Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your father was certainly special because I belong to "today's generation of young men", my father was born in the 1940s and the only thing he did was asking if I had money. Everything else was left to my mother, he wouldn't lift a finger. He seems like a pretty standard guy of that generation, I don't blame him. Certainly not a bad father but he's far from being this ultra important influence in my life.
My father and my father-in-law were both born in the 40's - and they are/were both wonderful fathers. They weren't perfect but they certainly provided us with more than money. My dad was the most loving, supportive father I could have asked for.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,771,805 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by WalkY91
One thing that has always amazed me is how men can simply believe their children are truly theirs. Not so much these days when there are paternity tests available, but especially in the past.
For example, my brothers and I are the splitting image of our father but that could not be the case. Even that doesn't prove anything.
How can they sign the birth certificate without knowing for sure that child has the same blood in their veins?
Maybe they trust their partners? Just a thought.
Even my half-a^# father knew I was his son. I even burped like he did when he was alive. No way he was even stupid enough to bring that Maury trash to my mother.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 37,007,908 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by WalkY91
Your father was certainly special because I belong to "today's generation of young men", my father was born in the 1940s and the only thing he did was asking if I had money. Everything else was left to my mother, he wouldn't lift a finger. He seems like a pretty standard guy of that generation, I don't blame him. Certainly not a bad father but he's far from being this ultra important influence in my life.
He seemed to be the norm in my suburban community. I never knew anyone divorced growing up, until we hit college. I'm 42, my dad was born in 1936 and died in 1989. Not much of an age differential. Now, he wasn't around a lot when I was young, he was in the army reserves and worked for a defense contractor, so he traveled a lot and he was sick when I was in HS and didn't have much energy, but he did his best.
My father and my father-in-law were both born in the 40's - and they are/were both wonderful fathers. They weren't perfect but they certainly provided us with more than money. My dad was the most loving, supportive father I could have asked for.
You're a woman, it's different. I'm certain my father would act different if he had had a girl. Instead he got 3 boys.
Yeah...as if fathers in the past were top notch, by filling the bank account and taking off the belt when needed. The only good thing that came out of it was that there were probably fewer teens in crime...bu that's about it.
Like the repeat customer to McDonald's who craves the fatty food, you must really enjoy the company here to keep coming back time and time again.
I weep for you, and other young men like you. I truly do.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,771,805 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14Bricks
Why would a woman be "offended" about a man wanting to know 100%, that a child is his? I know most women is this country live in a fanstay disney world, were its all about love, and trust and white knights. But in the real world, they are women who lie, cheat, and are devious. I don't put flawed behavior past ANYBODY.
It basically says, you don't trust them with something that is very serious business. If you show that much mistrust why be with them in the first place? I would never be with someone who I damn sure don't trust let alone have my baby.
I think the point that many are missing is trust has to be earned, and must be maintained. We're supposed to give a person a reason to trust you, thing is in this day and age I see more people feeling entitled to be trusted automatically. No one wants to work for anything anymore. No man can tell if his future wife is a jezabel no more than a woman not seeing her future husband is a player unless there are obvious signs.
Deceitful people have ways of masking their true intentions, manipulators, liars, con-artists, it's all the same. When they get caught they go into defensive mode where that wheel turns and turns to rationalize the mistake and to blame the victim.
It's a tough pill to swallow for many people, but there are just plenty of distrustful people in the world and what's worse is they do anything to justify bad behavior, we just don't always see it. I'm not blind to see that there are good honest relationships out there but for those who are screwed, for God's sake show some empathy once in a while.
I'm glad you googled that out. See, you ARE reading posts. You actually bothered to prove me wrong on that. Myth is not completely unfounded as numerous birds will not return to a nest where you take away their eggs and re-plant them. Birds have a weak sense of smelling, as you said. Try out mammals and ask yourself why they need to be careful when they place their cameras in the underground nests and why they need to take care when the "parents" are away when taking cubs to mark them and do the tests with them, etc. There were occasions where they outright kill the cubs for that, or they simply cast them out. Wildlife Rehabilitators Association of Rhode Island - Wildlife
Quoting the link:
Quote:
Notes:
Most birds do not have a good sense of smell. It is a myth that mom will reject their baby if you return their nestling to the nest. (Mammals can reject their babies if they smell a human scent on their babies.)
You can help baby birds survive by refraining from trimming bushes or trees during nesting season (May-August).
....
What to do if you find a baby mammal?
Never touch a baby mammal because the mother can smell you on her babies and could abandon them because of it.
Now go on and argue on other issues, since I'm sure you've also read other links where I linked to prove multi-million dollar lawsuits are common when hospitals make a mistake because they calculate not just the monetary expenses on raising a wrong child but also the distress and effort and the alienation of the other child, etc. Lawyers are quite good at making things up to boost those millions and nobody in here will contest that the hospitals should be held liable. Nobody says that "biology doesn't matter" as an argument in court... the judge will probably be very annoyed in such scenario.
Did you ever see the cases when parents find out about the switch later on? The parents will ALWAYS tend to (un)consciously connect with their biological child when they find him/her, even though they know there is legally no way to change anything. It's their desire and a proof that they think that biology matters A LOT and they'll regret for not being able to raise the child. Society and legislation thinks the same. It's too late to change that and it isn't a fault of any of them, it's just a mistake on hospital's part, but still, they are trying to connect with a child they consider their own, even though they have no legal way to change it! Take note that it doesn't work the same way when the father is cuckolded and he finds out - even in places where he might get some money back - it's generally a limited amount related to child support AT BEST. No emotional distress, alienation, blah, blah. Biology doesn't matter, you know. And the mother generally knew that he wasn't the father, but went along with it, and it generally also involves an affair on the side.
Please, oh please tell me why states still issue laws to allow the sampling among newborns only for mothers, not the fathers - even when the father's name is automatically placed on birth certificate. I've posted a link before concerning the state where I was (Virginia), since I was familiar when they discussed it. I've argued that the wording of all laws is very deliberate and they made sure to alleviate even fathers with their name being automatically placed on birth certificate from getting a legal ground to take samples without at least going through lengthy, expensive and complicated procedure that the mother can also sabotage, and which would ultimately destroy any chance of being done legally unless if they already suspect on something and plan on leaving the mother and the child already. I've argued it and will always say it - a guy who raises someone else's child unsuspectedly is generally a guy who never had a doubt about it. It's definitely not a guy who's going to demand the woman to go through paternity procedure or a guy who's going to walk away on her. I'm really annoyed that you make me repeat my words.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
