Wednesday, April 09, 2008

The lollipop theory.


"Field have you ever seen a half eaten lollipop?"




A girlfriend of mine used to ask me that question. When I asked her what that was supposed to mean, she explained to me that a man will use something up until he can't use it anymore. If he sees something he likes he will always go back for more. Thus the half eaten lollipop theory. "A man will never really break up with a woman" she used to tell me, "because as long as she lets him he will always go back for more lollipop". Okay, I must confess that the "half eaten lollipop theory" never really made much sense to me, I always figured that it was a woman thing and you would have to be one to really understand it.


But now, as I get older, I think I am starting to get it a little more. I am starting to see how it plays itself out in more dangerous and sobering ways.


So having said all of that that, I have a question for the women reading this:


If you have two children by a man---- let's say they are two years apart, and five years later you find yourself alone and not receiving any financial or emotional support from him. And for whatever reason, let's say he comes back into your life. Do you now have yet another child with him, the same man? And after you have that child, do you now sue him for support for all three children, and then damn the court system when they can't force him to pay because he doesn't have a pot to piss in?


I mean if you have the potential to be a lollipop, shouldn't you make sure that you know when to tell the eater to stop.


I am just wondering. Sometimes I have to try and find ways to blog about real life shit. And sometimes you folks have to give me some real answers.






84 comments:

Anonymous said...

NO you do not have yet another child with him, the same man. The woman is not thinking of the child or her future.

I personally believe it is a form of mental illness that drives women to have child after child with men who care less for them even less for the child they produce.

I have conversations with women who continue to procreate with no hope of a family unit in sight and it does not follow any logic it is an emotional minefield.

Get the sex if it is good but no need to mix that with bring a child into the world.

Can you also ask why it is so easy for men to discard their children in the face of the known tragedies their lack of presence brings.

innercityrose said...

Well I think the woman is thinking..she is stupidly thinking with her heart and not her head. Love or what you perceive as love makes you do some crazy a** things sometimes that even you can't explain at times... I think it's low self esteem more then I think mental illness though. When you learn to love yourself you can see pass the BS and want more for yourself and cut him off.

field negro said...

"Can you also ask why it is so easy for men to discard their children in the face of the known tragedies their lack of presence brings."

CONSIDER IT ASKED!!!

A.F. said...

I agree, it's a perplexing question, and I don't have children because I could not ever afford to give even one a really fair shake in life (and now I'm 40).

But can't the question be rephrased, too:

If you're a man and you have two children that you cannot support, then do you go back and get the same (or another) woman pregnant with a third?

Hathor said...

Something is in the culture that's preventing the use of birth control? Relationship motives are unanswerable.

A.F. said...

"Can you also ask why it is so easy for men to discard their children in the face of the known tragedies their lack of presence brings."

I have to comment on this, too. Yes, as the child of a single mother and a father who never acknowledged my existence, whom I've never met (I could have, but it was his choice not to), and who never paid a penny, I can attest that there are inavoidable lifelong problems for children with absent fathers. My mother could have easily pressed the court system but did not, and though there was real financial hardship as a result, I don't think that was as bad as the resulting emotional factors.

Okay, Field, phew, I think I have it all off my chest now :)

Aziza said...

Well, Field, some of the women don't understand the Lollipop concept either.

As long as the guy keeps coming back, in the minds of some women, they believe that the guy will eventually commit to them on some type of level with marriage not even being in the picture. Yes, this can go on for years. They will take love in any shape, way or form. But is it really love? I can't seem to understand why a cousin of mine accepts this kind of treatment. Her answer is that she loves him. But does he love and care about her and their two kids? *sigh*

Anonymous said...

I vote NO as well. If he isn't taking care of the first two children I think it's pretty safe to say you're a FOOL for having a 3rd one. I think it's also pretty selfish because if you're already struggling to provide for the 1st two because of his lack of support, ultimately all of your children are going to suffer if you add a 3rd child to the mix. There is also no blaming this on abstinence only education. after the first child, you have to have figured out where they come from.

Finally, if dude is STILL engaging in unprotected sex when he already has 2 kids, I'm pretty sure the "known tragedies" are not very high on his list of priorities. However, cutting raw obviously is. Can't begin to tell you why, though. I no longer wrack my brain about things that are illogical. I get too upset.

field negro said...

a.f. I did rephrase the question, because believe me, the men are equal partners. Literally!

In this particuler instance though, and the reality is that the woman is often the custodial parent, and is therefore the one who is always cursing the system for not getting her support.

Maybe I was too cryptic with my post, but that was the primary issue that prompted it. Today was a rough day for that on the plantation, and I just thought I would vent.

shonufded said...

If the lollipop is your sucker, or if you're a sucker for the lollipop.

My advice to you: Keep the wrapper on the lollipop!

blackwomenblowthetrumpet.blogspot.com said...

Greetings to all who are in this discussion!

I think that often black women continue to have children with the man who didn't marry them when they had the OTHERS is because they are in denial... they think to themselves "he's more settled now so he'll stay with me if I get pregnant THIS time..." and then they get pregnant and he does exactly what he did before: abandonment.

I do believe that some women just have a poorly developed sense of self and having children gives them something in the world to claim as "my own". I also think that many black women do not admit that they have children just to have someone to love them.

There are many reasons.

As for my speculation about why men abandon their kids...the men I have talked to said that they just didn't care anything about the mother and they viewed the baby as a part of HER not a part of them. Hmmmm.... sounds very ignorant but if that's someone's truth then I can't say that it is bogus for the person who truly believes it.

Well, that's it for my arm-chair psychology! I'll send you my bill! LOL

Lisa

Aziza said...

A couple of weeks ago, I saw a news clip about a sister who has a project called "Marry Your Baby Daddy." She admits that the title is a little off, but the concept behind it is to get folks who have kids together to get married and provide some sense of commitment and stability to the family unit.

But what threw me off a bit was the guy's answer to a question. They asked him why he had not married the mother of his kids sooner. They had about 2 or 3 kids. He said that he didn't know whether she was the woman for him all those years. *blank stare* I guess he had earlier on decided that she was good enough to sleep with though. *sigh*

A.F. said...

"Today was a rough day for that on the plantation, and I just thought I would vent."

I understand, and believe me, your straight-to-the-point venting never fails to make my day! Hell, your "house" and "field" distinctions have showed me a whole new reality, one that gets right to the point. And I know it's a damn hard job you do in the day time hours! Peace. A.F.

jp said...

Something is in the culture that's preventing the use of birth control? Relationship motives are unanswerable.

The church and the guilt trip they throw on young women about their sexuality. It's persuasive in the black community IMO, even among the no church going, who get these values from their mother.

