sapphi_snake said:
Several points: A. The woman didn't randomly find the sperm on the ground, and I'm not aware that the guy told her she can keep the sperm. As I said, she could've decieved him by saying she would dispose of the sperm. B. If the sperm really was her property, the outcome of what she did with it shouldn't affect him. It's not important that the baby is a human being. The man did not participate in the conception of the child, therefore the child is not his responsability. C. The woman concieved the baby deliberately and artificialy, using the man's sperm, but without his consent. Since the result of this process obviously affected him, he should've been consulted before the act was commited. Essetially he's a sper donor and, if I'm not mistaken, you need legal documents attesting that the donor consented to having his sperm used for the conception of a child, before you can go through with IFV. If this was done at a clinic, and they did not ask where the sperm came from, and if the person who produced it consented or not to having his sperm used, then he should be able to sue both the clinic and the woman, as fraud was commited. As I said, you can't have it both ways: you can't say that the sperm became her property, but he has to suffer the consequences of her actions. D. What does my racist, sexist, homophobic culture have to do with this? Over here it's essentially impossible to for a man to get custody of his children, and that's even if the mother is insane (I know of such a case). Also, there's no way this guy would've gotten off not paying child support, even if the woman had raped him (I'm not even sure it's considered that a woman can rape a man in the Romanian legal system). E. I'm gay?! O_O I did not know that... Wonder why no one has told me up 'till now? |
A) Well this first point is just... irrelevent.
B) Right, it wasn't. What did effect him however was when the kid was born. Since the Kid is no longer DNA but his biological son.
C) Where you are mistaken is that one crime does not nessisairly totally rule out other laws. Nor does it destory the rights of a third party. IE) The Child.
D) Sounds like a problem with Romania. Shit like that happens in anti-female societies like yours. In a few cases they protect women because women in mother rights because they see them as the only thing they should be doing.
To complain about something that women get because of their descrimination EVERYWHERE ELSE is ridiculiously stupid. It's like complaining that more black men get introductory jobs and welfare because they aren't aloud to have later laws.
ESPIECALLY in a system like yours that is extremly sexist AND has extremly backwords marriage laws, effectivly removing most women from the workplace via social pressure AND robbing them of any value as a wife and homemaker by robbing them of their due property in a divorce basically making them completely dependent on the husband, no matter how big of a douche they turn into.
Doesn't really happen in the US or Europe. Except possibly France Italy. It's shocking the shit that happens in France.
E) Oh, my mistake. In that case your sexism is much more understandable.
