maneaters who get pregnant by other men than their husband or boyfriend and they barely get abused for hit. Here in America, women who man-eat and get pregnant are required to take paternity tests which is costly.

  • Jean-Claude Dusse

    Stupids comments…
    Wrong analysis…

    Et l’intervention d’Europa Phoenix qui me fait vomir. Aller, essaie de te renseigner sur les vraies raisons et on en reparle…

  • hernanday

    So how does the state in France determine paternity without paternity test, maybe I missed something but what if the parents are unmarried live apart etc? is the man just assumed to be subhuman scum and to be automatically lying?

  • LR

    French men don’t mind sharing their wives with other men, especially foreigners. They can tolerate their wives’ affairs better than American men, for instance.

  • michael borg acosta

    Lol dont worry france males once the islamatization occurs in france youll be god in your household, lol because its happening every where on earth, even in america but we live in a politically correct western world lol

    • amy

      Shows how little you know about France.
      If you want to talk about pandering to the Muslim demographic, point to the UK. France on the other hand, is very different.
      Yes, there are many Muslims in France, but the government is certainly not sucking up to them and they’re not overrunning society.

      France is much more efficiently separating religion and state than the US (“In god we trust”, doctors being allowed to refuse patients for religious affiliations etc…). Secularism is taken very seriously in France, it’s one of the main points and very much insisted on in schools.

      Remember a few years back when Muslims were getting mad at the ban on veils covering a person’s face? The government did not budge a bit.
      I don’t consider myself to be very patriotic, but I will defend my country from misinformation.

  • LR

    I know French men are willing to allow their wives or girlfriends to cheat on them and have another man’s kid. French men are such cuckolds, or cocus, and allow their women to screw them over. But anyway, American and Canadian women can’t get away with cheating on their husbands or boyfriends. A lot of them get beaten or killed when caught which is why domestic violence against women is higher in the USA and Canada compared to France because North American men won’t allow their wives or girlfriends to screw them over.which makes them very bossy and controlling. North American culture is very harsh towards women’s sexual behavior, especially towards men.

  • optionout

    This is the most insane law i’ve EVER even heard about!


    So you believe it okay for women to lie about fidelity and get away with it? Your example is absurd like feminists illustrations. Most cheating and cockeling isn’t interracial. A woman can lie about her affair to her husband in his face and get away with because the child looks similar to the married couple. Your disgenuous for not admitting child support doesn’t go to the child but actualy goes to the mother and her interests, which may be or maybe not for the child. There’s many instances of child support paying for the mother’s Iphones and Christian Louboutin’s “Red Bottom” shoes. The preposterous idea that signing a paternity document under the false belief of actual paternity and calling it a choice is a part of the feminist belief system. Where males can never be a victim of fraud or deceit and only women are the victims of fraud and deceit, while children can’t be used as weapons.

    • franco-american

      No I do not believe it is “okay”. The example of an asian baby was a continuation of the example used in this article! You seem to be refering to a child as an object one pays for… but that is not the case. A child is a vulnerable human being in a state of formation. The woman can be divorced, she can be sued, even child support payments can be gotten out of if there is doubt about paternity (especially if she is making enough money to buy something like an Iphone and Louboutin shoes!) But the child is not a thing that one just decides to throw out one day when you’ve already become an important figure for them.

      • amy

        Would you mind sharing the name of the law / paper to be signed to choose to be a father to the child?
        I’m trying to research it but I’m not finding anything claiming that men can choose whether or not they want to acknowledge the child as their own (without a paternity test)

        • franco-american

          There is also a link there to the procedure of determination of paternity, which can be put into action if requested.

          • uncontainable_spirit

            Thank you franco-american. I’m pleased that you placed the article in its proper perspective. While loathe and detest feminism as a matter of course, this is an issue that I’ll not worry about as it doesn’t actually exist in the manner that the article says that it does.

          • franco-american

            I am against feminism too- I think some of my intent might have been misunderstood. Even amongst people who share the same goals, they need to use critical thinking upon their own arguments and messages, because the adversaries will for sure! It’s important to make sure that the arguments you send out into the public arena are without holes and weak spots.

