u/bigdonut100

Perspective: ...which was to be expected, because I get an argument when I shoot for the compromise of "50% custody and no child support in any direction."

Just the fact that I get *an* argument. ANY argument against it.

One guy claimed that I was "treating the child as property so I don't have to pay." As if the situation that involves less or no money changing hands is closer to treating the child as property somehow, and as if he wasn't insisting on treating raising a child as if it were a job.

One guy claimed it was a totally irrelevant red herring or mott and bailey. That guy later said "you don't think the father should have to take some responsibility?" as if I'm not allowed to turn that into a conversation about what form that responsibility should take. Like if he slipped on my icey driveway and broke his neck, and I said "You get to hold me responsible for that via taking me to court, not by making me your sex slave or breaking into my house or something weird like that, because 8th-amendment-y-reasons" he would be totally lost.

But I don't think your going to be able to wriggle out of it if I talk about "stay at home dads" explicitly because Feminists are supposed to pretend to care about that.

Because if you were convinced of something via nonreason, it might be impossible to reason you out of it. And on some level, thinking the parent that wants to do the most wholesome thing possible, raise 50% of their own children, is somehow the asshole compared to the one who literally wants the other want to write them a check, that was evidence enough of your nonreason.

So the whole thing was a waste of time from the start, and a "fuck you get with the program" approach was always the only thing that had a hope of working in response to your "fuck you get with the program" approach.

Because Feminism isn't the can't-we-all-get-along-under-the-rainbow answer, Men's rights is and always was. Men's rights is a 7 year old girl saying "Even if 100% of rapists are men, pwese be nice to my daddy," Feminism is "we can profile men in a way we cannot profile any other group," "you don't get a cookie for being a good human being," "we don't need evidence for a rape claim" and pretending THAT is where what little patience we have for the hippie "cant we all get along" argument should be dumped, when you don't even have the practical argument either.

Now I have to figure out how to censor this post in the radfem subreddit I've been trolling that is trolling me back by not letting me post unless I censor words like "men"

Also if you didn't know Mike Judge made an equal-but-opposite to King of the Hill with David Van Driessen as the man-of-the-house instead of Tom Anderson (the goode family) now you know.

EDIT: And I mean this about non public radio too, like classic rock stations via the internet.

Perspective: If Zoey Quinn wants comments on the internet treated as seriously as rape, maybe I do too.