A lot of this is a self esteem thing, and to be honest a scarcity thing, so many of black men serving time because of the nonsencial war on drugs, the available black men are low. A lot of women don't feel they have the leverage to keep one all to herself.

jp said...

But what threw me off a bit was the guy's answer to a question. They asked him why he had not married the mother of his kids sooner. They had about 2 or 3 kids. He said that he didn't know whether she was the woman for him all those years. *blank stare* I guess he had earlier on decided that she was good enough to sleep with though. *sigh*

Any reasonably attractive woman with a wet vagina is good enough for most men to sleep with. Men are looking for something special to wife though.

SingaporeSwim said...

There s/b a draconian law...Folks should only be allowed to bear children if/when they're responsible and emotionally/financially stable.

It's the height of selfishness to use kids to fill voids of loneliness and lovelessness and to use them as pawns. As it is, it happens all of the time.

Some men will lick/eat the lollipop as often as it's offered and some women only offer it up when they need some lovin' and attention or some cha-ching.

Maternal instincts are strong and bear the promise of unconditional love but a woman who has child after child w/a man who hasn't the desire or resources to care for her or their child(ren) has a flawed impetus and agenda.

She does not care to understand or come to terms with the psychology of her decisions/actions. What she cares about is not necessarily having his permanent presence in her life, by virtue of their offspring, but the s-e-x and the trumped up bragging rights of having his babies.

marci said...

they are both totally irresponsible....
after wasting my tax dollars bringing this mess to court... if i was on the jury.. i would have them both sterilised...
am sure this would be a great deterrent for others wanting to do this too..

i have no time for these people..
*dismissively waving them away with my hand*

SingaporeSwim said...

jp said: Any reasonably attractive woman with a wet vagina is good enough for most men to sleep with. Men are looking for something special to wife though.

And therein lies one of the problems. If it's true that most men are looking for "something special" in a wife then, if you believe the stats about low marriage rates among blacks, are u suggesting that black men don't consider black women special enough to marry and that black women don't seek and shouldn't expect "something special" too when it comes to a spouse?

Blinders Off said...

Field,

No! She should not have another child by the man. There are more than one scenario to answer why some women does what she do. I believe the main reason a woman keep having children by the same man who does not have a pot to piss in is because a piece of a man is better than no man at all. I sum that up to low self-esteem and not loving herself.

As for some women who never take their baby daddy to court for child support

1. She gets more being on the system and he is benefitting from that.

2. She is an immature child herself having a baby or babies.

3. She is following her mother’s example

4. The list can go on and on, but

The reality of it all...is the cycle must stop of women having babies by men who are not going to be around and men need to stop making babies for the same reason. Sometimes I think many men believe making babies by different women or a woman, is what makes him a man.

Finally,

There many women who just made a mistake thinking they had a real man, but they correct that mistake by kicking him to the curb and taking care of the child or children without being on the system because they have their act together. Most men do not know when they have a real woman until it is too late.

Hathor said...

jp,

Any reasonably attractive woman with a wet vagina is good enough for most men to sleep with. Men are looking for something special to wife though.

So women having sex, reduces their value?

What kind of bass ackward statement is that?

WildMagnolia said...

Women should never continue to have children with a man that is too immature to help her care for them. Her own immaturity and need to fill a void in her life supercedes logical thinking, though.

Men... Unfortunately, I have experience with being abandoned. WHY did my father abandon me? Because he could? He never was taught to nurture or put much value on it? Or could it be his internal conflict brought on by his powerlessness in this world rendering him impotent to express true devotion to anyone? Or is he just an ass that doesn't give a damn about anybody other than himself?

I guess there could be a million different reasons. Bottom line is none of them matter. They're all nothing but excuses anyway.

X

Jody said...

Hmmmm... a couple of things strike me in this thread... first, sounds like you are dealing with two adults who are BOTH emotionally immature, playing out a dance without thinking, planning, and taking responsiblity.
What I am far more interested in is how you create the best of this bad situation for the children. How you get to those kids to let them know that their parents behavior is NOT the way to behave when they become sexually active. Seems that in addition to trying to work for financial stability for the kids, counseling for ALL of them should be required as a part of the resolution!

Second, how ironic that gay couple s who want to create families that are protected by the same laws as straight folks, who DO, by biological neccesity PLAN families, are the ones being legally denied.

Oh yea, thinking of women as any "object" is also a part of the problem.

Anonymous said...

Stupidity is why a woman gets pregnant with a third baby when she is alone struggling to take care of the first two. But a man's sense of his own tragic lack of responsibility and a VASECTOMY would keep it from happening.

Aziza said...

"Any reasonably attractive woman with a wet vagina is good enough for most men to sleep with. Men are looking for something special to wife though."

I've heard old men say that is just an excuse to get out of responsibility so that one can stay a little boy in a candy store.

They further went onto say that any man who is worth his salt would properly care for his woman and children.

The old, wise men who speak this have been married for at least 30 to 50 years to black women. I believe them.

Anonymous said...

Lack of a man in a boy's life doesn't hurt him -- it's lack of parenting. Poverty plus single-income means that his parent doesn't have as much time to spend with him.

Historically, there have been many societies where kids were reared with only contact from one gender or another.

The reason we have single parent households now -- we can afford it. A woman can walk away, does not need to do whatever it takes to keep a man in her life for the sake of her kids.

Those folks field is talking about are willfully delusional. The man don't care about nothing more than his dipstick. And the woman is deluding herself in thinking SOMETHING -- maybe he's better now, maybe something else.

OTOH, she might have been on birth control herself. In which case, don't blame her so much.

SagaciousHillbilly said...

Damn Field. I was going to make fun of your post that you tried to make "real life," but these are some of the best and most informative repsonses I've seen.
You know how to bring out the best.

Hope everyone will check out:
http://stuffwhitepeopledo.blogspot.com/

Some interesting stuff over there.

The Christian Progressive Liberal said...

Field, I think most women would tell the guy to keep stepping if he's abandoned her before.

OTOH, I've seen this dilemma within my own family and I'm seeing the cycle repeating with my female cousins.

The guy saddles her with kids, and leaves. If she's lucky or blessed to find a decent man that is willing to take on her and her kids, the kids' father usually walks back into the picture for the sole purpose of jacking up the situation.

It is not that he's really planning to reconcile and become the responsible human being he should have been - it is more like a "thing" with the men when they see their ex with another man.

It reminds me of how a dog "marks his spot" by pissing on a patch of grass, scratches up dirt on it and looks at any other dog as if to say "Mine, SOB, Mine's!"

He can't have - no one else is damned well going to have her, either.

So the woman either convinces herself to return to the first fool, and kicks a good brotha to the curb.

