I just recently read an article from the “good men” project written by Hugo Schwyzer entitled; I may have a son, but I’ll never know for sure. I already knew what the article was about before reading it. Not because of the title, but because the link was on the men’s rights reddit. A nifty little gadget reddit is. Hugo basically explains to his readers how he might be a father but he doesn’t know for certain. That isn’t anything new. Many millions of men in the USA alone live through the same dilemma. It’s the reasoning Hugo puts behind why he doesn’t know and what he does to ensure the child’s parents don’t know that sickens me.
This whole story Hugo has put forth may just be an elaborate fabrication in order to examine the response of his readers but considering this is the same man who feels that men should pay for women on dates because men generally make more money than women, I doubt this story is a hoax. No, I’m sure that this man is proud of the misandric bigotry he enables with every sentence he writes.
So what has Hugo done that has made my blood and the blood of several other men boil? The story starts out harmless enough. Hugo claims that in his younger days he had a friend with benefits whom he refers to as, Jill. He and this woman would sleep together without protection on several occasions. There was another man Jill was seeing whom Hugo names, Ted. Hugo claims that this woman broke off their friends with benefits relationship before she became aware of her pregnancy. I doubt it.
what happened next is one of the most evil acts two people can do to another person
“Jill wanted to be a mom. Ted wanted to be a dad. I wasn’t sure what I wanted. In her mind, these facts settled it: the baby was Ted’s. Or it needed to be Ted’s.”
In her mind is where things were settled because as we all know, motherhood and fatherhood should both be decided in her mind.
Hugo’s story gets worse
“Jill never told Ted that she’d been sleeping with someone else the week their son was conceived. Ted and I were both about the same height with the same fair skin and the same pale blue eyes; she knew that without a DNA test, there’d be no sure way to know which one of us was the biological father. But there was a sure way to know which one of us was “dad material”, and which one of us wasn’t. Jill was clear that she preferred everlasting uncertainty to the possibility of discovering that her Ted was not her son’s father. As the one who carried Alastair in her womb, it was her choice to make.”
So let me get this straight, Hugo. The fact that this woman you may have impregnated carried the child to term gives her the right to choose who the child’s father will be? I didn’t know equality worked that way. I always thought something like this was misandric bigotry supported by feminists but now that you have explained it to me so clearly I see now that I was wrong. Men don’t take part in the creation of a child, men just splash some insignificant liquid around inside a woman’s vagina and then her body does everything.
That liquid from the man isn’t important, it’s just a convenient lubricant for whatever strange lady parts women have in their stomachs that create children all on their own. So of course the woman should have full authority to name whatever man she wants as the father. This has been an Earth shattering revelation for me, Hugo, thank you. Why this common knowledge hasn’t been made law confuses the hell out of me. Too much sarcasm? I don’t think so seeing as how that fucking is the law and is only now being changed.
Opposition to that change comes from (you guessed it) feminists
“I made a promise to Jill before Alastair was born that I’d never ask for a paternity test, nor reveal to Ted the possibility that I might be the biological father of his son.”
Why exactly would this promise even be necessary if you were all in agreement that the decision on who the father will be would be hers? Oh wait…because you weren’t all in agreement, were you Hugo?
No, you see the discussion wasn’t brought up in front of Ted. You made it clear that you didn’t want to be a father and considering the fact that only women have the legal right to relinquish their parental responsibilities without anyone’s permission before and/or after a child is born, you were probably overjoyed when Jill shrugged at your wishes and said, “meh, I got some other guy I fucked, I’ll just tell him it’s his”.
The rest of Hugo’s tale is a slew of apologetic excuse making. In my opinion, he is still trying even now after fourteen years to convince himself that there was no wrong in his decision. At the same time he is condemning men who would choose to seek the truth when confronted with suspicions that the woman they shared their feelings with betrayed their trust.
“I wasn’t in love with Jill and wasn’t ready to be a parent: Ted was both of those things. From what little I hear, he’s been a great husband and a doting father all these years. He and Jill have had two more sons together. With all that in mind, it would be an act of destructive narcissism on my part to ever break my promise and barge back into Jill’s life.”
Really Hugo, an act of destructive narcissism? The way it sounds to me is you’ve already committed that act of destructive narcissism. According to you, this woman you may have impregnated was a good friend of yours. Good enough for her to let you fuck her with no strings attached. But the moment she became pregnant and decided to hook the man who was more professionally stable (read: wealthier) the two of you decided that keeping in contact would be a bad idea. Why is that Hugo?
Ted obviously believes the child is his so there would be nothing wrong with talking to your good friend would there? Unless there was something that made you feel that even speaking with this woman was wrong. Could that feeling be guilt, Hugo?
You reveal this speculation of mine to be most likely correct within your next paragraph
“My role in Heloise’s conception was brief (but, um, not that brief); my roles as a devoted husband to her mother and a doting papa to her are my most treasured and important tasks. If I were to discover that I was not my daughter’s biological dad, I’d be hurt by my wife’s deception – but Heloise would be no less my daughter.”
So basically you ignore the irony of the situation you placed Ted in and reduce the significance of a man knowing the truth about his children to “it’s not mine!? Aw shucks well that doesn’t matter I forgive you for fucking another guy, lying to me about it, and then tricking me into raising a kid I thought was mine.”
I am not a father so I cannot speak from experience when it comes to knowing what it feels like to watch your child being born, knowing it is yours. What I can say is this; if I were ever to start a serious relationship with a woman and planned to have a child with her and then found out that child was not mine, it would fucking destroy me. Not only because of the realization that this woman who supposedly “loves” me has slept with another man, not only because this woman has conspired behind my back to keep this a secret from me, and not because I have been paying to support a family literally born of deceit. No, the thing that would stop my heart from beating would be the knowledge that a child I thought was a part of me was a part of someone else. Like I said I can’t speak on what it feels like to see your child come into this world but I would imagine that a man who witnesses this would feel a special kind of joy knowing that he had a part in creating that new life. To have that taken away, I feel, would be devastating.
This is something I know you agree with, Hugo
Because I don’t think it’s your promise to Jill that held your tongue. I think it’s the fact that you know you would destroy this man if you were the cause of him finding out the truth. Jill knows this too, which is why the secret was her idea. That in my opinion makes her the most evil one of all. Women go bat shit insane when someone threatens to take away their children because those children are a part of them. Women have sued hospitals for mixing up their babies and tracked down their child, demanding it be returned to them because the idea of someone else raising their child as their own drove these women over the edge.
If someone were to tell Jill that there was a mix-up at the hospital, even now I’m sure she’d want to find her real child and tell him the truth. But Ted? Shit…let him go on thinking this kid is his. He loves him so what’s the harm? If there was no harm then there would be no secret. Hugo claims that this other man loves Jill. So why not tell him from the start and let him decide? She already broke off the friends with benefits arrangement with Hugo and the claim is that Ted wants to be a father.
So why not tell him?
