29 year old Father Claims To Have 21 Children

Post Reply New Topic

how is it winning if you don't want what he has? that makes no sense at all. if someone wins a contest and gets to see Justin Bieber live, i don't consider that winning because i don't want to go. i consider that losing!

it's not feminist to have a guy use you and leave you to hold the baby- that has been happening for as long as some men have wanted to use women for sex (google "sociopath"). you are misattributing some people's stupid choices (or their sociopathic tendencies) to feminism, and your logic is so flawed that it is weird to even debate with you.

i noticed you ignored the fact that you will probably benefit from this new kind of economy at some point in your life. perhaps you enjoy the benefits but want to turn the feminist clock back at the same time, but that would not work. thank goodness.

this post is full of stereotypes and chauvinism. You're basing your entire argument on non-scientific evidence; a single puff piece article. Has it occurred to you that Journalists tend to publish articles that reinforce current stereotypes?

Furthermore, partially in response to the "Idiocracy" argument, this "intelligent" vs. "dumb" argument is quickly turning into the 21st century version of white supremacy in my opinion.

Where is the scientific evidence that these people are stupid? If welfare recipients are growing, then this would most likely be due to a faulty system (which would be naturally rectified in time once it failed completely). Where is the evidence that these people, your so called "alpha males", are less intelligent than you? You've got nothing. The only thing that is somewhat certain is that they have a completely different culture, but culture does not mediate intelligence, I'm sorry to inform you.

Nope, I am contemplating abandoning my career for an easier job.

Going Galt.

There is no sense working hard in this system for the benefit of others. I do have a internet business idea that I'm working on the side. If that takes off I am going to expatriate to a country with more sensible tax laws.

Either way I'll let you harpies work and pay to keep this system going.

You racist!

Was that sarcasm? I don't get how that statement was racist...

Or maybe these 11 women had no brain cells or had low self esteem so they would sleep with anything that walked..

It can be played both ways. Hale_Bopp seems like a smart person so I would think these 11 females are more suspect than she..

It's especially strange considering that their ancestors were writing books while mine were backward, illiterate farmers and hunter-gatherers in Europe and North America.

But you're making it sound like this is something that's only started to happen recently ... which is not the case. This has always been happening throughout the history of mankind. If you couldn't charm your way into a woman's pants, you couldn't have children.

That man may be considered a loser in your standards but he is sexually a hero in the eyes of those women who got to be f*cked by him ... and that's why they agreed to having sex with him in the first place!

It doesn't matter what your modern standards are. A lot of "Don Juans" will always be considered douchebags in the eyes of society even while they successfully insert their penises into every p**** they come into contact with. This was like that in the past and will continue to be the way it has always been ... just in different manifestations and under different man-made rules and regulations.

Welcome to the world of real evolutionary theories (instead of feminized evolutionary ideas).

Like I said, there were severe negative consequences for the women who mated with them (poverty). The rest of society wasn't forced to subsidize that kind of behavior.

You are making it sound as if there's a great portion of guys are dying single and dateless because of this, that's not true. Look around you, ,more than 90% of guys are having girlfriends ,partners or wives during their lifetime.


The problem is in us, and not because some guys are mating with 10 and so of girls.

You are completely wrong,

The percentage of people who get married has been dropping for decades throughout the western world, while the percentage of people living alone has gone up dramatically.

This is in addition to the very high levels of divorce.

The reasons are complex, but sexual immorality and the destruction of the family caused by the welfare state are often sited as a major cause.

I am arguing that socially awkward males are baring the brunt of this trend as more and more females become single parents dependent on the government following their flings with the "bad boys".

There is no reason why men who cannot find wives in this disgusting society should be forced to pay taxes for the irresponsibility and recklessness of the matriarchy.

The man in the article is the worst kind of parasite possible. Most parasites simply weaken the host by diverting a small percentage of nutrients from the body for its own purpose.

This man on the other hand, has terminated the genetic lines of multiple men and simultaneously forced those men to surrender part of their labor for the upbringing of his progeny.

Violent revolutions and wars have been fought over less injustices.

In nature animals will instinctually destroy threats to their germline like this man represents.

If this $#$t keeps up, we will get the law of the jungle and no amount of shouting about "women's rights" is going to prevent the inevitable.

If women want their freedom to F$ck men like this they are going to have to do it on their own dime.

The moment you reach into my pocket to pay for your choices is the moment you surrender your freedom to make those choices.

Actually, it did. Guys like this are nothing new. Society would absorb the children and the woman would lie about being raped or that another man was the father. There was not a way to prove otherwise.

Be thankful for DNA tests and child support laws. Now accusations can be proven and the guy recklessly spreading his seed will be hounded for the rest of his life.

-I disagree. Since so many women think he is a 'good provider' and you are single and reproductive he is 'better than you.' Humans have always reproduced in a society. Your job is to pay for HIS KIDS. Being a 'good' provider is not related anymore. I agree.
-Morally this is QUITE offensive. But since destroying and rebuilding society on your terms is both impossible and dangerous, as well as having a 0% chance of success, I don't see what your answer is.
-I'd recommend either a wife from a 3rd world country, or madness.

in pre-contact inuit/eskimo society, there were sometimes men who would play sick and stay home from hunting and fishing. while at home, they would seduce women of the village. these men would procreate copiously and other men would have to raise their children (if unaware of the parentage).

there is nothing new about this situation.

such players would be lured out onto the ice and pushed into the water, but anyways. not the point. the point is that the problem is not caused by feminism or the welfare state (the inuit were about the furthest froma welfare state that you could imagine). the problem is caused by the dark underbelly of human nature, and the personal choices that result from that.

A few people have made a link to the welfare state and the epidemic of irresponsible men fathering children that they then abandoned. If you look at society pre-welfare state, say for example, at the England of 1900 roughly, there were still a lot of charming players that charmed the pants off of girls, but the incentives were different. For a young girl of a working-class background, marriage was often the only way ahead. A high percentage worked at low-paying factory or retail jobs where an unwed pregnancy would cause them to lose their jobs. A high percentage worked as domestic servants, and the same dynamics worked there. A surprisingly high percentage were prostitutes. In such a poor society, a little money could buy a lot of sex, so the mistress on the side was a common acquisition for an affluent man. In that society before computers, picture IDs, and DNA tests, it was much easier for a man to abandon his children and re-surface somewhere else with a new identity.

Eh, some states presume the husband is the father regardless of genetic ties, other states assume the father listed on the birth is the father and if he doesn't go to court to prove otherwise within a certain time period he is liable for CS regardless of genetic ties.

In these cases the genetic father isn't always liable for child support. This claim of your's isn't universal, I don't even know if it's safe to say it exists at all.