One year later, when the fool believes his competition has taken a hike, he's confident in leaving, too. I think that's what your former girlfriend meant by the "half a lollipop" concept.

Women basically want to believe the man they love returns that love and will often accept a lot of bad treatment that is usually prefaced with "I'm Sorry, please take me back" to sugarcoat letting him back into the door.

As for having another kid with this fool, my own perception would be one of major distrust, because in the back of my head, I'm thinking "When will he leave again?" of "What might make him leave so I won't do it?" For me, the stress would be too much, and I'd probably be too angry to take him back, anyway.

If we break up for good, then I don't care to see you in my face six months later when you've told me it's over and no chance of reconciliation. The Good Lord would have to drop the possibility of reconciliation in my heart, and then He would have to work on the man - otherwise, when it's over, for me, IT'S OVER. THE END. PERIOD.

And women who willingly engage on this Merry-Go-Round, hoping that brotha will do better, but probably won't - her friends and family telling her to watch herself, and she ignores their advice; and finally a "get yo act together" lecture from her mother or grandmother, which she also ignores, and you have a vicious cycle where innocent children become the victims.

Dang, Field, you always post these essays and keep a sista on her toes by facilitating good thinking processes, for which I humbly thank you.

Guess that's why I come here first in the mornings, along with my latte, LOL.

jp said...

So women having sex, reduces their value?

What kind of bass ackward statement is that?

Thats not what I trying to say. Its a statement about men, and their view on sex. The point being the subset of women a man will go to bed with is larger than the subset he'll married. It's not that anything is wrong with the woman, just for what even reason, stupid or valid a lot of men are really selective about who they marry. Also, I'm not consigning men creating kids they don't take care, that is immoral.

Anonymous said...

"Any reasonably attractive woman with a wet vagina is good enough for most men to sleep with. Men are looking for something special to wife though."

Just because a man sleeps with a woman doesn't mean he wants to commit to her for the rest of his life, or start a family. The same applies to women. It takes an adult to make that type of commitment and show that type of maturity and love. It takes two adults to make a marriage work. There are too many 30 year old+ children out there. I'd also like to add that IMHO, too many women (girls/ children?) are attracted to dogs (also known as the "bad-boy"). If dog-like behavior (fleas, if you will) is what attracted the child to the boy in the first place then how can she complain about the itch years later? If black women ( little girls) weren't attracted to fleas on their dogs (bad-boys) then they'd be less likely to get that type of itch. Let's all take some responsiblity for our own immaturity. This also obviously goes for the "bad-boys" that abandon their children. But I really feel like if these girls weren't attracted to that itch, that drama, those immature boys then we'd have a lot less broken families as a community. Am I being unfair?

innercityrose said...

"There many women who just made a mistake thinking they had a real man, but they correct that mistake by kicking him to the curb and taking care of the child or children without being on the system because they have their act together. Most men do not know when they have a real woman until it is too late."

This is my story after having ONE child with this man.

Also, would just like to throw this in the ring.. what happens to the little girl now a grown woman, whose father abandoned her, who doesn't know what he looks like or sounds like etc... could it be the fear of yet another man in her life abandoning her which is why she hangs on so tightly to the knucklehead and takes him back??? Something to think about.

jp said...

I've heard old men say that is just an excuse to get out of responsibility so that one can stay a little boy in a candy store.

They further went onto say that any man who is worth his salt would properly care for his woman and children.

The old, wise men who speak this have been married for at least 30 to 50 years to black women. I believe them.


This is true for the most part. Today there is very little social pressure for anyone of any race to get married. The white marriage rate is declining a lot too, the number of birth to unmarried parents among them is increasing. People want perceived perfection when they walk down the aisle now, that probably wasn't true 30-50 years ago. Also, feminism told women to get educated, go and work for yourself, and enjoy pleasure. This is a great thing for the individual, but I think bad for marriage. With all of this said, properly caring for children is a moral responsibility and be damn with anyone who doesn't meet it but brings them into the world.

jp said...

Just because a man sleeps with a woman doesn't mean he wants to commit to her for the rest of his life, or start a family. The same applies to women. It takes an adult to make that type of commitment and show that type of maturity and love. It takes two adults to make a marriage work. There are too many 30 year old+ children out there. I'd also like to add that IMHO, too many women (girls/ children?) are attracted to dogs (also known as the "bad-boy"). If dog-like behavior (fleas, if you will) is what attracted the child to the boy in the first place then how can she complain about the itch years later? If black women ( little girls) weren't attracted to fleas on their dogs (bad-boys) then they'd be less likely to get that type of itch. Let's all take some responsiblity for our own immaturity. This also obviously goes for the "bad-boys" that abandon their children. But I really feel like if these girls weren't attracted to that itch, that drama, those immature boys then we'd have a lot less broken families as a community. Am I being unfair?

I agree with this completely also. A lot of black girls demand undivided attention of their men all the time, don't go to school(even though I do it), don't do anything to make yourself better in your younger years and when they get to be certain age they turn around and complain the men haven't accomplished anything outside of the relationship in their lives.

jp said...

Also, would just like to throw this in the ring.. what happens to the little girl now a grown woman, whose father abandoned her, who doesn't know what he looks like or sounds like etc... could it be the fear of yet another man in her life abandoning her which is why she hangs on so tightly to the knucklehead and takes him back??? Something to think about.

This cuts both ways. A lot of men run from commitment because they don't have a family example to show them how to be committed.

Anonymous said...

I work for a child support agency and if I had a nickel for every time this scenario occurs, I could quit my job.

There is one part of this scene that was left out of the script. After the woman has the third child and tries to collect support off the man (who she knew had no job) through the agency, she blames the agency for how little money she gets.

I frequently want to say to them, "If you wanted Donald Trump support money, you should have slept with Donald Trump!" Of course, I can't say that.

Anonymous said...

If this was me, Hell to the No! I would not have him in my bed under any circumstances after the first baby he didn't support. But he also has an obligaton and duty to support his children without being told to do so and to make sure he doesn't have more children than he can afford!!!!

Anonymous said...

"As for some women who never take their baby daddy to court for child support....."

In my case, I refuse to sit in a court for 4-6 hours to get an order against my ex-husband who will not pay nor has he paid for his 5 other children. ( 5 children which are no more than 7-10 years younger than I am. He was 10 years older and from a different state.) I act as if he is dead along with his Momma who knew about the other children. I do not discourage him from seeing his daughters but I encourage him. Why? I want my girls to know what a low down lying snake a man can be. Not that he has showed up more than 5 times in 15 years. Guess they know what he is!!!