The reason Ted wasn’t told right from the start is because Jill knew that if Ted were to find out that the child might not be his, he might not want to raise it. If it was indeed as simple as Hugo claims then telling Ted would have been no problem. Hugo and Jill weren’t officially dating or planning to get married. Once things with Ted became serious she broke it off with Hugo. So if being a father was all only about love then there should have been nothing holding Jill back from telling Ted. What held her back was guilt. Guilt and fear.
She was afraid he would demand a paternity test and she was afraid he would not raise the child if it turned out to be Hugo’s. Then she would have been stuck with the drunk partier about to hit rock bottom instead of the professionally stable (read: wealthy) man ready to marry her.
Hugo can try to explain away the evil in what he and Jill did by throwing the word love in his article as many times as he wants. The fact remains that if he felt there was no wrong in the situation then the truth would not have been hidden.
“Fathering has everything to do with being present after conception and after birth, and very little with providing the sperm to fertilize an egg. Regardless of what a paternity test would reveal, I am still my daughter’s dad – and in every meaningful sense, Ted is Alastair’s.”
Hugo’s twisted sense of reality is wrong on so many levels that if the same situation he placed Ted in were to befall him I would only smile at the irony. His hypocrisy would melt from him like the hearts of so many men who have been destroyed by a society and legal system that views them as mere tools for breeding and supplying finances instead of human beings with rights.
The most outrageous lie from this misandric man comes at the end of his article
“The specifics of human reproduction mean that men may have children of whose existence they are unaware, and they may unwittingly raise as their own children conceived with another man’s sperm. But women have it harder, and not only in terms of pregnancy, labor, and delivery.”
Women have it harder? Did I read that right? So Hugo basically just said that because women give birth to children, a fact that almost guarantees they know their child is their child barring a hospital mix up, men, who for the most part can never know if their child is their fucking child unless they get a paternity test have it easier? Fucking really?
Not to mention Hugo argues against paternity tests so in his perfect world men should just raise whomever a woman says they should raise. If some random woman were to walk up to Hugo and say “hey you’re the father of my kid” I guess Hugo would just smile and say “okey doke” and like the woman worshiping sap that he is, raise the kid with no questions asked.
Some would argue against this scenario pointing out how Hugo could easily resolve the issue by proving he never slept with the random woman. That argument wouldn’t work though because Hugo already said that sperm doesn’t make the dad, what a woman feels in her mind is what makes the dad. It’s her choice because she carried the child in her womb. Right Hugo?
If anyone doesn’t think that’s how Hugo feels well just take a look at his final words
“I may or may not be Alastair’s biological father. I may or may not have other children “out there.” These uncertainties that I know many men share are part of the cost of a habit of unprotected heterosexual intercourse. But the solution to the problem isn’t suspicion or frantic demands for paternity tests, Jerry Springer style. The solution isn’t even the rigorous use of contraception (though that’s a very good idea.)
The solution is to remember that it is love, not sperm that, makes a great dad.”
Hear that ladies? All you single mothers out there who are tired of struggling because you didn’t get knocked up by (or couldn’t fraud) a rich guy, here’s a man ready and willing to pay for your children. Sperm doesn’t matter so don’t worry about any paternity tests just walk up to his house, baby in tow, and start knocking until that wallet opens the door.
Among the many things Hugo Schwyzer is, he is a liar and a possible paternity fraud accomplice. The one thing he is not is a good man.
14 Posts in Total
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.
If you don't have paypal, check out the other options.
If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store.
JGteMolder:
Near Earth Object:
ErnestoGuevara:
Paul Elam:
Of course, if it makes no difference who the sperm belongs too, then women shouldn’t be able to get support for a child from a one night stand, or even an affair or relationship. If the man has not accepted and acted as the father, then he is not the father. That is the logic of all this. Therefore, according to Hugos own morality, and that of the feminists when it suits them, the owner of the sperm means nothing……then if all a guy has done is splash sperm around…..he’s not a father…..and owes no responsibilty.
What we have is feminist double think. When sperm is all you have, that is all that counts…….dna makes the father. When you don’t have sperm…..you use other measures of what makes a father…….(insert made up fantasy rubbish here). You are then able to assign responsibility to anyone you have been able to con.
He had also better hope that Ted doesn’t die. You see, if Ted dies, and she is then alone raising the child…..she can then make a claim against Hugo….and he can be hit with backdated child support for up to 10 years. So after getting Ted to finance the child for all that time…..she can then double dip and receive another helping of child support for the time that Ted was already supporting. Future support payments would begin then also. I’d like to see Hugo then argue with the feminist courts that the fact that it was his sperm mean nothing…..you see…..that’s not what fatherhood is based on lol
Yep.
And if biology makes no difference whatsoever, then why do hospitals devote hundreds of hours and millions of dollars to implementing check and systems to ensure that mothers get their biological when it’s time to go home? If biology was irrelevant and love was all that mattered then what’s wrong with just giving any child to any new mother and sending them home together? Oh that’s right—biology is only irrelevant when men are concerned!!
The whole idea is just so transparently misandric and illogical it makes your head spin.
What a PUSS.
This is related to your assessment of schwytzer’s apology. Here in Canada, this idea of giving the same rights to those conceived through IVF, as those who were placed up for adoption. The main argument being; people (kids) are entitled to know their family’s medical history, just like kids who have been adopted. This is quickly being drafted as law, it means paternity fraud is a violation of a child’s right to have access to proper medical care. operative word being proper, if we expect physicians to make a proper assessment then they need to know the child’s family history. If Betsy Spread-eagle committed fraud and named the wrong father, there should be consequences, hopefully one day even standard paternity testing for all newborns.
This idea can be easily sold to the blue-pill taking masses under the guise of; ‘it’s all for the children’s medical care’. You mention Men’s (father’s) rights and people will laugh, but you mention a kids right to medical care and the band wagon won’t be big enough.
——
“Arvay argued at trial last year that children born from gamete donations should have the same rights as adopted children to learn information, when they turn 19, about their birth parents.
Pratten maintained it’s important to know the medical and social history in order for her to properly form her sense of identity.
There now is a trend to make it optional for sperm donors to allow contact by offspring. Such countries as Sweden, Holland, the U.K. and parts of Australia have got rid of the anonymity of gamete donations.”
Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/health/government+appeals+landmark+sperm+donor+ruling/4966861/story.html#ixzz1RxAGarG6
You mention Men’s (father’s) rights and people will laugh, but you mention a kids right to medical care and the band wagon won’t be big enough.
It’s because of this attitude that Canada has misandric human rights commissiions.
Absolutely agree. If we are going to make any inroads our true motivating factors must be kept out of the limelight and we must use their own weapons against them. ie media exposure and kids well being.
Initially at least.
Who knows, the damn could burst before all that. I’m in Vancouver Canada and despite this being a bohemian cello stroking hippy dominated blue pill swallowing leftist stronghold, I have taken note that even the most PC speaking headband brandishing flax eating men are getting more vocal about women’s sluttish ways as well as the overall ‘user’ attitude common in younger women. Sometimes the blatant unfair court rulings in the newspaper as well as the light prison sentences assigned to women are too much to tolerate for even the weakest bed wetting mangina.
