@Ashanti. Smell a rat both ends up.

No matter where you take the point of liability to start from, the amount of money is not a serious sum amount of money to a man in his position, even if he is not earning the kind of money he used to. If it is a simple issue of an absoulute amount it cost to raise a child, all things being considered.

The whole issue about whether it is based on current earnings or earlier is absolutely irrelevent to the child and all about either the woman looking money for herself and him trying to protect what he has, with a child in the middle. That is why these things are so nasty,because yes there are many men who do not accept responsibilities and other women looking to eat and drink of off men.

I know a brother who has his own business who is paying his child's mother £600 a month for his 4 year old daughter, much of it going to keep her lifestyle,combined with a very flexible part time job and taking various classes for which she is paid. Not mention all the holidays which her daughter desperately needs to go on[right] for which he pays for etc.

So these things often have nothing whatsoever to do about the welfare of children, but what the woman in question can get.

Ja....

Good observation Ja.


I caught the story on a program called "Celebrity Justice" and they spoke with an attorney who felt the woman was not entitled to Hall's past earnings and questioned whether the child's mother was trying to get paid, quote-unquote to perhaps supplement a lifestyle.

But on the other hand as you so rightly pointed out, Hall seems to be trying to protect his resources.


Who knows for sure.

What I don't know or understand is how peeps allow themselves to get caught up in situations like this.confused3

The answer is that both of this 'parents' should do right by their child. If they both focussed on this rather than how much can I get vs how little can I pay then this dispute would not even be in the public arena. If you have a child the principle should surely be that you would want that child to have as good a life as you can provide for.

Following on from this logic dictates that if you want your child to have a good life (materially) then whoever he/she lives with by default will also need to be living a good life materially. You cannot seperate the lives of children from their primary carers.

Sounds like both parties are more concerned about their own selves then the child. The needs of our children should not be used as a weapon or bait in personal battles or grievances. Unfortunately all too often this is what we do as so called caring mothers and fathers.

If the father is really involved in the child's life, meaning he goes beyond his 'duty', but does what every caring parent does and give more than is necessay for the welbeing of the child, then the woman should ask only from what he currently earns.

But if he is one of those ignorant absent'fathers'who will not and does not do a thing forhis child, then sheshould 'bleed themanDRY AND still try to get somemore!!!'

@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

2. Does she have any children by anyone else?


Excuse me Fredblack, but why do you need to know this?



And although I understand what you mean abut a woman should be ultimately responsible for her sex life, but have you never heard of a woman going to bed with herman JUST TO KEEP HIM HAPPY!!?

Please don't tell me that men don't do the same thing.

@Athaba. My dear sis we have discussed this in a round about way before and I want to repeat, I am not one who just wants to bash our women, or many of our women, because the fact are I would be bashing myself, because nobody from our community can isloate themselves from many of the problems we suffer from. We are all the enemy in a way. Neither am I saying BAD WOMEN V GOOD WOMEN. Life is much more complicated. I want to uplift our women and make them stand back and say we can do better and must do better.

What I am saying very very clearly, I hope, is if we want to build our community and make it strong and promote the majority good and interest, we must base important decsions on clear fundamental truths/ principles and a clear sense of justice and responisbility. This means things are not black and white, but where they are the law or our policies, should be on the side of the victim. I do cannot pressume immediately who the victim is in these paternatiy dramas, and the evidence, intelligence and experience will help us establish was it reasonable behaviour or, what is a reasonable remedy in financial terms.


For example before I say a woman is entitled to whatever amount she claims, I want to know what she needs the money for, and that will also include in my judgement any other children she has and who is maintaining them. Because if I have any doubt wheter this is too much, or too little those things are important. No woman is just going to come and claim said ammount and think we should pay it never.

So I have little personal attachement, or interest and have no woman bashing my door down for maintainace. Even though I have a very clear interest as I am an apologetic Caribbean cultural conservative. I hence want to preserve the things which are fundamentally important for the good of the whole, and want to punish or not reward things which are bad and dangerous.

I need little convincing about the behaviour of many men, none whatsoever. I am a man and have lived in masculine society all my life and longer than you and know the kind of dodgy and dog heart men who are out there. I don't want those kind of men as company as I value my reputation.The law should punish them without mercy, because I have nieces and sisters and women to protect.

But sister, consider this. Men and women in their natural state would do if allowed a whole heap of things of destructive proportions. Despite our higher selves, we have lower selfs, and left to our natural states on the right day men would sex every woman on the planet, or men would kill each other for stepping on each others toes.

But civilised people, Black African people develop values, principles and mechanisms, so men like me cannot have sex with every available and willing black women on the planet, because we just happen to have the urge on particular day, because the moon is high in Saturn of something on that nature..