I flourish NOT survive, as if he were dead. I am educated, professionally employed and a homeowner who, in the words of Robin Harris " wears my ring on the wrong hand because I married the wrong GDdammed man."

How did I find out about the other children? When my oldest girl went to visit her grandparents her uncle ( daddy's brother from the army) asked had she met her brother and sisters. Well Well now!

DO YOU KNOW SOME FOOL (FORMER FRIEND) SAID I SHOULD STAY FOR THE CHILDREN? Women can be crazy, because I was trying to figure which children she referring to.

P.S.
I kept that ring my babies may need some earings in the future. LOL

Lola Gets said...

In this day and age, sex and reproduction are two different things. One can have sex and not reproduce. And one can choose whom to reproduce with. Unfortunately, folks confuse the two. If everyone who had sex took the time to USE A CONDOM they would a modicum of protection against procreation. Women would be doing themwelves a great service if they were to doubly protect themselves with another form of birth control (but dont tell dude, cause then he'll want to go bareback, and thats counterproductive).

I take reproduction very seriously. I refused to have a child with my ex, because I wanted any child of mine to have a better life than I did - family life not material. I wish women like the one in your scenario would think similarly.

As per your scenario...if I let dude come back into my life, which is unlikely cause its obvious that he doesnt care about me or the kids, I might have sex with him a few times (hey, a sister has needs) but we'd be using condoms. Now if he stayed around for a while, ie if his broke ass got a regular, decent-paying job, we'd use condoms for the first 6 months. After that, Id defnenitely be using some form of birth control, because Id need to see some long-term, deeply rooted committment to change and to building and improving the family we already have. If I dont see that, Im keeping my eggs to myself!

So, people can eat lollipops all they want, they dont have to reproduce with them though!

L

Christopher said...

When I'm being eaten, I don't want it to ever stop. *wink*

GenevaGirl said...

If she keeps letting him come back, she's the idiot and he's an ass. Unfortunately, there are children involved so it's not that cut and dry. The children need to be supported and he should do so.

She also needs to get her tubes tied and he needs to get snipped. Sadly, it can't be legislated.

The Christian Progressive Liberal said...

Christopher, you're so naughty.

Lola, I feel you on the reproduction issue. Too many ways to prevent pregnancies and women should be using them, even if they're just in it to get their swerve on, and they know brotha man is no more than "Maintenance Man" (you brothas got Michael Baisden to thank for that book).

Otherwise, if you know you got "Maintenance Man" between your sheets, stop trying to turn "Maintenance Man" into "Husband" because just like Pop said in "Diary of a Mad Black Woman"

"YOU CAN'T TURN A 'HO' INTO A 'HOUSEWIFE'".

You can't turn "Maintenance Man" into "Husband" so get what you can, and can all you get without getting an obligation to go along with all that "gettin'".

Kellybelle said...

Yay! I saw people talking about mental illness! I do think mental illness plays a part in some women having baby after baby with trifling men. If you're depressed or bi-polar or schizophrenic, you're not thinking clearly about the future and how you're going to provide properly for your children. Also, depression, pb, and sz can cause the kind of reckless behavior that would lead you to engage in repeated unprotected sex with a man who may have licked many lollipops since last he was with you.

Not everybody has mental issues but a lot of us in our community do.

The Christian Progressive Liberal said...

They further went onto say that any man who is worth his salt would properly care for his woman and children.

Is it me that remembers when old brothas used to shame a dude into his responsibilities by calling him out on his stuff and putting it on Front Street for doing foul by the woman having his kids?

Those old brothas, just like Big Mama, needs to return with dropping that wisdom and knowledge in the fields - unfortunately, we have sperm donors and egg recepticles masquerading as parents, and wondering why Big Mama and the old school brothas aren't around.

Because "Bebe's kids" would bust a cap in their behinds for trying to drop some wisdom on them these days.

Taking back our communties starts with restoring Big Mama and old school brothas back to their rightful places in the 'hood to slap upside the head for doing foul and to praise when doing well.

Now, here's something I'd like everyone's take on.

I am a Christian who's pro-choice, and my friends think I'm a heathen because I believe in and support a woman's right to choose. Can I hear from some other Christians, please?

RedLipstick said...

FN: "In this particuler instance though, and the reality is that the woman is often the custodial parent, and is therefore the one who is always cursing the system for not getting her support."

Field, she is cursing the system because the system is not helping her GET BACK AT HIM. She wanted revenge and I'm sure you understand that. The third child was a result of desperation and when that didn't work, the court became the last place of refuge for this scorned woman. The court failed to help her stick it to the man and that's why the good folks down at the court probably got cursed out, talked to crazy or something to that effect.

This sort of nonsense is why I remain childfree--that and the fact the birth control really does work when it is used properly!

Molly said...

A couple of comments referred to this as a black problem. This is by no means an only black problem. It happens all the time in the white world too.

My white cousin is exactly the woman you describe. She married a guy at the age of 20, neither had any education. They had a son. They got divorced. Father paid some child support but not much. They got back together and had another child and then broke up again. Repeat cycle a year or two later. She now has three kids, he can't pay child support, she has a drug addiction and can't drive anywhere due to DUI's. At the age of 34, she lives with her parents, they drive her everywhere she needs to go and her parents are caring for the kids full-time. I have no doubt in my mind that she will go back to the guy at some point. Her father told her to get her tubes tied but she won't.

Every case is probably different, but I think these women are desperate for love. She keeps going back to the loser because she "loves" him. Obviously any woman who so devalues herself to allow this to happen is mentally unstable. She needs psychiatric help.
And the guy, well, he just doesn't think he's required to do anything as a father (other than getting laid). He says he loves the kids, but his actions show that his girlfriends or getting high or whatever is more important. And this guy has positive role models. He just chooses not to do what he should because he is only out for himself. It is a problem in our culture when this is acceptable. He ought to be shamed into being responsible, but there is no shame in it anymore. No one speaks out about it.

There are probably a multitude of reasons this happens. It is tragic for the children. I have seen first hand the effect it has had on these kids and I just hope that they don't repeat the cycle.

Anonymous said...

And thus another "story" to dogpile on women. Good job Field, keep them coming! We cannot get through the day without dogpiling on those got damn hoes. The licker, because lollipops are not eaten, not eaters (George Bush) has no responsible in his choice of licking I guess. He just can't help himself. It's free so it is there for the taking. Like a wild dog. A thief. A user. A weak punk who cannot control himself. Who blames everything on that mean old woman who threw that pussy on him. You know that woman who keeps thinking it will be better this time, because just like the fool in The Raisin in the Sun the poor menz are always just asking for a chance to prove that he can do better this time. And when sister girl don't give him a chance she is hatin, must want a white man. Trying to keep a brother down. Yeah sister girl forced brother man to fuck with no condom, that evil bitch.