What Hugo displays and by extension the site that posts it “GMP” is a unique loathing and disrespect for children. A truly self absorbed character that translates his self hypnotic affair with his dick into some kind of progressive freedom and sublimation to the feminine. What he fails to highlight is the absolute carnage that can unfold in a child’s life as a result of these misplaced irresponsible and damaging values.
Case in point is a sibling who discovers at the age of thirty that his father is not his father. Translation: everything my father ever did to me that I didn’t like is because he wasn’t my father. This is what people live with when the likes of hugo and the slop that represents his values come and then leave. Pain. Nothing of Hugo’s progressive thinking is in consideration of anyone but Hugo.
Gee Hugo, do you know what it’s like to be driving with your family on a Sunday afternoon doing the Dad thing and your daughter pipes up with questions about your wife’s first husband, questions that relate to her progenitor which she believes is not you. The confusion that it translates into for her 5 year old brother. Yes Hugo pretty progressive alright right out the door and never look back you self absorbed piece of shit.
Been there, done that, got the falsified birth certificate. Mom divorced her husband very close to the time of my conception, but kept his name and put him down as the father on the Big Day. The last message I got from my putative father was, “Did you ever look up your biological father?”
If I have an unknown child in my own right, he or she is 35 years old now. Too late for child support.
Never too late. Look at my story http://www.lovechildstories.com
E
” … the woman should have full authority to name whatever man she wants as the father … Why this common knowledge hasn’t been made law confuses the hell out of me.”
Dunno where YOU’RE living, but this has been a problem for many young men in every branch of the military. It seems that as soon as their units deploy, their paychecks start getting docked for child support after some bimbo names ” whatever man she wants as the father”.
I’ve heard of cases of babies being swapped at hospitals, and years later the mother finding out that the child she is raising is not hers. They are always morified, and sue the arse off the hospital. They think they deserve financial compensation for having been conned into raising someone elses child even when it was a mistake. But a guy who was conned on purpose……..get over it…..man up…..take responsiblity you piece of shit……..no you can’t get back that child support you paid…..it was for the child..and children can not be held liable for debt…….then the woman gets a double hit of child support by making retro active claims against another guy……it’s fucking pathetic
First, let’s look at what a cuckoo is. Most species destroy the eggs or kill the hatchlings of their marks. Sure, the parent gets fucked but the young wind up paying more than the adults in the grand scheme of things. This account of fuckery is likely legit. Women have guys labelled. Ted is the guaranteed income while Hugo is the incum. It also goes back to how society empowers women to pull their shit.
With the blessing of clowns like Hugo.
Exactly.
Anyone who accepts Lamarckian drivel such as the stuff that Schwyzer implies is attempting to rationalize their self-disenfranchisement in a retardedly inane manner. Yes, a being’s environment influences it, but even the most basic education in genetics (or, hell, even common sense about the nature of humanity) should be reminding you that the environment is interacting with the intricacies of a being’s genome to produce any given outcome.
Schwyzer cannot sincerely believe that peoples’ reproductive fluids do not carry a part of them that influences the identity of a potential newborn. His desire to kow-tow to women is all that can be genuinely understood in his writing, and it is sad that the world will not resultantly shame him in the manner that he deserves.
I don’t think Hugo is all there. He made a promise to keep this secret, then he admits to it all, ON THE INTERNET, as if Jill and Ted live in an alternative universe where the internet doesn’t go. Even if he made up fake names for them, does he really think the actual people won’t recognize themselves? Would they really have never mentioned his name before ‘their’ child in the last 14 years?
Get a clue Hugo. Your argument sounds about as valid as your promise to stay quiet.
More and more I’m convinced that Hugo is a sociopath who only feigns compassion for women because it’s socially acceptable and due to lingering guilt over his predatory, self-involved behavior towards them. He hates on men because men are society’s scapegoats and he ritually absolves himself of sin by throwing men to the slaughter (metaphorically).
This is not to impugn sociopaths; I actually met one who was attempting to overcome his disability.
“A truly self absorbed character that translates his self hypnotic affair with his dick into some kind of progressive freedom and sublimation to the feminine. What he fails to highlight is the absolute carnage that can unfold in a child’s life as a result of these misplaced irresponsible and damaging values.”
This resonated with me. I’m beginning to wonder if Conscious men are less in love with the ‘divine feminine’ and more in love with the negative space around their dicks.
Again: Women fuck, date, and marry the opposite of who they say they want. Hell, serial killers are akin to Ron Jeremy to more women that actually come forward that we know of.
That is my impression exactly and Tom Matlack has the same sort of history of treating women badly and seeking to absolve his guilt.
Tom is attempting to “find his balls” by being subservient, here is his definition of “equality”:
“This comes as confirmation of the natural order of things for a certain kind of man, the sensitive ones in our 40s who no longer wear the pants, who understand our role as serving the needs of our wives ”
“Anyhow, this guy once told me, with regard to marriage, “You can do it the hard way or the easy way with your wife, Tom. The easy way is to agree with her right away no matter what. The hard way is to fight the good fight, leave your blood on the floor, and then agree with her at some point in the future. It’s up to you.”
That’s right, they’re slimeballs, so, by inference or, more to the point; projection, we must all be slimeballs.
No GMP, it’s not all men, it’s just you!
Of course GMP are abusers. The title itself is projection. Normal people.don’t live in a state of guilt.
Sounds like he just can’t get the hint on the 4th time running and is spreading his disinformation anywhere it will be taken.
GiMP standard fare.
GMP is a feminist front so publishing a mangina like Hugo is not much of a stretch for them.
OT, (but somewhat related), here’s a petition to stop the corruption of the Ontario family court system: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/6/stop-the-corrupt-family-law-court-of-ontario/ .
It can be signed from just about any country and only has 166 signatures currently. You can also choose not to display your name. Please drop by and sign if you can, thanks.
Done.
Signed.
Okay, not signed. Attempted to sign it several times, but each time it just locks up my browser.
That’s strange, it worked fine for me, (Firefox user). Are you using Windows? If so, did event viewer report any error’s ? Also sometimes browser add-ons conflict with some websites, you could try disabling them and see if that works.
Signed.
Done. I live in Ontario. Our children desperately need these changes.
Please notice one of my previous posts concerning the presumption of equal parenting (included in my comments on the July 12th article on Violence Against Women Act). Also, there was an interesting article titled “Divorce Act reforms Coming Down the Pipe” in “Lawyers Weekly”.
Here is the link.
http://www.lawyersweekly.ca/
I think we’re starting to make a difference. I have a glimmer of hope.
Signed.
Signed.
Signed!
My thanks to all who have signed so far, it’s not my petition but I’m watching over it. After all, Canadian courts in general, are some of the most corrupt in the west and Ontario is the home of judge Maurice(there’s no corruption in the family courts)Stong.
Some excellent comments too. The tally is at 181, the petition will be sent out when it reaches 1000 signatures. Please keep signing!
Signed with my own name and address.
Done.
Keep up the resistance up north, my brothers.
Signed, 1000 still seems a long way to go though.
