deleted by creator
That is a serious yikes from me…
You’re yikesing for the horrible take you’re replying to, right?
…right?
100% yes
So now the question is: would you rather have those kids fatherless and probably follow the father’s footsteps or have them have relatively normal childhood?
I’d rather not have those kids
deleted by creator
Am I responsible for all fatherless kids lmao? Honestly, rewarding a druggie by raising his kids he has all the legal rights to, and rewarding the chick for spreading eagle to aforementioned druggie by helping her raise two demons is the most pathetic shit I’ve heard of.
If you spend your whole life dedicated to not fixing anyone else’s problems, eventually they become your problem. And it’s usually a lot harder to fix then.
Sounds very poetic but it’s not true. Wont get me raising someone elses kids with an idiot
Fatherhood isn’t for everyone. There’s nothing wrong with not wanting that.
But being a misogynist and judgemental prick, referring to a woman as a “chick spreading eagle” and to children as “demons”… That’s a really sad existence. I hope you can learn to overcome your own insecurities and heal from whatever hurt you.
You aren’t responsible. But neither is the kid. Your entire post completely ignores the humanity and needs of the child, and your entire focus is on “rewarding” the parents you view as undeserving.
Turns out, life is hard, and it’s even harder for some people. If you don’t have the capacity to care or help them, that’s ok, you do you. But it’s pretty weird to judge others for being compassionate towards people you only know one thing about.
Considering the chick wanted kids with a druggie, I’d argue she wanted to be a single mom. I don’t know about you, but I sure never let a woman down.
I do have plenty of humanity, but people react to rewards and punishments, and in order to make the world a better place, everyone has the duty to gravitate others away from bad decisions and into good decisions.
I don’t want any kid to look at the fictional OP from the post and think, “hey, I can shoot my load anywhere, there’s always a loser willing to take care of my cum” or “hey I can get stuffed by whoever and there’s always some loser willing to take care of someone else’s cum”. Be responsible people.
Assuming someone wants kids with a druggie because they have kids together, without knowing their story, is a dick move.
Thanks for your opinion, I was really looking forward to it.
You are very much welcome.
Lol, what? So you shouldn’t help children because the jackass that gave them half of his genes is a drug addict? That’s insane. The male gene-giver should be paying to support them, but that’s what child support is for. Those kids (hypothetical kids, since it’s 4chan and probably fake) still need an actual father and the druggie sure as hell isn’t one.
deleted by creator
Happy for them but I could never see myself raising another person’s kids. Hell, I don’t even want my own kids to raise.
You wouldn’t be raising someone else’s kids…you’d be raising your own if that makes sense.
Until they hit 17, tell you they hate you and “ur not my real dad” and steal your car.
Yeah because every kid does that
This has the feeling of experience, not generalization.
Even if they’re your biological kid, you get “I hate you! You’re ruining my life!” before they steal your car. I don’t know that that’s much better. And it’s about as true.
The problem is that step parents have zero legal rights. If the marriage or relationship doesn’t work out, the step parent loses their entire family forever. It’s a raw deal for people brave enough to raise someone else’s kids. I could only ever consider this if I were able to legally adopt. That way, heaven forbid, things don’t work out with the relationship, they’re still my kids.
It doesn’t biologically which is what they were talking about
Removed by mod
On the bright side, you have the exact say on the kids you raise when they aren’t yours. If they are biological, you are stuck with whatever hand you are given. So if you don’t like their kids, you can leave with no issues. A family you choose can be better than a family you are born into.
Although yes, childless is the better option for some of us.
As a stepfather this sorta hurts my heart.
Anon made it sound too unbelievable. Should’ve toned it down a bit
A 6 year old riding his bike so far away from his mom they had to call her and wait for her to show up?
100% fake. 6 years olds are about when most kids start taking their training wheels off. They aren’t going off on solo excursions.
Didn’t say which country, here 6 yo definitely ride their bikes alone. At least when it’s like town center where cars normally aren’t even allowed.
Lol don’t bother, most north Americans will never understand. In my city a father had to fight in court for years for the right to let his 3 kids ride the bus alone. He was at risk of losing his kids for daring to teach them to be independent before they were old enough to drive.