Same old shit, different day.

Dogpile on those hoes. Two points. I feel like a man again.

Sign,

Not Kitty

Lolo said...

My personal observation in one of the main things that seems to make a difference in how people conduct themselves is this ~ unconditional love. I know, sounds corny but I'm telling you that the people that I've known that have come from the worst imaginable backgrounds, yet still managed to straighten it out and lead decent lives had at least one adult who loved them unconditionally. Not spoil, or allow to run wild, but LOVE enough to accept them, urge them to try their hardest, be there to listen and advise.

When people say there's this and that wrong with these kids today and how can we turn it around, etc. I will suggest that if they could make enough room in their heart to be a consistent presence in a young person's life it could make all the difference.

If you grow up seeing all around you accepting and being treated like trash, what else are you going to do when you get old enough to make choices? You can only imagine something if someone cared enough to plant the idea in the first place.

Okay, kuumbahyah lecture over.

Rum Punch said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rum Punch said...

I mean we can all ask why, and theorize, and criticize- but the truth of the matter is that you don't what that person you're studying or turning your nose up at is getting from the situation. Or what do they think they're getting from the situation? What does it mean to this woman to have a child? What does having a child represent to her? What does it mean to this woman to have a man want to be "with" her, to come to her, to "love" her? Even if we are like, "but you can't afford that child, or he ain't shit," it doesn't take away from her perception of the situation... People stay in mess/drama/bad siuations for various reasons, and we like to downplay the fact that they may be in it because they are getting something they "need" from it...Now whether it's positive or negative is a whole nother story...

Anyway, I know this is a serious topic, but did you see this, Field: http://theybf.com/2008/04/07/updates-lark-voorhies-michelle-williams-usher/#more-2068

innercityrose said...

CPL: I am a Christian who's pro-choice, and my friends think I'm a heathen because I believe in and support a woman's right to choose. Can I hear from some other Christians, please?

I don't necessarily live my life as a christian but I pretty much grew up in the church..now having said that, the commandment "thou shall not kill" pretty much sums it up and is probably why your friends are against it. Taking a life goes against God's teachings and what's written in the bible. So to ME that means you are choosing your personal beliefs over what the bible says is wrong. I'm not judging you in any way just giving my opinion on your question. :)

The Christian Progressive Liberal said...

Thanks, innercityrose, I understand, completely. For me, personally, the "thou shalt not kill" pretty much would be an option against abortion, because I would feel that since I engaged in sex, I should bear the responsibility and have the child.

My concern is forcing that choice on someone else, especially if you're telling them to bring a child into this world because of biblical principle, while not, in accordance with biblical principle, help homegirl raise and care for the child she was forced to bear.

Yea, she could give it up for adoption. That's what I'd do if I wasn't ready to become a parent.

But that would be my choice, guided by God's principles. I can't say I'd want to impose my principles on someone else, because they have to live with their choice.

God gives all of us free will (choice) and consequences come with that choice, which is why I guess I'm pro-choice, but thanks for the debate.

EmJay said...

I would generally agree with lack of self esteem being the primary cause for this scenario. Also, sometimes women are just lazy and selfish, having kids without thinking of the repercussions.

However, we should also consider the possibility of emotional abuse. For example, has anyone ever considered that the man may be using the first two children to manipulate the woman into having sex with him (with no protection), and she gets pregnant again? I've seen a lot of circumstances where the woman will try just about anything to get the man to provide emotional support for his children, including keeping him around and having sex with him.

Deacon Blue said...

I'm with TCPL on the pro-chioce issue. We have to remember that there is a difference between man's law and God's law. Something may be wrong in God's view but allowed by man (fornication, drunkeness, etc.) and thus I cannot and would not force my views down anyone's throat simply b/c I am a Christian. Man's law doesn't recognize a fetus as a fully living being, so it's not murder. As to how God sees it, well, that's another issue, and that's between the parent(s) and God to sort out.

vdubjb said...

Some lollipops just enjoy being licked...

rikyrah said...

There's a reason why you wrote this post, FN.

You're having a conflict within you.

On the one hand, logically, your brain is telling you one thing.

On the other hand, emotionally, your heart is telling you another.

I'm here to tell you that you need to follow what your brain is telling you, Brother.

Maybe it's because I'm getting older, and I've somehow, been able to make it to where I am without a baby of my choice. Maybe it's because I've never put myself in that situation.

And, make no mistake, FN.

It's a CHOICE.

This isn't 40 years ago.

No woman IN THIS COUNTRY gets pregnant without wanting to, unless they are a teenager and it's their first time, and not even then.

Don't let this woman off the hook for her REPRODUCTIVE RESPONSBILITIES, FN.

DO.NOT.LET.HER.OFF.THE.HOOK.

Unless you're telling me that she has Forrest Gump's IQ...

DO.NOT.LET.HER.OFF.THE.HOOK.

That is what's wrong with our community right now.

I'm talking to Black folk right now.

Black people began lying to women. Telling them that babies weren't their sole responsibility. Telling them that babies were shared and shit, knowing that wasn't true. Oh, in the pie-in-the-sky world, men and women share responsbilities for children, but we know that isn't true.

See, when I was growing up, the older women in the community told me the truth:

Don't be laying down getting no babies without a husband. No promise that he'll stick around, but for damn sure, don't set yourself up for that mess - being alone.

We stopped saying that, FN.

We fed these women the BS that they could do it alone...listening to that feminist BS that never ever had the Black family in mind.

I do not look askance at a Black woman who is single with one child. Everyone makes an honest mistake.

Baby Number two forward, without benefit of a wedding ring - IS HER FAULT.

HER FAULT

HER FAULT

And the proof of the result of this 'lifestyle' winds up in your Killdelphia count nearly everyday.

Are there good single mothers out there? Of course there are, but let's stop pretending people that they are the rule......THEY ARE THE EXCEPTION. Our prisons are littered with the results of the rule; the cemeteries are filling up with the collateral damage of the results of the rule; the rule is on display for everyone to see once the schooldoors open at the end of the schoolday.

I have no sympathy for her. She's a Goddamn FOOL, and has condemned her own children to probably a similar fate...and will blame everyone and Jesus for HER own failings. YOU KNOW A MAN by the time you have Baby Number 1. PERIOD.

If a woman won't look out for herself once she has a child to take care of...what can you call her but a FOOL.

rikyrah said...

I know I was harsh, but our community is dying from the collectivity of this type of willful indulgence of ignorance.

texasladybird said...

Yeah, what rikyrah said!

And I know this sounds real anti-woman of me, but I place some, if not most of the responsibility on the woman.