Remember the Mary N. Kellett petition? Look at how many signatures we got for that petition: http://www.change.org/petitions/disbar-assistant-district-attorney-mary-kellett-for-prosecutorial-misconduct
We can do it,we’ve done it before.NOW LET’S DO IT AGAIN !!!
Let’s fuck their shit up and keep fucking their shit up.
Agreed, if we did that kind of thing every time there was an opportunity to, and took a position of true justice seeking over retribution each time, the mens movement would probably increase its stature noticeably. It’s already happening slowly, so lets do things to speed it up.
Keep pushing for change. Eventually the system will either have to correct itself, or by not doing so, will have effectively admitted that it intends to keep dehumanizing men. Either way it improves our situation, by gaining redress, or by further exposing societies disinterest in mens well being.
Exactly,we’re on the right road let’s speed it up.
Thanks for the post.
MRActive and Done.
Hugo fucked himself, Jill fucked him, Jill fucked Ted, Jill and Hugo fucked their own child, and no one wants to take responsibility. Aren’t today’s families so wonderful?
Again, you fuck yourself by fucking her, don’t be a fool and tool for shit like this to happen. It kills me to know how much shit this child has to go through just because some guy can’t keep his pants up and his mother’s a lying whore. And not to mention the clueless Ted who’s potentially waste 18 years of his life. Even if the child is his, he’s been with a whore all this time. Seriously, this is just a big shitstorm.
This is a big part of why I abandoned sex. It’s all just putting something in a hole back and forth with a feeling of natural nicotine at the tip. Totally useless for truly enjoying life and finding people who truly love you. Not worth crap like this story happening to me anyway, even if their used to be some big reward out of it.
It kills me to know how much shit this child has to go through just because some guy can’t keep his pants up and his mother’s a lying whore.
These types of people we call “feminists”.
My sympathies are with Ted.
What a fucking cock sucker. Good man my ass….you sir are a very very evil man indeed. You are the very definition of a MOTHER FUCKER and no matter how you much you try to justify what you did if you had any fucking shred of manhood in left your white knight nut sack, you would own up to what you did and tell “Ted” the truth. That’s right, here is your chance to fill your saggy purse and confront what it really means to MAN UP. Eat shit and die.
That was great. I wish I could give you more than one green thumb.
The oldest of my three children is not my biological daughter. She was 14mnths old when I met her mother. Nevertheless she calls me Dad and I always refer to her as my daughter. She is 26-years-old now.
She has two fathers; a step-father and a biological father. She enjoys a good relationship with both of us. Both of us are Dad to her. Her biological father doesn’t forfeit being her father because he didn’t raise her.
If a child is conceived from your sperm then you are the father, regardless of what someone else suffering from their own denial tries to preach to you.
Keeping important secrets from your child or your partner, that directly affect them both, for your own personal gain is selfish and cowardly. It is abusive. Q. What sort of person would assist you to commit child abuse? A. A person like Hugo of course.
Wayne: I think it is the truth that makes you a father. It is the step beyond duty to your family, that sets their value high enough to deserve the truth. High enough to be accountable to your loved ones. Honesty is a tremendous act of love and faith it is elemental to equality. Withholding the truth is to say you can never be equal, you were not worth the risk. This is damaging to a child, how anyone can pretend love while withholding it, blows me away. You make a fine point for honesty, trust, faith and love. Because you can.
I guess an acronym for “scum” would be either “Hugo” or “Geraldo”.
@Wayne
The good thing in your instance was that you actually had a choice in the matter. You kind of adopted the girl as your daughter knowing full well you weren’t her biological father, AND that you weren’t in a relationship with the woman at the time she had the child, as in, she didn’t cheat on you/was sleeping around.
“Her biological father doesn’t forfeit being her father because he didn’t raise her.”
I still wonder though, if he wanted to raise her, but was denied the chance to do so.
Agree..it’s the withhold that is the issue!
1. Hugo is a huge drama queen. I have no idea why he wants to reveal every little detail about his life. He may have even made the story up to get more attention.
2. Hugo seems to think that everything done before his sobriety was done by another person completely unrelated to him. Hugo is still a predator and con-man and narcissistic user of people.
Very good post. And you’re right, I can tell you as a father that the sense of kinship to your child is not something you’d want to be deceived about – I don’t envy those men who find out that they are victims of paternity fraud.
Guys, some seriously bad news.
This is OT but needs to be shown.
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/wife-threw-mans-severed-penis-in-garbage/story-e6frfku0-1226093487099
A woman cut off a mans penis, threw it in the garbage disposal and turned it on.
Disgusting.
This is one of those crimes where I perfectly believe in the concept “eye for an eye.” As in, if a woman commits such a crime, they should have their genitals mutilated. Not just the clitoris, the vagina should have a blending blade run through it. She can be drugged so she doesn’t feel the pain.
I don’t normally believe in the “eye for an eye” thing, but honestly, a prison sentence or getting charged doesn’t do justice for what probably feels worse then death for the man.
This is a terrific article and coincidence or not a fresh post has been submitted by an understandably upset woman.
I am pasting it here because she posted it on an old thread that would otherwise be missed.
Here it is:
I came across this post while searching for something relating to “Paternity Fraud.” I hope it is ok that I post here, even though I am a woman the current laws just make me so angry. The same thing as in the original post is happeneing to my family currently. My husband is being forced to support a child that DNA already proved he did not father. In the state of Kansas the law states “If a woman and man are married when the child is born he is the presumed father.” Even if he later finds out otherwise, he is forced to pay. A DNA test was done after he learned his ex cheated. My husband had no contact with the child for for about 7 years and one day he got a letter from child support saying he had to pay. My husband was on his second deployment to Iraq when the letter came and so I sent child support the DNA paperwork from years before and as soon as my husband returned from Iraq they sent notice again. We fought this in court for 2 years and in the end not only spent money on attorney fees to fight it, but also became in arrears and his paycheck is garnished. I wrote State Senators about this and was able to finally introduce Senate Bill 27 in jan 2011, my husband was deployed a third time when the hearing was held. I testified on his behalf at the state capitol and they said they would look into it. It has been two years and they did nothing except let it die in the committee. We have 3 children of our own to raise and support and shouldn’t be forced to support a child he didnt father! Woman who do this are committing fraud and are not being held accountable for it. The judge told my husband his only suggestion was to find out who the real father is and maybe he would want to take the financial responsibility. Hello??? Why is it my husband responsibility to figuire out who she slept with 15 years ago? There is a petition on http://www.change.org under paternity fraud if you would like to sign it. Many states have changes their laws, but many have not. A woman is allowed to choose to become a parent, however a man is forced to support a child he didn’t father? A woman is rewarded financially for committing adultry and fraud? Makes no sense!!!
when you realize that laws in the west are BASED in feminism (read: female supremacy, male denigration) it actually makes quite a LOT of sense, sadly.
Can somebody provide a link to the the particular petition? If you are going to promote something like a petition it is on you to provide a link to it.