          • uncontainable_spirit

            I completely agree. Thank you for being patient. Many of us guys still have some ‘ouch’ in there somewhere and being prickly about anything that even smacks of support for feminism is just what we’re going to do. Once we’re pretty sure that you’re not the adversary we’re really quite cuddly and friendly. Just like grizzly bears. lol!

          • franco-american

            I understand the feelings. This would be a scandal in the US!
            Precisely because the state demands money from fathers, and simply takes the mothers word for it that he is the father.
            My first child, I had in the US. I was young, the father and I broke up before his birth. He had said he still wanted a relationship with his child so when he was born, they asked for the fathers name at the hospital, and I told them. I had no idea what would happen. He didn’t challenge it, because he knew he was the father. Fatherhood of a tiny baby was too complicated and he chose not to get involved. I accepted his choice and went on with my life.
            But the state went after him and collected child support, none of which went to me, I didn’t even know about it until he told me about a court hearing having taken place! Years later, I married, and my husband wished to adopt my son. We paid all our savings to two lawyers (one in the US, one in France, a very complex process), but then the real father had disappeared and couldn’t be found to sign (though he had already agreed to the adoption verbally.)

            The child support payments were too heavy for him and he had split. We gave up. Years later, the state authority found him in another state and made him pay years worth of back child support! They attached his paycheck and everything. Not only did none of this come to me, I didn’t want or demand it, and I was not informed this was happening! The whole damned thing was the state trying to get money, and using the excuse of “punishing” fatherhood to get it!

            He was screwed, and we kept in touch enough so that he knew I had nothing to do with it, but it left a rather sour taste in my mouth to see how the system works. I am not the kind of woman that supports any of this, but the system is such that I think it encourages women to hold ideas and actions that are sexist and unfair.

            But this sort of thing would not happen in all countries, and that is important to remember- the US has it’s own problems. And I suspect that the PTB wants to provoke the battle of the sexes, because a people divided are easier to manipulate.

          • franco-american

            JUst to add to my story-
            When I found out they were making my sons biological father pay, I called the DA and told him I didn’t want this to happen- I was told point blank that it is none of my business, and I have no say in any of it! Women are just as much victim of this crap as men!

      • JANUS

        Changing the argument and not addressing the question is classic misdirection. A cheating wife can be unfaithful to her unsuspecting husband and convince him that he has fathered a baby. As of date in America or any other country no woman has been sued successfully for wrongly receiving child support under false pretenses. No woman has ever gone to jail for lying about child support. No state entity has been successfully sued for wrongly collecting child support from a male victim..this told to me by a child support attorney.
        I personally know a woman who receive over $3K a month in child support in which little if none goes to their son.
        “Signing those paper” is not a gesture of engagement it is a legal obligation. A legal obligation enforced by the state only when money doesn’t show up to the state’s child and welfare department. The state doesn’t care if you don’t visit a child, it only cares if you don’t pay the state.
        If a child wasn’t an object abortion wouldn’t be legal. Women who are pregnant want prenatal care or an abortion for their babies not their objects. More women dissect and vacuum out their beloved human being in the West than in the rest of the world.

        By the way since men tend to work longer hours per day, more days per year, and more years on average than the majority of women, while earning a hire hourly rate that eventually gets taxed by the government. The government then redistributes the tax monies earned primarily by men to unmarried mothers/ “single mothers”. And women like yourself claim “single mothers”/ unmarried mothers are less dependent upon men…the math doesn’t add up, State benefits are funded primarily from working males which allows the “single mother”/unmarried mother not to look for long term committed relationships only temporary ones. Women want it both ways coddled when they want a baby and independent and free when they don’t want a baby.

        • franco-american

          I don’t want to make assumptions, but it sounds like you are not french?

          In France, child support payment do not go to the state. I know that is the case in the US, if the mother is on welfare. Here, it goes directly to the mother.
          My son had a child with a woman he was broken up with at the time of the birth, he chose to claim paternity, and offered her many times to pay her child support- she refused. The reason is that as a single mother, she gets MORE financial aid then if she got child support- which she would no longer receive if he was paying child support. (she works, by the way- the system is different. People get financial aid from the state even if they work, which gives them more incentive to actually get a job, knowing they won’t lose benefits if they do).