Why?

Women are the ones that get pregnant! It is a lot harder to walk away from a child if your body is the vessel. And if, as a woman, you do choose to walk away, there is still some action required on your part (abortion, adoption).

As a woman I refuse to give any man that kind of power over my body. I plan to wait until I'M emotionally and financially ready.

And I know all relationships don't work out, but at least I could look at my child and know that she was wanted and planned for. That he is not a burden to me. That she wasn't some pawn in my twisted plan to keep a man. That while I love him, he was not just born to fill an emotional void, but rather born to fill my life with joy.

End of rant. :)

Bob said...

It's endless fun to generalize about the opposite sex. But as soon as one creates these personal theories, like the "half eaten lollipop," one has to defend it against all the exceptions that would seem to disprove it. & also explain how & why one invented the theory, which could be a little embarassing if one thinks of oneself as a lollipop.

Mama Sunshine said...

I was wondering when the rest of the plantation women would show up. I've been intrigued with this sex blogs for the last month. And you know what I discovered? It's a conscience choice of where and when men shoot their sperm. Men choose. Men make the decision. Men feel it coming. In the bible man is the head. But in this screwed up AMERICAN society, it is the woman who holds ALL the power to the man. We are the new alpha male. We can choose who lives and who dies. We can choose who we love and who we don't. We can choose when to let a man speak, and when to shut him up. We can choose if his seed is worthy or if it should be disposed of as garbage. We can choose if he is fit to grace his growing seed with his presence, or be banned. And we can tell him shoo fly, you are a nobody, you have no voice, you have no power, you have no responsiblity, you have no choice, if you choose to walk away, I will decide it this child lives or dies, or who he calls daddy, and where he goes. This is not your burden but mines alone. Go away you weak effeminate male..HA HA. You thought you impregnated me, YOU FOOL! I IMPREGNATED MYSELF! Now I control the world!!!!!!!

field negro said...

"I know I was harsh, but our community is dying from the collectivity of this type of willful indulgence of ignorance."

rikyrah, you weren't harsh enough!

"Same old shit, different day.

Dogpile on those hoes. Two points. I feel like a man again.

Sign,

Not Kitty"

Kitty's sister maybe?

shonufded said...

Children benefit all the members of a society.

Many of our so-called primitive people understand this and behave accordingly.

Since we pass down societal norms to the next generation, and expect it to maintain our social, economic, cultural values and traditions, we all have a stake in the rearing of that generation.

Clearly what we're doing now only works part of the time, and under the most ideal of conditions.

I won't detail them: you know what they are.

We need to recognize that childrearing should be a collective process, where everyone (all of society) gets in on the act.

A child should have no fewer than ten mothers, ten fathers, all selected from the wisest among us.

I know, I hear you saying that it won't work; that it's a Utopian concept.

Perhaps.

In some black communities it used to be the norm--you know, that extended family phenomenon.

We need to bring that concept back so that every child that is born today is given over to at least twenty adults who will take responsibility both for its upkeep and the impartation of society's values.

If it sounds a lot like getting the "village" involved as in, "It takes a village to raise a child," so be it.

But until we do, each generation will continue to produce from its numbers a measurable number of lost and neglected children who will become our next generation of anti-social, and dysfunctional adults.

*In the news recently: a video of a black teenager beating her Art teacher in a Baltimore high school classroom, and later being told by the principal that she (the teacher) instigated it by using "trigger words."*

This was unheard of at the time I was in high school--unthinkable, unimaginable, and implausible (accentuated with redundancy to make a stronger point).

I say: we all need to be part of the solution, and stop wringing our hands over the prevalence of the problem.

By settling for a wait-and-see attitude, a sideline approach, or a its-none-of-my-business mindset, or it's-her-parents-problem, hands-off, wash-my-hands-of-it dismissal of it--we perpetuate this blight on society.

We, as a society, can continue to stress the "nuclear family" fiasco where some children are saved and others are lost (and have the mushroom cloud of failure hang over the land), or we can try a new, old concept where we all contribute, and get involved (no more tsk! tsk!) in the childrearing process.

Just my humble thoughts on the subject.

GailScott said...

Field, advise her not to be a fool. Advise her not to spend time with fools. If she's open to your advice, then help show her the way. If she's *serious* about changing, then it will be relatively easy and inexpensive for you to help her.

If she doesn't want to take your advice, then distance yourself from her and do it quickly. Her foolishness won't rub off on you, but it will affect you.

Need I add that the lollipop theory sounds like a fool's game to me?

StillaPanther2 said...

Brother Field,, how about the fact that the Black race in Amerikka has such a short history of INTACT families. Prior to 1900 the black race by legal standards were not allowed to be strong and intac: for one generation post-slavery this must have been a very fragile relationship. After 1900 more Black men fled "North" alone due to when he was a threat to the status quo; he had to leave,As far as decades the history of our families continued to be on shakey grounds. My parents, married in rhe forties were the second generation that enjoyed unfettered union. Myself, I have enjoyed my same spouse for thirty-five years. Now we are a novelty, but I have enjoyed being in the same household with spouse and children. Which now leads me to the statement that I firmly believe in...Amerikka produce nothing...therefor we needa 'crop" of young Black males to produce jobs for Amerikka. The number one growth industry is corrections. Just think what would happen if young Black males would stop messing up. So every thing we dont need as a race, the majority need. Black people dont get mad at my beliefs, they are what I have experiance after 57 years here. White people, when your percentage of dysfunction get the same as mine I may rethink my contentions.

SingaporeSwim said...

apathy has taken hold of more than a few. there's little room for personal responsibility when one is preoccupied with keeping up with the joneses [and following them to debtor's hell] and one's priorities are not in line w/reality.

SingaporeSwim said...

in campaign news: at a fundraiser for hill wednesday night, sir elton john actually said...
I never cease to be amazed at the misogynist attitude of some of the people in this country. I say to hell with them. . I love you Hillary, I'll be there for you."

jeremiah wright redux? hill should reject and denounce the anti-american sentiment inherent in that remark. oh, but wait, that's a wink and a nod to feminists and white females to come together for their girl hill.

what a flaming flake!

Anonymous said...

Kitty's sister maybe?

They are both bitches and hoes anyway (along with all her other sisters), so basically one in the same. That's how the menfolks roll you know, I just trying save you time.


Sign,

Not Kitty.

Angie said...

