| alekth said: Well, damn if you do, damn if you don't. Remembering the wikileaks case, if a man tricks a woman to get her sperm into her, that's wrong (with which I agree), but if a woman tricks a man to get his sperm into her, he should have been more careful? Joint property is perfectly fine in a more traditional marriage. Try disputing it in Japan where women are still expected to quit their job when a baby comes along, stay out of the job at least until kid is 4 y/o and then be expected to take a part-time job at most. Many of them want just that though, just as many men want their wife to take care of their kids, have a perfect household while they earn the money. Prenups are certainly fine nowadays if both parties are in the clear what they are going to be giving and taking from that marriage. |
If the man specifically said "I do not want this to be used to have a child."
You'd have a point.
Though even still... it would not be a full point... since the man's contribution has ended at this point.
The woman was being violated physically while he ejaculated.
A similar case would be if some woman tied you down and raped you and then forced you to pay child support.
That is a case.... she would not win.