Her name is Kaleigh and she wrote that here —> http://avoiceformen.com/2011/06/26/houston-man-forced-to-pay-child-support-for-a-child-proven-by-dna-to-not-be-his/comment-page-1/#comment-56786
Is that the “Good Men” project, or the “Good For Nothing Men” Project?
I’ve been calling it the “Nice Boys Project, by Ms. Magazine.”
Huge-Old may be “a great writer” in the eyes of the Nice Boys; I don’t know, but he is what Winston Smith would have called a “doubleplusgood duckspeaker”. It appears to me that he knows the party line well enough that he can bend truth and decency into pretzels, and still use it to burnish his white-knightly shining armor.
Fuck him with a spiny fish jammed up his ass.
Good slave project
That’s the one I use.
good mangina project?
Good Boy project
I would like to nominate our good friend Hugo, a professional woman’s studies major and clearly holding himself up to the very same standards that he applies to….women….to be our very first male member of “Registar her”.
I would also like to coin a phrase, one which, I am sure our publcity hungry Hugo would approve.
I recommend that as p@ssy begger describes a type of man who will throw other men under the buss and pander to every possible conciept in women to get access to the stank taco, so any man who takes this to the extreme, finds himself employed in a place just for access to p@ssy, breaks moral and skirts legal limits on sexuallity and then joins the forces that actively seek to criminalize the self same p@ssy begging behavior that they themselves are infested with should be coined a “Hugo”.
In the gay sense of things, Ted Haggard, the antigay evangalist caught doing meth in a motel room with a young gay hooker, would be a “gay Hugo”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard
If anyone here doesn’t know Hugo, let me give you a rundown.
Hugo is a p@ssy begger grand wizard. He is such a preditor and cad that he screwed so many undergrads, surely the mother of his “child for the publicity” while she was an undergrad, he screwed so many, was such a womanizer and disrespectful to women that the Community College that the administrator wanted to fire our profiligate Hugo.
For those of you who don’t know Hugo is a womans studies professor from a Community College, the lowest level of higher education in the US, one half step above public high school, a high school diploma is optional and is two years in length with a drop out rate of 70% a place where reading and writing are optional and not necessarily encouraged.
Did our Hugo, having been caught with his hand and other things in teen cookie jars of his patriarchially dominated students resign? A Hugo doesn’t resign from his favorite poaching grounds. No, like a mafia rat, he turned on his fellow Hugo’s and volentarily wrote the college’s anti-sexual harrasment laws criminalizing the natural male attraction to healthy fertile females, cementing his position as a Hugo.
.Our Hugo found it so profitable to turn on his own that he became a professional louse and womans studies professor. He came on some MR sites 10 or so years ago, where I learned all this, and was trounced.
It is not a surprise that he is on the good boy project as this is the home of the p@ssy beggars and as a Hugo he is their king.
I disagree that Hugo is a psycho path because this is too easy an out for any Hugo. He is a Hugo, pure and simple. You can always find a Hugo on top of the heep with the bodies of his victims at his feet. That’s how a Hugo get’s ahead.
Hugo’s current foray into the public sphere comes because he has written a book and needs to sell it. Last month he wrote and article in Salon burying men who find young women attractive on the occasion of the man who married the 16 year old. The feminists can always count on their Hugo to shovel the dirt when they want to bury men for being heterosexual.
Now he is abusing a child to sell books. This poor boy should sue Hugo. Hugo has ruined his life. It doesn’t matter who his real father is in this case. The boy is being raised by Ted and anyone who’s not a Hugo would leave him be to be “normal” and happy.
Not our Hugo. He must sell books. How to get on the good boy website, post against the latest wrinkle in the sexual jurisprudence, the recent laws saying that a cuckolded husband doesn’t have to pay to support the child that came from his cuckolding. This has infuriated the fem’s but they are wiley and got their good boys to post about it, trying to convince men to go back to being door mats in marriage…..like that’s possible anymore….lol.
Hugo doesn’t know and doesn’t care about this boy, he’s a Hugo, he only cares about himself.
If the best friends women can find today are Hugo’s, I say, victory MRM!
Remember: Thomas Ball’s immolation, he gave his life for your children.
Maybe a special catagory like “Feminazi Collaborator”
I actually love the idea,I think “Hugo” could replace “mangina” over time. I’d start using Hugo instead of mangina myself if feminist males didn’t hate the “mangina” label so damned much.
Why just today, I debated a male feminist on youtube who goes by the name of abaddon5, who was insulting the venerable Bernard Chapin. He mentioned how pissy he was about being called a mangina specifically.He’s a married pussy-beggar flipping shit at Uncle Bern to try to impress his feminist wife.
He says he has a genius IQ, which is more common on the internet than saying you have a 12 inch cock,but he didn’t realize that vasectomies are not reproductive rights,merely contraception,and he refutes points by saying they are “lame”. Apparently,he just found another job and wasn’t aware that the reason he was out of work was because NOW had a sit-down with Obama and told him not to replace the jobs men had lost.
I would sincerely hope that being made aware of these facts would make this man think, but you know manginas.
Anyway,I think this Hugo thing has a lot of potential and there’s a certain bent appeal in turning a symbol of male feminism, widely popular in the 70′s and then again in the 90′s,into a widely-understood symbol of spineless submission to female supremacism.
I posted this in the comment section:
“Just how long to you all here at the Good Men Project think you can keep this up? Sooner or later your money will run out and then we MRAs won’t have you to laugh at any more. Seriously, this whole site is a joke and I can’t help but think that the people behind this know it.
It is really amazing that you expect people to buy this crap-and this is real crap I tell you.
If you people here think for one second that this pathetic organization set up by feminists to derail the Men’s Rights Movement is going to have any effect then you are simply advertising your own self delusion. You are, in effect, heaping hot coals on your head by publishing this stuff and you are becoming the laughingstock of all who read it that are either not a part of your feeble minded plan or happen to poses a brain.
You would best serve yourselves and the rest of humanity if you would just put down your pens and retire to your homes to jerk off. So for the love of God and certainly for your own sakes do it!”
Lets see if it get’s posted.
I hope these p@ssy beggars are at least getting laid, but I doubt that’s happening, not without taking the bird out for at least a $100.00 dinner, paid for by subcribers, all of whom are forced to subscribe by their overbearing “empowered” wardens, I mean wives.
Then perhaps, occasionally, there getting some peri-menopausal trim.
I wonder how many co-eds our Hugo has spinning at once? How many does he tell his wife about?
Remember: Thomas Ball’s immolation, he gave his life for your children.
Well it was up for a little while and got a lot of thumbs up but then got taken down. I suppose I over looked the part of the posting policy where it said that you can’t criticize anything that the GMP publishes.
These “confessionals” from blatant manginas over at TGMP remind of the sort of writing in women’s magazines. Something you’d read in Glamour or Mademoiselle, only they supposedly write for men to read. They’re a stone’s throw from the “Conscious Men”. Pussy-begger apologists with a progressive agenda to promote; as if using men to indocrinate other men into the feminist world view won’t go unnoticed as a subversive tactic…at least by the likes of us here.