CPL, I was quoted in an article on the Dallas Observer back in March regarding the questionof Christians supporting Obama, a candidate that is pro-choice. Here's an excerpt from the article, which includes my quote. I've also included a link to the full article. Travel over there and check it out when you get a chance.
Peace and love,
Angie
(The Realest)

"My questions continued to haunt me. I started quizzing my black evangelical friends about their support for Obama. How do you reconcile his support for
abortion and gay marriage with your Christian beliefs? I asked. Black evangelicals, by and large, see both as clearly contrary to their faith.
Well, I was chilled by some of the answers I got, surprised by the lame rationalizations. On abortion, I did get one extremely thoughtful reply via e-mail
from a fellow Christian blogger,
Angela L. Braden
of Nuvision for a New Day, that is worth quoting at length:
Block quote start
“My heart bleeds when I consider all of the babies that are aborted every day. My heart aches even more when I think about how many mothers felt compelled
to make a decision like that, rather than feel like they could face their challenge with courage and certainty of the future.
“I believe that we as believers should be taking the steps to make sure that mothers are not compelled to make those decisions. I feel that we should take
steps to prevent people from being in that situation. If we give people the tools, such as work skills, financial counseling, education, equal housing
and access to employment, I honestly do not feel that women would choose to end their children's lives.
“I feel that Senator Obama understands that as well. Yes, he may believe in legalized abortions. But he believes in giving the living what they need to
live. Some of these so-called conservatives are creating and supporting policies that choke the very life out of those of us who are walking, breathing
and living today.”
Block quote end


The article in itself pi$$ed me off because I felt that the writer was somehow implying that Black Christians, for whatever reason, were not concerned about abortion. You should really check it out. Here's the link.

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2008/02/obama_and_the_hand_of_god.php

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't care if my tubes were tied,and I'm burning the crotch out of panties and setting toilet paper on fire. Leave me with two kids and the only thing you can do is come a get them so I have time to find a real man.

Angie said...

Field, I have strong, strong feelings about the crisis and the crash of the Black Family. I'm pretty much right there with Rikyrah.

I think that it is time for responsible adults to start holding our people accountable. It's time that we stop pretending like our families are not in a crisis. What is happening to our families is a tragedy!

I try to explain to my friends all the time that marriage/a partnership between two adults is the beginning of a strong family. Marriage impacts the bottom line. Consider marriage a way to have shared economics, shared responsibilities, shared emotions, and shared discipline of the children. It's just smart.

No, I don't think that everyone needs to run and get married. and no, I don't think that folks in bad marriages need to stay married under any circumstance.
But I do think that it is high time for us (Black Folk) to start making marriage a priority. We must do it for the sake of our children, for the generations to come. We short change the next generation by telling them in action or in words that marriage is not important and something to be entered in with pride and joy.

And I'm with L on sex and reproduction being two different acts. Yes, sex leads to reproduction. Bjut sex, coupled with birth control, leads to the real "pro-choice", the choice not to reproduce.

I have chosen to not have a baby before I am ready. And I didn't decide that with my back on an abortion table. I didn't even decide it on my back at all.
I have made the choice that I didn't want to have a baby without a husband while I am standing straight up, fully dressed, and in my right mind.
Too many times, people passively make the decision to have a baby as they are laying on their backs, out of their freaking minds.

Birth control is something you consider before having sex. Birth control is not for after sex. Family planning needs to be put in place before you hit the sheets.

Now, don't get me wrong. I understand accidents happen. I got a couple of those little accidents in my family. And I wouldn't trade my little honeys in for a million dollars each. But life for them would have been a lot better if their mommies had planned for their arrival.

One baby... I'll give you room.
Two babies... Some people just have a hard head. They just don't get it the first time.
Three babies... Crazy! Not thinking!
Four babies or more... I have no words.

Angie
(The Realest)

I am not Star Jones said...

thank you rikyrah .... that was so on point
and I would like to add the following....

who are these men with the magic penises that render these women incapable of resisting their unsheathed members?

or render them downright senseless when it comes to buying and using birth control?

I want to look in the faces of the men who seem to be able to make panties fall down with such ease.

should we put up posters of them in nightclubs, arenas and hair salons to warn women that
these men have magic peens that can impregnate you with a compliment and a Happy Meal?

maybe billboards will help?

I'm wondering because I will do what it takes to stop this epidemic of children with
parents who are so goddamn lackadaisical when it comes to having a purpose when it comes to life and parenting.

Any woman who decides to have a third child with a man who won't pay for his other two has deep psychological issues and needs cognitive behavior therapy to remap her thinking and approach to life.

Too bad courts can't mandate this along with child support orders.

Angie said...

One last thing...

I have come to wonder how the welfare system has impacted the crash of the Black Family.
When young ladies can get pregnant, get emergency Medicaid, get WIC, have their babies in nice, private hospitals, get food stamps for them and the baby, get on housing, get free child care, and get TANF... Where's the deterrent?

I'm just asking... Help me with this.

They don't need a damn baby daddy to be there for them. The government got it.

Only thing is this new baby daddy, the government, don't mind locking them babies up in a jail cell when these babies get out of line.
they don't mind declaring their little government children "special ed" when they can't pass all of these "No Child Left Behind" tests.
Their daddy, the government, don't mind stopping their kids from getting federal financial aid when they have a drug charge.

See, when you give the government the power to provide for your kids, it don't stop. They continue to try to control the destiny of your children. At least that's what I think this very moment, as I write this.

**I'm not sold on this thought. But it definitely gives me something to think about. Feedback please.**

shonufded said...

@molly:

Every case is probably different, but I think these women are desperate for love. She keeps going back to the loser because she "loves" him.

molly, I'm not surprised that your cousin has a drug addiction.

Don't take this as a "dumping" on your cousin. Your cousin is representative of a host of women and men in our society.

I don't call what you described above as love. I call it an addiction.

Yeah, you can be addicted to a person, place, or thing.

Here's how you know whether it's an addiction or not.

Will the loss of it cause you to be unhappy, miserable, or agitated?

If the answer is, yes, then you're contending with an addiction.

You can call it love, need, or what have you, but if the absence of it leaves you bereft of joy, and you need a fix to fix what's wrong with you--a man/woman, certain foods, clothes, or whatever will bring back that state of mind you call happiness--then you're addicted.

Usually, fixes don't last long, requiring a re-fix.

The answer: elevate addictions to preferences.

Prefer a thing but don't need it. Prefer a person but don't need him/her. Prefer a food but don't need it. (A diet of beans can keep you alive and happy; but if you need steaks and potatoes to be happy, then you're addicted.)

Just a thought.

Ms.Martin said...

Rikyrah was harsh, but everything she said was true.

If women haphazardly have children, they tend to haphazardly raise them - especially ones that are confused enough to continue a relationship with a man that doesn't really want them. The attraction to this type of man usually takes on a life of its own and becomes more important than most things including her own welfare and that of the children - sick!