          The state does not look to the father to get their money back- it is considered social security, paid by the whole of the collective- and the french culture embraces this, as their values are upon collective solidarity- not individualism.

          It doesn’t sound like the people you know live in France, and I didn’t suggest a woman would go to jail. No man here goes to jail for infidelity either.

          The issue of abortion is irrelevant, since the law addresses the psychological well being of the child- the emotional trauma of being separated and rejected by a parent figure they have already grown attached to psychologically- no personality development is recognized by a child who has not had any life experience outside the womb.

          “The employment rate of women in the French labour market equals 60.0% and is only slightly above the EU-27 average (58.6%).”


          Though on the whole, men do have higher salaries and hold higher positions of hierarchy

          “In France, women earned 14.7% less in 2011 than men (EU-27: 16.2%).”

          Yet… there is not any big trend in feminism here, as in the US. Because the home and family life is valued higher by the collective than career and work life.
          Women have a lot of power in the home, and they don’t feel the need for such extremist movements.


    No wonder the birth rate in France is 1.6% for indigenous Francophones…

  • rtdave

    Please explain how a man being DECEIVED into making the emotional and financial commitment of fatherhood can be judged to be anything other than a crime. If a woman was forced to be the mother to someone else’s child, I can only imagine what talk of slavery or the infringing of her rights there would be.

    • franco-american

      If a man is deceived by a woman, than his beef is with HER; not the child. He can still divorce her, sue her, whatever. It is not the child who did the deceiving. Why should the child be punished? A child is not an object one “buys”, sells, or throws away.

      • rtdave

        If a parent commits a crime and is convicted for it, the child will suffer, it happens with the children of male criminals all the time. This is no different, no action is directed at the child, but the child will suffer because of the crime of the parent, in this case the mother. Allowing the mother to get away with fraud because prosecuting her would hurt the child erodes the principle of people being equal before the law. Emotive statements about children make no difference if the father is the criminal, why discriminate in favour of criminal mothers?

        You have avoided addressing the issue of how paternity fraud can be considered as anything other than a crime.

        • franco-american

          Please, link to the french law which makes this a crime.
          Honestly, I wonder if any french people are reading these comments- most of them, I have seen, are shocked and disgusted by our focus upon money over humans, and calling a woman a criminal because she slept with another man!

          • franco-american

            Never mind- I did the research. It is not a crime a in France. There IS paternity fraud in France- but it refers to men claiming paternity (doing this process I spoke of) for children that are not his, knowingly. You are mistaken about it being a crime in France. Of course you have the right to consider that it SHOULD be crime- you have the right to your opinion.
            But I think it is up to the french people, and I see so many differences in the context, that people from other countries who aren’t aware of them all can misjudge the situation. (for example, make the false assumption that the state forces men to pay child support systematically, as in the US).

          • rtdave

            I will try to answer you in a single place as this is getting confusing. I chose my original question’s wording deliberately, asking how paternity fraud could be ‘judged’ to be anything other than a crime, and again later, how it could be ‘considered’ to be anything other than a crime. I consider it to be a very obvious crime, but so far as I know it is not on the statute books anywhere. If however, it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then a duck it is, or as the French would call it, very aptly in this case, a canard.

            As I have said in reply to Amy, “I think that societal recognition of paternity fraud as a crime would be a massive step towards true equality between the sexes” but it isn’t going to happen anytime soon.

            Nobody is, “calling a woman a criminal because she slept with another man!” The crime is the obtaining of goods and services under false pretences, the heart of fraud. If the man knows who the father is and is happy to take on that role regardless of it not being him, or if he has plainly stated he doesn’t care, there is no crime, but if he has been deceived into believing a child is his when it isn’t, and so works to provide for that child and possibly to refrain from having other children, and stays with the mother when he might have left her, making an economic contribution to her existence as well, then yes, by every definition I am aware of a fraud has been committed against him by her. The woman has also wronged her own child by denying them the knowledge of who their true father and therefore their true family is, with all the possible losses, of relatives, of health information, etc. No one is trying to recriminalise infidelity, only to make women responsible for their actions, and to limit the damage they can do through deception.