What they’re attempting to do is to convince men already ridden with guilt and overtly subserviant to women, that the path to nirvana is even more guilt and subserviance to women. True gender equality can never be acheived until as many men as possible are beaten down into submission to woman. That’s the remedy for everything that ails society today; everything that’s keeping women unhappy with their lives…and men need to fix this by doing what the TGMP say.
If only men would behave more like women, women would be happy.
As long as its not YOU or YOUR man that’s like that.
Elitists are above having to adopt their own advice to the prolotariat.
It’s that we ALL need to sacrifice to make the world better, except them.
They’re simply too wise, learned and introspective to be considered common folk.
But socially engineering the common folk to serve at society’s behest is fine.
The serf’s must be controlled after all. We seriously need to kick these elitist caricatures of the old world, off of the planet and find a way to prevent them from manifesting in another form again. Every time the common man shakes of the “yoke”, he wakes up to find another one around his neck. I’m sick of it.
Dr. Phil will be at tomorrow’s VAWA hearing… What about you? Your testimony is invited. http://news.mensactivism.org/node/16911
I’ve signed the petition at http://www.saveservices.org/ for PVRA and written both my US Senators today. I’d set my self on fire on the steps of the capital, but the media would ignore it.
I’ve signed the petition at http://www.saveservices.org/ for PVRA and written both my US Senators today.
Ditto.
Thank you for the link to mensactivism.org. I just forced myself to read the entire linked article at that site (‘Look, Kitten, I Am Too A Feminist! Fauxminism and Men’)(http://www.lawsonry.com/891-look-kitten-i-am-too-a-feminist-fauxminism-and-men/). After that article by the fresh-faced “recent grad in women’s studies” my empathy-factor for men-in-society has gone through the roof.
All I can say is Thank God you men here @ A Voice For Men don’t treat women like myself (newly aware of and hence supportive of Men’s Rights (& Activism)) like author Megan Milanese advocates feminists treat men coming to her feminist-cause.
I have never been made to feel ANY of what she dreams of making men feel who have even a shred of ‘concern’ for women. She comes across as the Grandest of Inquisitors in what sure sounds like for her is a perpetual War of the Sexes. Every man to her is a Privileged One, every woman is a long-suffering member of a “marginalized community”. Every man is to be treated as Guilty-of-all-mens’-failings/crimes; every one held to untenable standards including Listening-Codes, Speech-Codes, Tone-of-voice-Codes…eechh.
It made me sick to read it all. Worst of all I KNOW there’s no point in trying to ‘discuss’ any of it with her. I’d just be ‘mansplaining’ even though I’m a woman.
p.s. And no, I’m not saying any of this to curry favor with men’s rights advocates.
Demon spawn. She WILL get hers.
Thanks for the link. What a laugh. We need her to put out a lot more stuff along these lines.
“p.s. And no, I’m not saying any of this to curry favor with men’s rights advocates.”
Doesn’t seem like you’re doing that at all Patrice!
Patrice I have no doubt I speak for just abut everyone here when I say it’s very clear you are not trying to curry favour here. The transparency of the way you write tells of it.
Thank you in fact for your thoughts to words.
Thanks for the kind words. As a recently ‘retired’ home school teacher/mom my focus is (supposed to be) on the fiction-writing I’ve long claimed to want to do (but this website is like a good addiction – and I love learning). But sadly, for ‘research’ over the last year, let’s say, I’ve had to read so-called women’s fiction: chick-lit, vampire-lit, etc.
With each & every one I say the same thing, “No more, please,” kinda like that poor beanbag chair that just wanted ‘out’ of its misery! But I keep hoping…and going back for one more “best-selling” chick-author not wanting to believe that (thinking, decent, real) woman read and love the drivel I’ve only found so far…
I just forced another nightmare into my brain: the famed Candace (Sex & the City) Bushnell’s “Lipstick Jungle” from 2005 in about 2 days. I only picked that one because it was ‘free’ at the library, not for any reason other than to try & ‘understand’ what-women-want in a book. And I do mean forced; if I went through my notes I bet I’d find a dozen times I wrote “GAG” as a preface to a particular passage.
Because of my education here I could see from the start – and it only got piled onwards and upwards – man-hatred, Misandry, from p. 4 on; I made over 14 pages of notes with quotations [for a parody?]. [Note: Was only going to read chapter 1 & conclusion, but got sucked in to the horror of it].
That 20 & 30+something females partake of this kind of ‘entertainment’ on top of their feminism-infused college educations leads me to conclude the Road Back to Sanity Between the Sexes is much steeper than I had ever imagined.
Just as with the young author of the “Look, Kitten…” article, I believe it would be near impossible to get the average (indoctrinated) woman to understand the ‘soft hatred’ of men that totally infuses the Bushnell book and books/TV/movies like it.
Personally, I welcome all women to the MRM – I don’t descriminate on genitals or skin colour.
Honestly, I feel bad that I focus so much on the male perspective on my own blog (thankfully grerp counterbalances that).
“Good Men” Project? What a joke! Once again these clowns reveal their own hypocrisy.
With the possible exception of feminism, I doubt that there is any widely accepted set of ethical/moral principles that views the promotion of lies and deceit as “good” behavior.
There’s Taqiyya.
HUGO RESPONDS:
http://hugoschwyzer.net/2011/07/13/cuckolding-is-the-worst-thing-that-can-happen-to-a-man/
Basically, he shies away from any real debate / discourse about the relative influences of genetics and the environment and men’s emotional ties to the reproductive process by offering a reiteration of his previous points with some subtle shaming language sprinkled on top of it. It’s thoroughly disgusting, but we wouldn’t expect any more, eh?
Hahaha…he called me an MRA. I’m honored
Hell hath no fury like a MAN ON FIRE.
Rape is a momentary act potentially depriving a female of exercising their will in when and with whom she reproduces.
Paternity fraud is calculated conspiracy and deceit exercised over the timescale of the ENTIRE REPRODUCTIVE SPAN of a MAN’s LIFE, absolutely depriving him of exercising his will in when and with whom he reproduces.
Paternity fraud is a HEINOUS crime against humanity DWARFING rape in magnitude.
The attitude of feminists toward paternity fraud, as exemplified by the gremlin Denise Court in this video, is the most unforgivably soulless, callous, subhuman, unfuckingconscienable display of vapidity that even a slime would indignify. And this from the crowd bleeding at the mouth imploring empathy for female ‘victims’. Watch and hold your stomach.
http://www.manwomanmyth.com/video/family/paternity-fraud/
I’ve seen all of the MWM videos. It is a spectacular documentary that every man and woman should see.
I have given up on trying to appeal to the common sense of feminists. They are bigoted hatemongers who will take any opportunity to discriminate against men.
I am not here to appeal to female Klansmen in any way, anymore than I would appeal to Kim Jong Il. I’m here to FTSU and eviscerate their filthy influence.
OT – another fucking Lorena Bobbitt. I just heard about this:
http://www.wsmv.com/story/15068191/police-ca-woman-cut-off-husbands-penis?redirected=true
Bitch needs to die.