So we choose to regulate our behaviuor, because of our own self interest and the common good. Where we don't then trouble occurs ,which threatens the safety and stability of the group. This was long time before herpes STDS etc so those old Africans had foresight, would you not agree, because they were talking about the dangers of children being born in undesirable circumstances, multi fathering from different men, which is a recipe for serious social conflict.

I know professional men who have been beaten and attacked by "baby father", for what, looking after their children, or because some foolish woman run her mouth on the child father ,using another man's name, who is not involved in that shit. But women being women, or humans being humans of the feminine variety, want to hurt another and find the tools to do it. No this dangerous terrritory, very dangerous territory. Men are extremely competitive by nature and nothing more passionate about who is the mother of their children, or even cruder who is between the legs of their exs or child's mother. Boy....

That is why men in their higher minds and selfs, not women FACTS, designed these cultural rules and institutions to stop this craziness. Because men know where this could lead. Any baby father cross me in that manner I would go to jail if I am feeding and reasing his children and why I run from them things. A man who is my social inferior does not come and step up to me like that and think it will rest there. You cannot even raise you children and want to come and test. Bad move...

My younger brother went out with a bueatiful looking girl who had a child. Before we ever met her, her ex ended up on our doorstep with his friend's claiming to be looking for his daughter. What has his daughter to do with our home? We knew nothing about this woman ,and my mother would never approve. Unfortunately while he was playing the big man on the door step, I overheard and grabbed him by his windpipe, and he was a few seconds away from crushing his skull into the pavement.

He came back two days later to appologies to my mother, when he realised my younger brother would kill him dead for the disresepct alone to want to act the bad man with our mother ,and unbeknown to us had already paid him a vistit with his crew. He dumped the girl one time. It would have ended up in serious bloodshed for a waster, and he took his older brother advise.

So when I make my judgements, or remedies playing Judge Judy or Judge Roy Brown for a second, I am atttempting to try to take many things into consideration, particularly the decison making and motivations of the woman, as well as the man's.

So if you take what I say, that if men have little costs or disincentive for sexual relations most men are going to take whatever a woman makes available. Yes some men may pray on female insecurities of vulnerablitiy, but that can only work with the voluntary compliance of women.

Moreover, what makes you think women do not not attempt to manipulate men sexually, or place them under pressure to have sex? Sis you are a woman, and I am a man don't let me start to talk. Men are probably more cruder and basic, but if anyone on this planet believe women do not sexually pressure men to have sex, then we should stop this now.

In fact to take your own example in your post, women who feel insecure may be even more likely to pressue a man for sex, especially if they are in a competitve situation. Or create situations where sex is very highly likely to occur.

As I have said and it is true, I have never started a sexual conversation with a woman ,or made those moves. Womem and women alone decide when and who they sleep with and they will make it clear in their various ways what they want and when. For example when she says "I have been to the doctors and am now on the pill" when you are talking about football and the last thing on your mind is sex when your team is being beaten.

For example when you go to their yard and they are walking about in their sexual regalia, or the environment has clearly been prepared for something special and the man has no idea, or expectation what was being planned. Try to get out of that situation, when a woman has been bold enough to pull her moves, and you have walked into it blind as a man, and you are going to have to say listen honey you moving a bit to fast..and she is sitting there all dolled up in her finest..

I know brothers, who like myself had to run from women's yards, because they have jumped the gun big time and it can destroy things ,because you were not checking them in that way, or thinking abou those things at that stage, and the woman comes out in her shirt and sexy underwear on and has immediately created a situation which you have little control over, other than to leave immediately and there is no guarentee it will not get ugly.

You can be going out with two women as I have done and committed to none at that stage, just checking things out, and have done nothing to move things beyond that, and one woman decides to up the stakes and pulls some foolishness.

Because once a woman expose herself in that manner and a man does not follow up, she is very vulnerable, and has put it all on the line, and has to come back with something of face saving value, eg curse you out and say your'e all mouth etc ,or you give off this impression etc.

I had a woman running around saying she suspected I was gay because I did not jump her bones, after she revealled her stunning bra and panties combination. That is called manipulation. Your'e ****ed if you do[excuse my language] and ****ed if you don't. I take the latter course every time. But a lot of brothers don't, and that is where they are foolish. It's there available and in your face, and they are going to take it.

I could go on. My girlfriend of long time about 7 years and me split up, as she was driving me mad. But we had to see each other at a Christening. We got on well and civillised and danced etc, but my girl was sooo stunning one thing let to the next, and the relationship resumed from there. Next day we were laying at home and told me she better phone her sister to pay her for winning her bet.

She knew she would get me back that night, because she knew me so well especially sexually and our chemisty and the way my girl was dressed and was interacting with me, try as I might I had my mouth on the floor even though I had my tough business "woman who you think you playing with" face on. She knew me like the back of her hand, and knew she was irresitable, and she was and is. She knew she was not going to her home that night..