            It is interesting that you say, “french culture considers that the role of society is to protect the
            weak, the young, and the vulnerable members of the society- and that
            especially includes children.” Given what women are able to get away with in this case, it would seem that the role of French society, like many others, is to shield women from adult responsibility.

          • franco-american

            As you acknowledge there, cases may vary. A
            woman could have slept with another man and not know who is the father… she may
            even be in a state of denial, believing truly that the other man could not be
            the father. She could have been raped, the couple could have had a temporary
            break up, in which she fell into the arms of another out of despair, then
            regretted it, and then the couple got back together. Or the man could have been
            aware of the child not being his at the time of birth, but later, while in a conflict,
            decide to use that as a way of hurting her. I could go on and on. Human
            relationships and psychology are
            complicated. There are various possibilities.

            The French courts reserve the process to
            look into it first and determine the context before families get ripped apart.
            That’s all. You can get a DNA test for paternity, you can have a court ordered
            investigation into paternity on request (I linked to the description of that
            process), it is not impossible. That is
            where this article was not clear.

            Perhaps I shouldn’t have attempted to also
            clarify the sociological context, which did not seem to be understood by the
            commenters- it is perhaps too complex to approach here.

            But ask yourself- France is a country known
            for the peoples reactivity… there is always a protest or strike going on here
            for something. They can and do regularly bring the whole country to a
            standstill for (what often seems to me) minor objections.

            So why did we not see any protest happen
            about this?

            Partly because it is not as limiting as
            painted by this author- it is not completely banned to get confirmation of
            paternity, one must go through legal channels.

            Partly because the surrounding context of
            rights and responsibilities are not as constraining as the ones we have in the
            US, leaving people with less incentive to react- men are not force
            systematically to pay child support or recognize paternity. Even if you know a
            child is yours, and you simply choose to not accept paternity, you can, and no
            one says anything more about it. You exercised your right.

            The whole cultural aspect plays into this,
            in which men just don’t feel as trapped as they do in the US (or in other
            countries I am not as familiar with), women don’t feel as dependant upon an
            individual man.

            If you have doubts about your wife’s
            fidelity, you can just leave her, and not pay child support, and in most cases,
            nothing more happens. The woman can start a costly and lengthy legal process to
            get the state to intervene, but since she has full support by the social security,
            it is hard to prove she really needs child support payments from an individual.

            Another commenter brought up that that
            indicates dependence upon the many men in the society who pay taxes for that.
            You could look at it that way. It one of the things people also bring up in
            referring to the countries multipayer medical security- when you pay your
            taxes, you know you are paying for someone else to get care.

            But the flip side, which the French
            consider obvious, is that doing so means YOU also have that! If you fall sick,
            you will get care. Anyone can fall sick, anyone can have a moment of
            infidelity, of accidental unwanted pregnancy. If they are going to start making
            sexual infidelity a legal matter for women, that means it will be for them too!

            Hold them to more responsibility, then the
            men too, will suddenly be held to more responsibility- they will lose that
            right to choose that they have now.

            Most of them kinda prefer to keep a measure
            of individual freedom there- to keep the state out of their bedroom and their
            love lives.

            The americans have already invited the
            state in, making it possible to hold a person accountable and punished for
            marital infidelity- that is their choice. But the French haven’t.

            I have no personal opinion on the matter, I
            feel rather neutral to it all, simply interested in observing “how things are”
            rather than determining “how they should be”. I am a foreigner in this land,
            and morality is relative to the society- I am in no position to say how the
            French SHOULD be, and in most cases, find that is not an easy call to make,
            because to judge one piece of the system, one must learn how the system works
            as a whole first. Take a piece of a clock mechanism and put it into the
            mechanism of a hairdryer, it will seem useless and even destructive, but that
            is because it is not within it’s context.

            You could even write an article upon how
            useless and destructive that piece is, how it makes the hairdryer blow up and
            break- but that would not be completely accurate or honest.

      • driversuz

        Should a deceived man be “punished” by being forced to support another man’s child? Let the deceiver name the real father and have HIM support his child.