My grandmother use to say you should know everything about a man and his family before you reproduce him and straddle yourself with responsibility you could have prevented.

I also wouldn't continue to have a sexual relationship with a man that lacks the character to FIND A WAY to care for his own flesh and blood.

shonufded said...

@angie:

Feedback:
when you give the government the power to provide for your kids, it don't stop.

The problem is not the kids that we're bringing into the world; the problem is how they're treated once they get here.

From my perspective any support that is given is OK, whether it comes from the government, or from some other source.

Kids, well reared, are assets to society. However, we have allowed some to become deficits--the reason why so many here are posting against the young woman in question.

Check out my previous posts for a more complete answer to this social dilemma.

For me, the more kids the better, but the missing element has to be applied or society will continue to throw away its most important asset--its kids--either through abortion, or the criminal justice system.

Let's face it: we don't always value and treasure children, or we would stop sending out the continual message that life is cheap, and the preservation of life, just as cheap.

We don't always affirm the value of children here or abroad: hunger and disease still ravage and kill many, or thrust them into lives of misery and pain, and an existence filled with hopelessness and despair.

More kids? Yes. Just give them what's missing--they'll do the rest. This often missing element will give them a head start towards productive, and useful lives.

The song, Greatest Love of All, sums it for me:

I believe the children are our are future
Teach them well and let them lead the way
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier...."

Anonymous said...

What's wrong with simply having a baby by your HUSBAND?

SingaporeSwim said...

sbo's taking some heat for sounding elitist...

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

SingaporeSwim said...

sbo was speaking @ a fundraiser in san francisco when he made those comments.

Mama Sunshine said...

"What's wrong with simply having a baby by your HUSBAND?"

Do you live in la la land? Divorce rates are at a all time high, and husbands are the original deadbeat fahter. How about what's wrong with people not loving God and living exclusively by the bible?

Deb said...

Field...funny you'd post about this today. I was listening to "All Things Considered" on NPR this evening and the Radio Rookies segment had to do with aging out of foster care - which I know, is NOT what you're asking about here -but this young girl's lack of self-esteem, as well as some around her, speaks directly to your inquiry. If you've got a few minutes this weekend, listen to this: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89570059

There are so many young girls-turned-women who feel just like Shirley "Star" Diaz in this story and as much as most of us here want to discount these feelings, they are there and they are rampant.

If all women (and men, for that matter because guys have those self-esteem issues too, they just don't own them for fear of being called out) "got it" in the rearing, or "figured it out" in the growing up, it'd be different. But a lot don't. And as shonufded said, it is on this "village" like it used to be -but the village doesn't want to deal with it. If all women had somehow gotten it like rikyrah, or texasladybird or redlipstick or anonymous who works "for a child support agency" (which, I'm just sayin', scares me for the lack of compassion shown), then you'd not be asking these questions because there'd be no situation. But those aren't the cards dealt everyone - for whatever reason.

rikyrah...I disagree with you on this one. Our prisons are littered, not with the results of the rule, but with the children about whom the "village," more and more is not giving a damn because the village is busy "getting theirs." The cemeteries are not filling up with the collateral damage of the results of the rule, but with the lives cast away by man's continued inhumanity to man as a whole. The rule is not on display for everyone to see once the school doors open at the end of the school day. What is on display is the lack of compassion, empathy, discipline and respect for the lives of the least of us.

They're not "results" of some rule to be followed, life has its own rules. They're human beings with little or no guidance and more importantly - little or no love.

onix said...

sorry to say but we get it all wrong, the matter is prioritys, like in the article the priority is with the kids, and people that have to live through live with a certain (individual) number of problems even if they are woman, are not often ready to have the right prioritys.

In that sense i think woman need a parenting course to cope with problems as a need for 'own' ones to love them. Man do too for slightly different reasons.

apart from that the situation scetched with rather many unmarried mothers is actually, like a woman also refered to,
a natural. To some point feminism, socialism and emancipation already allow woman to support another with the children, etc. And a selfconscious woman can find professional support, tho u have to be a pretty selfconscious to get any i figure.

From the man and the woman point of view the ideal situation is one where they switch partners. The female urge for replication, with it additional work appears not all encouraging.
She doesn't need the man after fertilisation for some 18-20 months. Would we all live in a great forest and go where we want, she would probably have met another potential genetical improvement and sufficiently safe playmate by then.

Likewise with man, whats the use of most marriages if man are supposed to deny what they feel, and certainly woman too, meeting interesting representatives of the other sex.

The womanunfriendly resistance against birth control, lack of free pill receipes and that its nice to have sex without condom are factors.

The really biggest problem with birth control is that female chemistry gets tempered through births, but not stopped.
Most woman feel like having "baby's" but when they have one, it is not always easy to say no to the next. (having once admitted to these feelings.)
I guess it's different for every woman, and also that it is a means of giving purpose (to life) to much but that would be a nonvalue shared by man.

Missy said...

I say no. If you keep doing what you've always done, you'll keep getting what you always got. At some point you go from being a tasty lollipop to being an all day SUCKER.
-peace

Lorraine said...

cheap wedding gowns
discount bridal gowns
China wedding dresses
discount designer wedding dresses
China wedding online store
plus size wedding dresses
cheap informal wedding dresses
junior bridesmaid dresses
cheap bridesmaid dresses
maternity bridesmaid dresses
discount flower girl gowns
cheap prom dresses
party dresses
evening dresses
mother of the bride dresses
special occasion dresses
cheap quinceanera dresses
hot red wedding dresses

Anonymous said...

Replica Handbags
Fake Handbags
Knockoff Handbags

Replica Louis Vuitton Handbags
Replica Gucci Handbags
Replica Chanel Handbags
Prada Handbags
Replica Fendi Handbags
Replica Dolce Gabbana Handbags
Replica Chloe Handbags
Replica Jimmy Choo Handbags
Replica Thomas Wylde Handbags
Replica MiuMiu Handbags

Replica Balenciaga Handbags
Replica Coach Handbags
Replica Lancel Handbags
Replica Hermes Handbags
Replica Marc Jacobs Handbags
Replica Anya Hindmarch Handbags
Replica YSL Handbags
Replica Mulberry Handbags
Replica Givenchy Handbags
Replica Valentino Handbags
Replica Versace Handbags
Replica Cartier Handbags
Replica Marni Handbags
Replica Bottega Veneta Handbags
Replica Loewe Handbags
Replica Kooba Handbags

Replica Bally Handbags
Replica Burberry Handbags
Replica Christian Dior Handbags
Replica Juicy Couture Handbags
Replica Ferragamo Handbags
Replica Celine Handbags

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,

,

Anonymous said...

коттедж
восстановление зрения
зеленый лазер
электрошокер