I would have said that was impossible for a woman to do to me knowing myself and how I have handled situations before, but she did it quite comfortably, and very proud that she was one of the few women who could pull that off; and never let me forget it. Enjoying every inch of a feminine powers.

If a woman is close to you and is no fool, she will know you and know you very well and how to approach you, or engineer a situation. When my mother wanted to get her way with my father, I knew because she would do things which were her regular pattern to soften my father up ,so he could not resist. For example she would cook his favourite back home dishes a particular way. Usually she did not have time and would do a short cut version, but when you see her up extremely early you knew something was going on.

Women have manipulated men from the begining of time, as women are the natural nemisis of man. Men are weak to women as women are to men. Because we both potentially give each other things we both deeply desire. To assume all women are powerless and mallable is simply not true, or supported by what we all know....

My first sexual experience I walked into as my girl friend had planned the whole thiing like a military operation. To look at her butter would not melt in her mouth, she was such a sweet little thing?

So certain things do cut both ways. Women have been getting men to kill each other from the time god made man, because they know thier influence, and there nothing more powerful on this planet than a confident woman lying down with her soft body against a man. If men have weakness women will find it.

When Malcolm X said, he does not trust women more than 95 percent and was unapoletitic about it, many brothers hailed him because they knew what he meant. The man was not a fool or little boy. A woman can mastermind a tragedy and come with water in her eyes, like she knew nothing, and is a victim and get a trailer load of people and plenty men to come and beat you, give you plenty of cutlass, and licks in your arse and then hang you.


My mother and aunts told me as a child women been giving men "jackets" from time in memorial in the CAribbean. So nobody is fooling anyone here. They are pregnant by other men and put the charm on some poor sucker and make sure he gets plenty sex, even if he had never expected it. Next thing BINGO.."I've got some bad news for you....They did not have Maury Povich in those days with his DNA testing and lie detectors. Women use to abort children in the CAribbean if they did not want the man as a father or they thought it would make their lives harder and the men knew absolutely nothing about it. So any body familiar seriously with our history and culture and the things that have and go on, will know how to never jump to easy conclusions where particular things are concerned.

By the time I was a child I was already being prepared for the tricky and slippery world of women, because our women did not want the wrong woman to ensnare their sons. If you get thier sons you deserve them, that is their views on the matter. As my mother and aunts use to say, they came through the front door with our father's invitation and family blessing, not the back door.

I will understimate a million men, before I underestimate one black woman, because I have seen the balls and neck too many women have, and what they will do. It could be best friend, sister, work mate, as we say "dem no partial when dem ready"...I assume nothing.

So we assume nothing in paternity matters other than sex took place.

FredFredniceone.gif

Fredblack - I'm not being peculiar, funnyor awkward, butI really don't understand that last post confused3

Hang on......, I just re-read a little bit more, so you're saying that the child may not be his, if she has other children by another man?

Fredblack

Isn't the issue that there are too many irresponsible men and women out there who do not think about the consequences of their sexual actions, sorry but men as well as women have a responsibility here. Having a child with someone ties you to that person for the rest of your life either directly or indirectly so anyone who doesn't want children with a particular person should do something about it and not leave it up to the other party. I like your fathers advice and I wish that more guys were given this advice about taking responsibility for their sexual organs.

As forwoman, yes there are alot of us out there who are irresponsible ( and also stupid) beyond believe. We need toinstill alot more responsibility around sexual behaviour.

Regarding standards of living my point was simplly a child's standard of living will be based on whoever he/she lives this is practical reality, by default guys will end up supplementing the standard of living of the childs mother and yeah your right possibly children who are not his, this is part of the complexity of relationships.

Incidently not all woman go chasing men for all they've got. I know of a sister who spent the last 18 years raising her son alone because the father refused to have anythingto do with the child. The son wanted to know his father so she gave him what information she could. The son tracked the father down. The father acknowledged his mistakes and is now paying for his son to go through university.

My biggest concern in all of this is the impact on our children and what they are learning about sexual behaviour, taking responsibility for children and a whole host of other things.


By the way Fredblack what has my country of origin got to do with the issue?

athaba wrote:

[color=darkred][i]
* Let me please ask you just these two questions, A. --

* Imagine that you're a woman who contributed to making a baby and you neither wanted the burdens, the expenses and/or the responsibilities?

* Well... You would have SEVERAL OPTIONS open to you, including putting the child up for adoption, leaving it at the hospital, leaving it to the State to care & provide for, etc., correct?''

* Now... Imagine that you're a MAN who contributed to making a baby and you neither wanted the burdens, the expenses and/or the responsibilities? Yeah.

* "Child Support" Laws need to be DRASTICALLY changed!


[align=center]= Think About It ! =

____________________________________


''Before We Can See Things As We Would Like For Them To Be,
We Must First See Things As They Are!"[/font][/align]