        Don’t be a gynocentrism troll. You will not be invited to stay.

        • franco-american

          For one, I am not interested in judging how things “should” be- my interest is in observing how they ARE. I am a neutral observer, in a foreign country.

          I have explained, there is no forced financial support here.
          Men have the right to not recognize paternity, (even if the child IS theirs biologically and they know it), there is not even social pressure for them to do so, as the cultural morals do not support that.
          If you have doubts about your wife’s fidelity, or want to leave her for any reason, you do it.
          If you do not want to pay child support, you don’t. In most cases, there is nothing more said about it. A woman can begin a costly and lengthy legal process to get child support from you, but in most cases, it does not happen, because they are already well supported by the state.

          WHERE is the “FORCED” ? It seems you are referring to another social and legal system other than France’s, one in which the law judges paternity something one should be “punished” for!

          As I also have shown (see the links I provided), men can request a paternity investigation if they want, and DNA tests can be done! This law simply means you have to go through legal channels to have it done.

          I am not being a troll- trolls post short and inflammatory personal insults.
          I am participating in the discussion, bringing information and facts to it, without personal flaming.

          I am, and will not, wait for an “invitation” to do so.

        • franco-american


          If the issue is of such personal investment
          for you, go for it! All the more power to you. Move to France and try to rally
          the men to protest this! (they love protests and are quite effective at that).

          My guess, from experience, is that you will
          not find success though. Because men LIKE their freedom. They like that sexual
          infidelity is not a crime which the state punishes for- they know that if that
          were the case, their freedom will also be curtailed. They like keeping the
          state out of their bedroom and love life. They like not being forced to pay
          child support for unwanted children or accidental pregnancies. Each man will
          listen to you thinking, “and that girl that got pregnant from me years ago,
          against my will, who I’ve had no further contact with since- that would mean
          she would suddenly come back and demand years worth of child support??? “ Good
          luck with that. I hope your methods of communication are worthy of the best
          sales persons out there, to convince them!

    • franco-american

      …and you seem to forget, this is talking about FRANCE. I live here, I tried bringing up the issue of feminism with a group of coworkers (wondering what current positions are here). They looked at each other and said, “What’s that?” There is not the same extreme feminist trends in this country.

      • rtdave

        The fact that you live in France is irrelevant, as is your comment about feminism. Paternity fraud has always been an issue, regardless of geography and before feminism was ever thought of. This issue is about a crime that you refuse to acknowledge is a crime, and about how it may be detected and proved. Limiting the means by which a crime may be detected, punishing those who do no more than detect the crime and prove that it has happened, erodes the standing of the law.

        • franco-american

          I can’t find any laws which proclaim paternity fraud a crime in France? Could you link to them please?
          I am not refusing to acknowledge it as such, I am simply not currently aware of all the french laws that exist.
          I simply point out that the french culture considers that the role of society is to protect the weak, the young, and the vulnerable members of the society- and that especially includes children.
          They do not have the same ideas as americans, in individual merit and responsibility (each man for himself ). In related issues, it is illegal to use surrogate mothers, for example, or adoption by gay couples. I don’t want to fly off into those issues- I mean to point out that what we americans would call “sentimental” reasons and irrelevant, the french take into account! People still get off murder charges if it is a “crime of passion”.

          The french courts want to reserve the right to check out the situation first, and make sure it is not about stupid or crazy people that are going to do things that will end up hurting the child.

    • amy

      I just looked it up, and the article is very misleading.
      I read many legal sites in the original language (French), and franco-american is right.
      For starters, the court must get approval from all parties involved for the DNA test, yes. But if the mother refuses to get the test, the judge will automatically be encouraged to rule in the father’s favor.

      The 15,000 euro fine is misinterpreted. Any laboratory in France which accepts to do a paternity test without the required legal documents gets a 15,000 euro fine, not the person asking for the test. The person who asks for the test gets no legal repercussions.

      I’ll assume that things got lost in translation, but that doesn’t change the fact that what is stated in this article is wrong.

      • rtdave

        Thanks for going to the trouble Amy. I am perfectly prepared to accept what you say.

