@All. interesting comments.

Before we can come to any firm conclusions I suggest we need more information.

1.For example why did the woman take 5 years to approach my man, or do we know whether she has been on his case from time?

2. Does she have any children by anyone else?

These issues to me are very very important in shaping what my overall judgement would be in terms of remedies. The only facts we have is Arsenio Hall's acceptance that the child is his, the circumstances surrounding the issues in question, other than the fact that his penis entered her are missing.

This is where I agree and disagree with Sista Africa and I don't know the sister's country of orgin, so could be incorrect if I assume she is from the continent and I will explain the difference.

Whenever you make law, or policy, where it is impossible or very difficult to establish the true circumstances or all the relevent fact's, societies develop what is called a decision rule. This means in general all things being equal there is an implicit bias in how decisions are made. We assume women are victims of bad behaviour, and a breach of fundamental social mores and expectations which are institutionalised in law, so the doubt must clearly go with them.

But these princples were developed at a time when women were essentially victims, which is clearly not the case today, or in the case of particular cultures. That is why the cultural background and details are critical. For example from my experience ,albeit limited but probably more than most Caribbean people. When African women are abandonend by African men with children, it is abandonment in the real and true sense.

Men who have clear obligations to their women and children and who for whatever reason, eg they are in England, or the US run off with another woman, or they abandon them for other reasons. Under such circumstances a man should pay and made to pay and as much as possible as far as I am concerned. As should men from any other cultural background where there is clear evidence that commitment and a committed relationship exists.

I could be wrong but this type of behaviour is not commmon amongst African men, even though I know Southern Afrian men were notorious, but largely explainable in part and only part by the situation in their home countries.

However, the cultures of African Caribbean and African Ameerican, or should I say sub cultures are fundamentally different, and the law or principle Sista Africa clearly and rightly outlined was never designed for the kind of opportunisitc and damaging behaviour which are fundamentally parts of the culture in question.

Women are ultimately responsibile for their sexual activity and reproduction, and social status, and hence consistency dictates unless there is clear evidence of commmitment and defacto contract, or agreement about fundamentals, sorry men cannot be held to account. Women cannot have it both ways. Principle are not what you want them to be and have to be consistent as much as it is humanly possible.

Moreover, there is too much evidence to show the dirty games women play around getting pregnannt, from the cultures in question which even honest and concious women will admit to openly, confirminig what men always knew in private male discussion. So to have a decision rule based on the bizzarre assumption that because a man puts his penis in a woman he has agreed to support children. Sorry the cliche "put a condom on it" is not a realistic and mature response to anyone with any experience in the real world within these cultures.

For example no Nigerain woman is going to tell me about too many Caribbean women here. NOt all men are liars and all women tell the truth. What about the young man who goes to family planning with his woman who on speaking to her friends comes off the pill without telling him.

So as I said the principles involved are different.

Moreover ,as my father warned us as boys about children outside the family, or outside marriage. That those children are the most expensive, and potentially damaging children you will ever have. A man knows how much it costs to raise his child who he raises in his home. If money is tight his woman will juggle to make sures needs are met at a decent standard for the benefit of all.

A baby mother does not give a damn about you, or your children, or your wife and what she has a right to have by culture, convention or law. She wants what she wants, and usually wants more because your wife has things she does not have, and or may never will have. Hence it is not suprising outside children cost more money to men who are not dirt poor. Hence why people like Arsenio Hall who are not poor are not willing to part with their money easily.

Moreover, as a man your money also ends up being spent to supplement their other children by men who do not support theirs or she can draw from both ends and benefit personally. Culturally the thought of raising another man's child financially is deeply offensive. A self respecting man looks after his blood and child and is not responsible for the children of others.

So I do not agree with Sista Africa about the primary carer requires a material standard of living commmensurate to that of the child. The only woman a man has a reponsibility to the material up keep of is his wife or woman, not in any opposition to her own responsibilities for herself. A man has no obligations to the financial upkeep of any ex, or baby mother. He may give if he wishes, but has no obligation whatsoever.

A wife is a wife, whether she is divorced or abandoned and a baby mother is a baby mother and these distinctions are there for a fundamental reason. To give the status of one to all is undermining and actually confusing important differences only made common by sexual penetration. It cannot and does not serve the public good to confuse these distinctions while it can and does serve the public good to say to women in this woman's position with A Hall, hold on a minute girlfriend, this is your entitlement, like it or lump it.

The only woman who thinks she can take me for what I have is my wife and I enter that agreement with eyes wide open, because there is no way around it or where you can genuiinely claim reasonable ignorance.

So as in this case about Arsenio Hall, there is much more information which we need before I personally can come to a definitive judgement and remedy.


Fredniceone.gif