We don’t even have spaces where a six year old could bike alone safely. Our cities fucking suck.
I don’t think other countries have Mountain Dew, do they?
Yes they do.
Of course: how else would they get to the mines?
At least when it’s like town center where cars normally aren’t even allowed.
Sounds like paradise. Can I ask what area you reside in?
In Germany, where people love cars but also love Fußgängerzonen (areas only for pedestrians) and Spielstraßen (literally translates into play street, you can only drive 10 km/h). Like these:
6 years olds are about when most kids start taking their training wheels off. They aren’t going off on solo excursions.
Nah plenty of 6 year olds ride around on bikes
I’m not saying 6 year olds don’t ride bikes. I’m saying they don’t ride their bikes unsupervised so far away from an adult that someone needs to call them on the phone if they fall.
I guess someone should have told me that when I was six and doing that very thing. Not everywhere is super afraid of letting kids go off to do their own thing (for better or worse).
A lot of US states have laws against leaving a child AT HOME unsupervised under a certain age, usually ranging from 9-12. In states without such laws, CPS typically responds to reports of that under the age of 12.
For allowing a child to roam the streets, it’s hard to find hard data because the exact age varies or sometimes is just evaluated on a case-by-case basis. There’s also a huge industry of providing quack advice to parents that dilutes search results. But I found this publication from the North Dakota state government saying that children should not ride their bikes ON STREETS until 10 years old. That’s not referring to them roaming around unsupervised, but being on the streets at all.
Sounds like you were neglected as a child. I’m sorry to hear that, and I hope things turned out okay for you in spite of this adverse circumstances.
Lol, playing outside without parents isn’t neglect.
USA is a weird place.
In Germany, children under the age of 16 aren’t allowed in restaurants unsupervised under the Jugendschutzgesetz.
UK laws don’t define a specific age, but leave it to judges to decide on a case-by-case basis. However, the NSPCC is a leading children’s advocacy group and they advocate 12 years old as the cutoff.
In Poland children under the age of 7 are not allowed to use public roads alone.
But let’s leave the “West”. In Saudi Arabia it’s illegal to rent out bicycles to unsupervised children under 12 for example. A lot of Islamic countries will have various laws based on Sin at-tamyiz, or the “age of discernment” for a child.
It’s not some crazy American idea that children under 12 need some sort of supervision. It doesn’t have to be a parent: when I was 6 I roamed around with my older cousins and siblings. But going out on your own into the world at the age of 6? In most places in the world that triggers some sort of agency to investigate for child neglect, or there are consequences for business owners allowing those children to do things.
Anon’s story reeks of small town. In rural US it’s not unusual for kids that young to be “free range”.
Why do these stories all tell us to “be them”? Can’t we just read about their adventure? Stop telling me who to be.
be youcomplain about how things be on 4chanFinally, someone telling me to be myself
Because they’re trying to convince people not to become domestic terrorists.
Bit late for all that
It’s just the style. It isn’t a command. It’s the format of green texts. I don’t know what else to tell ya.
be me
See idiot complaining about something stupid
laugh
still be me
First off great title. Secondly, does anyone else read the first letter of each line to make sure that don’t get John cenad or some stupid bullshit too?
I’ve never thought of that. Does that happen often?
Often enough to give me trust issues
I’ll have to keep an eye out for it.
If you read enough greentexts, yes
Why the fuck would you marry someone after only a year?
I know it’s a modern thing to wait many years before marriage, but living with someone for a year is plenty of time to know who they are as a person. Most people need to shit or get off the pot at that point but they don’t because apathy is easier.
Yep we were only living together for about a year indeed before I asked my wife to marry me. But we were also nearly 30 when we met, I think if you’re younger then waiting longer is better.
It doesn’t say they lived together for a year, it says a year after they met
I’m only going to say that bluntly, the only reason why myself and a few of my friends in long term relationships aren’t married, essentially boils down to two things: #1. Getting married is expensive. We’re all millennials and most of us are just trying to pay bills. #2. After you’ve crossed the threshold of “common law” here, there isn’t much of a point. Most common law partnerships have the same benefits with few exceptions. The legal/financial benefits of being married are almost entirely covered by being common law, so for the most part getting married is more about the statement of being married (eg, “this is my wife/husband” type thing, though, several unmarried people I know use those terms anyways), and having a wedding to show off or whatever.