        The weird thing for me is the difficulty of having a reasoned conversation about paternity fraud wherever it may occur. Many people find it virtually impossible to label this uniquely female behaviour as a crime, and yet, as I have already said, if a woman were forced through deception to bring up someone else’s child, no one would say it was okay. Think of the distress, alarm and legal actions that take place whenever babies are inadvertently swapped at birth in a hospital. And again, I have never heard of a criminal father not being prosecuted because his children would suffer. The fact that the French courts see fit to penalise a laboratory for performing a scientific test, that will lead to the truth being made known, demonstrates that there are distorted values at work. In what other situation would a court intervene to penalise anyone for telling the truth? The emotive talk about possible harm to the children is yet another example of double standards that are loaded, not in favour of the child, but in favour of the female criminal.

        • amy

          That’s a pretty good point, and though I don’t think having to wait for a court order is exactly fair, I think the reasoning behind it is :

          1/ There needs to be consent. When it comes to a minor who can’t give consent about taking a DNA test both parents would need to give their consent in the child’s place.
          2/ Making sure that the laboratories follow legislation. It seems they realize that the parent just wants to know the truth (hence the lack of punishment), but if they can’t trust the laboratories to follow this rule, one could argue that it wouldn’t follow other rules either.

          I do think a more effective rule would be what franco-american is implying exists : that unless the man decides to sign a document saying that he wants to have all the rights and obligations of the child’s father, he has no responsibility toward the child.
          It would take away the need for DNA testing in some cases, and it would be beneficial for other cases which the fraud can’t be proven through DNA (where the man was tricked into fathering a child, if the woman told him she was on the pill or *shivers* saved the used condom with the goods still inside etc..).

          • rtdave

            “There needs to be consent.” No there doesn’t. There are any amount of procedures where children cannot give consent, so parents make the choice for them. Since DNA testing poses no physical risks this really is not an issue. Granted it would seem far wiser to discuss it with your wife/girlfriend, but why should their consent be necessary since they are potentially the party at fault? You don’t ask a criminal’s permission to pursue an investigation.

            “Making sure that the laboratories follow legislation.” The courts are potentially involved in penalising someone for finding out the truth, for gathering evidence if you will. This is absurd, the legislation is unjust and it should be repealed. French men being forced to go to foreign laboratories for DNA tests is ridiculous.

            Until a man knows for sure that he is the father, any consent he gives is not informed by the truth. If he is deceived, the heart of the issue with paternity fraud, he will have given consent under false pretenses, so why would a court need to be involved at the evidence gathering stage, especially if it has even the potential to stop that process? If paternity fraud were recognised as a crime and punished accordingly, the legislation referred to would not exist.

            It is true that the other examples of deception you give would not be detected by a DNA test, but that is no reason to not allow it when it would be useful. The lesson for men is to choose their sexual partners and wives with great care, and women need to accept that asking horribly uncomfortable questions, or taking precaution with the use and disposal of condoms, is not unreasonable.

            I think that societal recognition of paternity fraud as a crime would be a massive step towards true equality between the sexes, but I don’t expect it to happen without a great deal more protesting from men.

      • Frodo

        Dosent change the fact that someone gets 15,000 EURO fine for TAKING A SIMPLE STUPID TEST.TO TEST FOR FRAUD!!!!! To test and see if the woman LIED!!nuf said

        • franco-american

          Apparently there has been some misunderstanding here, as Paternity fraud (as you mean) does not exist in France. Only in the UK, and some American states.

          There is a paternity fraud in France, but it refers to men choosing to claim children that are not theirs. Such as here-

          This man kept going in and claiming paternity for a bunch of babies that were not his! ..Why? and american would ask (thinking this would make the state go after him for a ton of child support) Because all these ladies got residency permits as a result (they were mostly from Africa). They also received lots of financial benefits from the state. The state does not go after men to make them pay unless the mother put into action a legal procedure – and that requires an investigation.
          Couples are left to work this out as they want, unless there is a conflict and they choose to go to a court!

        • amy

          I don’t agree with the law but I’m simply stating that things got lost in translation and the legislation isn’t as bad as this article makes it out to be.

          That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be changed, but it’s best to keep misinformation to a minimum.

        • yougottaproblemwiddat

          You go, girl!