Every single article I read from The Goober Project doubles and then redoubles my hatred of feminism.
Paternity tests and male birth control is the answer. Technology will set men free.
Uhh-wow. Great article Jmnzz, first off. Secondly I just Googled this Megan Milanese person. Read her thing on male feminists. This is the biggest, stupidest feminist cunt I have encountered yet.
I respectfully disagree, the biggest stupidest feminist cunt, besides our Hugo, is Dworkin.
Remember: Thomas Ball’s immolation, he gave his life for your children.
They perhaps all run close in rank. But what Megan Milanese was saying was basically men who support feminism are still trying to control women. Saying they are mostly fake. It is usually the fake in genuine one who accuses all else of being fake.
I believe it is referred to as “benevolent sexism”.
I believe it’s called “reading the party plank”.
Women appear go be pushing for laws protecting their delicate ears from the voices of men.
I can think of two purposes for this, one is to make the workplace more hostile to men and so get more jobs for women.
The other is to shut down the mens rights movement. Something high on academic feminists lists.
Remember: Thomas Ball’s immolation, he gave his life for your children.
“… this is part of the cost of heterosexual intercourse…”
Excuse me – why *exactly* did Hugo feel the need to specify heterosexual? It’s bloody assumed in context, you hack. Christ in a cup, I’m bi myself, but this sort of extra-inclusive politically ultra-correct language brings my piss to a boil.
Hugo is a high-level Beta who mouths Feminist platitudes to get his dick wet, who wears his ideology like an outfit, nothing but a signal to tell others how ‘enlightened’ and ‘special’ and ‘fuckable’ he is. The man has no principles, and no innate value.
He is not a Man. He has no principles.
I spit on you, Hugo – and I guarantee my girlfriend is hotter, smarter, younger, and more successful in life than your woman, despite the fact that I unapologetically argue with her over the falsehood of Pretty Lies you ensconce yourself in.
Mate you are staring at the world in the r i g h t way.
Nice post bloke-man.
Thanks! I gotta let the insanity out somehow.
Hugo is just nauseating. He keeps saying DNA doesn’t matter and then thinks he can foist that same maxim on somebody else. Presumably there’s at least a chance “Ted” thought DNA DOES matter or else Jill and Hugo would not have had to connived in this way. He doesn’t get to decide somebody else’s priorities – if “Ted” thinks DNA matters, then so be it. Hugo is SO self righteous that he thinks his own moral maxims are the last word on the matter without even realizing he thinks in this way, he just thinks it’s self evdiently right. Total, full on scumbag. Ted certainly seems to have awful, awful taste in women.
Don’t let Hugo derail you, he’s a professional feminist, he’s trained in how to manipulate. He really has no substance other wise. He mouths the feminist dogma that DNA doesn’t matter.
Tell that to a mother who is given the wrong child to bring home.
The courts have recently handed men the biggest victory in male/female sexual relations in a thousand years.
The courts in the US have now recognized that DNA matters in determining parental rights. It was shoe horned in by a man who fathered a child with a married woman and wanted to be part of his life. The law prior to this was based on thousand year old British common law that a man who was married is the father of any child born to his wife during the marriage.
Now that DNA is discovered, only 60 years ago, the law has changed.
Win: Men.
Smart female lawyers…women’s studies professors…are freaking out and sending out their minions, like Hugo here, to spread the gospil that men should step up. They’re trying to supercede the law with appeals to chivalry.
Hugo is a very stupid and bumbling tool to bring his personal bull into this.
Chivalry will not work, thats what we’re trying to kill here.
Women will lose this fight in a way they never dreamed possible.
If I were a woman, I wouldn’t quit my job….ever.
Remember: Thomas Ball’s immolation, he gave his life for your children.
Smart female lawyers…women’s studies professors…are freaking out and sending out their minions, like Hugo here, to spread the gospil that men should step up. They’re trying to supercede the law with appeals to chivalry.
That’s why I’ve responded with this: http://mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/2011/06/man-up-why.html
Thanks for that piece of information, I’m glad to hear of it.
I agree about Hugo being a bumbling fool on this one. Most men and actually many women apparently take a dim view of Hugo’s take on the Jill/Ted scenario. He just further discredits himself in the eyes of people he’s trying to win over. Actually it’s a good example of one of these loopy lefties acting like an ersatz rockstar in academia not realizing how hated many of their views actually are everywhere else. The “Good men Project”, if it wants to be anything more than a strange vanity project by Feminists, would be better jettisoning him at this point, instead I notice they’re trying to pretend as if the general tone was very sympathetic to Schwyzer. Likewise, Schwyzer retweets the few vapid fruities/self interested assholes that think his article was wonderful. Makes you wanna vomit.
Does anyone care to name this elephant in the room? How does “Alpha” sound? Or at the very least, “Alpha” as a liberal would interpret it.
“Women have sued hospitals for mixing up their babies and tracked down their child, demanding it be returned to them because the idea of someone else raising their child as their own drove these women over the edge.”
It’s also a crime in Finland:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/05/17/custody-bias-reveals-hypocrisy-of-equality-feminists/#comment-90629
What this “good man” is, is a pile of human garbage, which is what all “good men” are. “Good men” aren’t, in other words.
Hugo is obviously a cowardly, self-serving creep; Jill is a cheap, grasping opportunist. Quite happy to live a potentially explosive lie without any thoughts for the feelings of others. They are both quite disgusting.
One simple thing for any man worried about this sort of thing – get a paternity test. You can buy them for about $100-$200. It only requires a mouth swab from the father and child, post the swabs back and wait a few days for the results. At least it would put your mind at rest one way or the other.
Why do these people feel the need to dress up everything? As you mentioned, it’s all just base, animal urges. Jill was fucking two guys at once because she’s a whore, when she got knocked up she made the best decision for herself and passed the child off as that of the richer, more responsible man and she didn’t want Hugo hanging around to endanger her lie. Hugo didn’t want a child, probably couldn’t care less if it was his and was more than happy to let some other sucker pick up the bill.
There are no higher, cerebral philosophies at work here, everyone just made the most selfish choice they could. It’s one thing to feed yourself this bullshit so you can live with the fact that you fucked over a perfectly innocent man (who you either never met or profess to love) and still consider yourself a good person, but it’s another to write about it and try to get others to agree with your bullshit rationalisations. That’s all any of this is; twisted rationalisations for why doing what was most expedient for me at the moment was the right thing to do ‘for everybody’s sake’.
It truly does make me want to vomit.
This man makes me want to puke.
What a fuckin’ deadbeat.
I apologize if my comment is long…. It’s a real life story that took place in the past couple of hours of Hugo and his values regarding debate, censorship, and banning.
At Hugo’s blog, a commenter Catie asked:
http://hugoschwyzer.net/2011/07/16/wrapping-up-spermgate/#comment-590614
“So does anyone have any idea why men are so interested in equating paternity issues with rape? This seems to be a trend in some of the responses to this story? Here’s one example from the Goodmen Project:”
I responded at:
http://hugoschwyzer.net/2011/07/16/wrapping-up-spermgate/#comment-590682
“@Catie,
“So does anyone have any idea why men are so interested in equating paternity issues with rape?”