The people in my circles tend to value people who stick around out of desire to help eachother than from some vow or perceived obligation because you’re married or whatever. We see family the same way, if you’re a toxic person and you expect me to put up with your shit because we share more chromosomes than I do with the rest of the population, than you’re in for a rude awakening. The strongest bonds I have, are from facing the perils of life, standing along side my friends. We may not be blood relatives, but we’re family; these friends have been a better family to me and I to them than their biological brothers/sisters/mothers/fathers.
Bluntly, I don’t see how a legal document could make what we already have any better than it already is. That being said, there are some very specific legal benefits in my country to being married vs common law. Because of that, I will eventually sign the paperwork. My SO and I will likely just get it signed at city Hall and throw a big party/reception after.
The people in my circles tend to value people who stick around out of desire to help eachother than from some vow or perceived obligation because you’re married or whatever.
Maybe this is a cultural or generation difference, but I do not expect my partner to stick around because of some vow, I except my partner to stick around because of love. If the day comes when that love is gone, I would not want my partner to live with me. Marriage is out of love, not need, for me at least.
Bluntly, I don’t see how a legal document could make what we already have any better than it already is.
I see it as way for me tell my partner how much I am willing to commit, to say that “I REALLY want to be with you”. Call it a proof of our love, if you will. Another way to express our love.
It’s not just about who you are. Modern life is full of instability, but most relevant here I think is future plans. It might make sense to be together today but career paths, opportunities, desire to live near family or friends, things that we want, can all change with time. This is especially true for young people today, with the unprecedented income inequality and expense of basic housing. When you’re just trying to get your feet under you it’s hard to imagine getting married, and you don’t know if you’ll still want the same things in a few years. It’s not apathy, it’s pragmatism.
Because you love your partner and your partner loves you?
I married my wife just under 12 months from meeting her. We’ve been together for 21 years and she’s my best friend. Sometimes you just know
Once women hit 30 or so they’ve known their share of shitheads and losers and most just want a decent guy if they’re single. From what I hear the dating landscape for women at 40+ is absolutely bleak.
My Facebook is a graveyard of single 30 something friends who dumped dozens of great guys because they didn’t tick every box on a 100 item checklist. Now they’re panicking because their clock is ticking and no one wants them because they’re shallow and desperate. A few have settled but it’s clear they’re both miserable. No one wants to feel like the 76th best option.
Ya, my wife’s best friend is over 40 and her standards for a guy are like the bare minimum of being an acceptable person. Its sad because she is One of the most beautiful, intelligent, and kind women I’ve ever met.
Oh hamburgers, we should make a Hallmark movie out of this… because everyone with half a brain knows this is made up
wishful thinking
Hope you don’t get too attached to kids that aren’t yours anon. You have no custody or parental rights and are one big fight away from having them exit your life. Or like, the return of the original Chad who decided to get cleaned up and even years later, you know she’ll forgive the father of her children.
Being a substitute dad is a huge mistake, but i guess someone’s gotta do it. I certainly wouldn’t.
You have no custody or parental rights
Also no obligations. He can get divorced and not have to worry about paying child support.
Or he can choose to adopt them, which would grant those custody and paternal rights.
Would you be looking at this differently if the children weren’t hers? If she had no kids, Anon was shooting blanks, and they just decided to go to an orphanage and adopt?
It’s not about what you’re obligated to, it’s about the emotional attachment to children that won’t necessarily remain in your life.
As for adoption, you try that with a person you’ve known for a year or less, see how that works out for you. But yes, if they agree, then sure, i think adoption is fair.
What is not fair is having someone responsible for and bonding with your kids, regardless of gender, and never giving them parenrsl rights.
If they adopted kids it would be their kids, so no issue.
deleted by creator
If not wanting parental responsibilities without parental rights is not being right, I’m ok with that.
Anon cucks himself