    • amy

      I’m not saying the French legal system doesn’t need some fixing, there should be some changes. But it’s not as radically bad as this article suggests.

      I’m still reading more into the debate, and it’s not as cut and dry as you may think.

    • franco-american

      For one thing, an investigation must happen to determine that the mother knew who the father was, and was intentionally lying.

  • Frodo

    So why ban paternity tests?

    • franco-american

      There is not a total ban on paternity tests. They are limited to court approved cases. This is to protect children. If the child is still a baby, and there is a dispute about paternity, then it will most likely be approved- but if the child is older, and has already become attached to the man as his paternal figure, then it might not be- to protect the child. At that point, the adults can choose to separate, but the child is not at fault for their relational problems, and there is no reason that he/she should be abused because of them.

      • Frodo

        Yea i wonder how a woman would feel if she found out her child were replaced by a child her husband fathered by another woman without her knowing

        • franco-american

          I suspect all people are different and not all women or men feel the same, and all contexts have differing variables.
          I am guessing, whether a parent was male or female, and found out they had had their child “switched” this way, then they would feel curious and want to find the “lost” child. Normal people would not lose the love and attachment they had for the child they raised though – they would not want to put an end to the relationship.
          But even there, (that differs slightly from what were talking about) a court would still want to look into it and find out if these are “normal” balanced people who will not cut off their relationship to the child they raised, in finding out the identity of their genetic child. If it looks like they might, yes, I suspect a court would rule that the identity cannot be revealed.

      • Mikhail Cherviakov

        Why not to put a dissolute mother to the jail after the proof of infidelity? Since this is a logically fraudulent issue. She forces the man to pay for her lie. The best way to protect kids – is to punish such women. The less women sleeps with the strangers, the more protected kids are!
        This law will cause man to not accept paternity at all. Will the children be protected enough in this case?
        It’s really funny. Someone made a crime and the one who suspects her and tries to prove is in a risk to be imprisoned.

        • franco-american

          No one is imprisoned. If a man wants a DNA test, he has to request it and have it approved by the court. That’s all.

          If he wants to put into action a paternity investigation, that is simple to request and have approved. Though this law does not touch that- the traditional investigation only seeks to provide proof of the mothers infidelity- not the DNA of the child.

          Infidelity IS taken into account in divorce proceedings in France.

          The law draws a line between rejecting the child, and rejecting the wife for infidelity. A woman knows if she was sleeping with two men at the time of conception, but she doesn’t know which one fertilized her ovum. All she can lie about to her husband is the infidelity, and she can be judged for that. (though prison time is not used, for infidelity of either sex).

          Once again, unless a costly and long legal suit is requested, the laws give divorced people 50-50 custody, and the question of any child support payments are worked out between the parents, without any interference from the law.

          This is the most common form of divorce proceeding “Joint Request”

          Other forms of divorce are available to choose, but are more rarely chosen, in which a judge is obligated to get involved.

          In those cases, joint custody is still strived for, and the laws stipulates that if child support payments are ordered, it is the parent who has the larger income that pays it (regardless of gender). The link below explains this more in depth, and states “From an American point of view, the amount of child support set forth in the guidelines is very modest.”

        • franco-american

          “Why not to put a dissolute mother to the jail after the proof of infidelity?”

          Though there are consequences (like alimony she’d have to pay to the husband) jail term is not what the french men want.
          Particularly because if infidelity is punished in that way, it means that will be true for them also. They don’t want that.

      • Elvick

        How is it protecting a child? They’ll pick up on the issue in some form. You can’t possibly expect two adults to bring up a kid with that kind of lingering doubt without any issues being completely felt by that kid.

        The kid will feel the doubt in the heart of the father. And feel they aren’t wanted, because they don’t know what specifically is going on.

        It’s abuse to force that kid to have a parent who doubts whether they are their own. This is like forcing a mother to have and raise a baby she never wanted. The child feels it.

  • BaldheadedFoo

    I think slowly but surely white men throughout western society are realizing their greatest enemy isn’t minorities but white women.

    • driversuz

      It isn’t white women either. It is feminists and gynocentrists of both sexes and all races.