I’ll give you my very quick thoughts on the subject, but I am sure there are others that can give you far longer, more nuanced, …
1. Informed consent. Ted was not able to give informed consent to his fatherhood. Jill and Hugo conspired to take that away from Ted. Think of you being given a roofie and then raped.
2. Use of coercion and force. From the very day the birth certificate is signed by Ted, regardless of the true nature of who the biological father is, Ted is on the hook financially until the child is 18 (and actually in some cases longer) for Hugo’s child. As you know this is not an insignificant burden and will effect Ted’s entire life. If he has a divorce, it will limit his dating choices, it will limit his career, it will limit his ability to travel, study, take new jobs.
If he cannot pay child support, the state will use ways to coerce him, regardless of ability to pay. He will be shamed on billboards, he may lose his driver’s license or other professional licenses, he may even end up in jail.
This can happen once the birth certificate is signed even if the court discovers that Hugo is the father.
The court will be able to do this because inevitably, the court can rely on the state to bring guns and other force to bear against Ted, regardless of his choice.
Many people, including women, believe this is at least as equivalent to many rapes as there can be.
This is why I ask, and I’ve asked this three times, and Hugo has NEVER responded: what does Hugo think in 2011, is his obligations to another person that he sees being harmed.
Does he have an obligation to stop a mugging he witnesses? To stop a rape? To stop fraud from being committed?
Hugo in 2011, still rationalizes, and excuses his behavior from 1997. He still thinks he made the right decision then. He doesn’t see now how he failed Ted or Alastair in any manner. His story is completely narcissistic and self-serving.
Hugo and Jill both lied to Ted and dramatically affected Ted’s life and took away the information Ted needed to make an informed decision. That lie is now backed up with shaming Ted and victim blaming Ted: if he were to find out and abandon Alastair, he is not a real father, he is not a real man. And that lie gave the state the power to jail and imprison Ted.
I apologize to you Catie for using the wikipedia, but here is what it says:
”
Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse, which is initiated by one or more persons against another person without that person’s consent. The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority or with a person who is incapable of valid consent.
In any allegation of rape, the absence of consent to sexual intercourse on the part of the victim is critical.[4] Consent need not be expressed, and may be implied from the context and from the relationship of the parties, but the absence of objection does not of itself constitute consent. Lack of consent may result from either forcible compulsion by the perpetrator or an incapacity to consent on the part of the victim (such as persons who are asleep, intoxicated or otherwise mentally helpless).[4][24] The law can also invalidate consent in the case of sexual intercourse with a person below the age at which they can legally consent to such relations with older persons. (See age of consent.) Such cases are sometimes called statutory rape or “unlawful sexual intercourse”, regardless of whether it was consensual or not, as people who are under a certain age in relation to the perpetrator are deemed legally incapable of consenting to sex.[4] Consent can always be withdrawn at any time, so that any further sexual activity after the withdrawal of consent constitutes rape.
Duress, in which the victim may be subject to or threatened by overwhelming force or violence, and which may result in absence of objection to intercourse, leads to the presumption of lack of consent.[24] Duress may be actual or threatened force or violence against the victim or somebody else close to the victim. Even blackmail may constitute duress. Abuse of power may constitute duress. For instance, in Philippines, a man commits rape if he engages in sexual intercourse with a woman “By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority”.[25] The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in its landmark 1998 judgment used a definition of rape which did not use the word ‘consent’: “a physical invasion of a sexual nature committed on a person under circumstances which are coercive….
”
@Catie, how is it that so many modern feminists cannot understand this? Whether it’s knowing and malicious false allegations of domestic violence, rape, or paternity fraud, how is it that so many feminists don’t understand why a man would feel “raped”, and destroyed, and shamed, and abused, and not develop all the symptoms of a rape victim?”
Hugo responded at:
http://hugoschwyzer.net/2011/07/16/wrapping-up-spermgate/#comment-590689
I let Anon’s comment through by mistake. Seriously, people: no more mention of any comparison between cuckoldry and rape. It’s an absurd and offensive equation, and I will delete all further comments arguing for even the most remote equivalence between the two.
And I responded with a post that was “under moderation” and then vanished. I can only assume I have been banned.
This was my post:
@Hugo, your last comment demonstrates how intellectually dishonest you are and what a poor and biased moderator you are. I wonder (or not) how that reflects your classroom behavior.
Catie specifically asked the question “So does anyone have any idea why men are so interested in equating paternity issues with rape?” and then she gave examples.
If you don’t want my response in your thread, you should delete Catie’s question, not mine or others.
Otherwise what you are left with is one person asking a question, and people with an opposing viewpoint not able to explain or defend their viewpoint. That’s intellectually dishonest and not fair.
Considering that my response was polite, on topic, and relevant, it’s also disrespectful and patronizing of your readers for you to suggest it was out of bounds and that you would delete similar responses.
Now, in the light of “Nixon goes to China”, or “We have to talk with our enemies to understand them, otherwise we would have no one to talk peace with”, it shows where the bias and agenda and propagandizing of your blog is. Toss out people who disagree, even when they are polite, on topic, and relevant. I, Hugo Schwyzer am not listening. Hands over ears. LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU.
You’re dishonest Hugo.
Not all women are trying to avoid being raped either: http://mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/2011/07/female-journalist-looks-to-be-raped.html
It’s possible that he just made this up to get attention. I’m serious. I think he’s a psychopath.
Ok, so..I am the child who was conceived by an affair my mother was having with Dad’s best friend and boss. SHe was unfaithful, and kept it a secret. BUT..guess what? As the middle of 3..the Dad who raised me, and I both knew INTUITIVELY we were not connected..we knew something was off. When I was 31, we had DNA testing to confirm it. My biological Dad knew all along, and never took any kind of ownership of me as his. It created an undertone of wounds, that I have finally healed. Human beings know the truth intuitively, and secrets cause chaos and confusion. It’s that simple.
http://www.lovechildstories.com
E
Know the article is kinda old now, but just curious if anyone has actually tried to hunt down Ted? I would just love to link him to the tale of Mr.Hugo, and see if Ted himself thinks “genetics don’t matter”, and that Hugo/Jill’s stunt was a-ok.
So, how much longer do we have to wait until the male birth control arrives on the market? Women were given absolute control over reproductive rights, and they proved “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” They are too many women who would feel right at home on “The Maury Povich Show.” This nonsense has gone on for far too long. I hope the feminists are happy they created a lot of broken families because of their delusional rhetoric. Anyone who can count to five can see the insanity by trusting women with control over reproduction.
Ah good old GiMP. Once again totally failing to see the things that make men truly good. Honor, justice, respect and compassion. Virtues demonstrated by men for so long and under increasingly dire and unfair retribution. Hugo fails at all of the above. He may possibly and very debatabley be a good woman, but Hugo is just not emotionally or intellectually capable of being a good man.
Misandric, spineless and thoughtless rubbish at its finest once again from the Good Dog Project