From the wild Irish slums of the 19th century Eastern seaboard, to the riot-torn suburbs of Los Angeles, there is one unmistakable lesson in American history; a community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future - that community asks for and gets chaos.
The problem is that the "sperm doners" eat and run, so to speak, leaving the offspring to make their way through life without them, resulting in the societal tragedy Moynihan predicted. What is the solution? What is the remedy? We have had over sixty years of costly affirmative action, but the problem is far worse. I can't think of a solution that has not been tried.
Yes--agree. But seems that the sperm donors could be, you know, tracked down and presented with hard choices (support your kid or get deported to, I dunno, who wants them? Liberia? Sierra Leone? Communist Chyna?)...rather than it being so easy for them to leave their spawn on the wallets of other men.
Which points to the real crux of the problem. This is de facto state forced polygyny (men required by threat of punishment to pay taxes to support others' offspring). Which is bad enough. Not only are taxpayers required to take resources out of their own families to give to those they don't even choose, the state chooses for them.
Taxpaying men need to push back hard on this. I have seen no signs of that happening. The only discussions IRL I've seen of it have been with women (conservative, but a few libs) who recognize it as the reproductive strategy it is. Of course the lib women who had children out of wedlock dream of finding a man who will support the other man's offspring. But at least that's more or less contractual...at least in some cases....
I've been doing late landwork/winterprep, and am bushed, so I hope this even makes sense. Thanks, Fred.
So erm where’s the sperm donors? Or are we to believe these were all parthenogenetic births???
The problem is that the "sperm doners" eat and run, so to speak, leaving the offspring to make their way through life without them, resulting in the societal tragedy Moynihan predicted. What is the solution? What is the remedy? We have had over sixty years of costly affirmative action, but the problem is far worse. I can't think of a solution that has not been tried.
Yes--agree. But seems that the sperm donors could be, you know, tracked down and presented with hard choices (support your kid or get deported to, I dunno, who wants them? Liberia? Sierra Leone? Communist Chyna?)...rather than it being so easy for them to leave their spawn on the wallets of other men.
Which points to the real crux of the problem. This is de facto state forced polygyny (men required by threat of punishment to pay taxes to support others' offspring). Which is bad enough. Not only are taxpayers required to take resources out of their own families to give to those they don't even choose, the state chooses for them.
Taxpaying men need to push back hard on this. I have seen no signs of that happening. The only discussions IRL I've seen of it have been with women (conservative, but a few libs) who recognize it as the reproductive strategy it is. Of course the lib women who had children out of wedlock dream of finding a man who will support the other man's offspring. But at least that's more or less contractual...at least in some cases....
I've been doing late landwork/winterprep, and am bushed, so I hope this even makes sense. Thanks, Fred.