Categories
$MONEY$ evil women idiocy men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA reddit

MR Redditor: Unmarried women will have babies so the government will pick up their tab at restaurants

This comment didn’t get a ton of upvotes in r/mr, but it was just too idiotic to ignore:

Thanks, r/againstmensrights for pointing this one out!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

366 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Yaz
Yaz
9 years ago

Totally worth all the hospital/doctor/prenatal care expenses if you get a free meal at Denny’s.

As far as incentives go, this one is pretty tempting. /snark

Shora
9 years ago

I wonder if MRA’s think women are incapable of a simple cost-benefit analysis, or if they themselves are?

Nobby
Nobby
9 years ago

Buh? Whaaa?

WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!

mythago
9 years ago

I wonder if MRA’s think

Not so much, no.

Shora
9 years ago

Mythago, you make me giggle 😛

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

If anything, these MRAs illustrate how much our educational system sucks.

Holly Pervocracy
9 years ago

I suspect these “restaurants” might be a bit less “glass of wine and candles on the tablecloth” and a bit more on the fast food or sandwich shop side of things. Which isn’t totally unreasonable for a working mother.

Also, as long as people aren’t lying about their eligibility, who cares how they spend their benefits? It doesn’t cost the government any differently if they buy rice and beans or if they buy lobster and steak.

Fuck MRAs
Fuck MRAs
9 years ago

Let me know when they start handing out Mini Coopers and cruise vouchers. I’m saving my eggs.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

I’ll be sitting on my eggs until they cough up beach front property and a pony. Till then, forget it.

BigKitty
BigKitty
9 years ago

@ Holly – I share your bewilderment, but we’ve certainly seen this kind of thing before. There seems to be a very distinct resentment, on the part of right-wingers in general and, apparently, MRAs in particular, against the idea of poor people ever experiencing any kind of pleasure whatsoever, and a sense of outrage if said poor people can be seen as somehow “getting away with” experiencing something pleasurable.

For example, here’s a nice white yuppie lady freaking out about a recent article on Salon that described poor young people (described in the article, for maximum outrage thrills, as “hipsters,” which apparently means they have the nerve to be interested in culture and music when they’re nowhere near rich enough to deserve interests or culture): http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978108869

Nice white lady is all, “They’re eating better than me, on my dime!” But she never considers the fact that if a person’s getting $137.46 per month in food stamps, and they go ahead and blow that whole windfall on (a small piece of) lobster tail and (one, small) heirloom tomato and (a miniature container of) wild rice with truffles, there goes that person’s entire food budget for the month.

Obviously, if you only have $137.46 a month to spend on food, you’d probably be wiser to buy the rice and beans. . . but Nice White Lady’s problem isn’t with the idea that a poor person was unwise to buy gourmet delights. Her problem is that a poor person IS NOT ENTITLED TO HAVE gourmet delights, because she herself is frugal – by choice, I might add, since she obviously is not so poor that she qualifies for food stamps.

I have no idea what to do about people like Nice White Lady, or all the furious commenters on the OP from that link, or the icky MR Redditor who is subject of this OP. It seems hopelessly bizarre to me that so many people resent the poor for any and every single second of happiness they might ever experience, because on some kind of “MORAL!” ground, they have decided that pleasure should always come at a price, and poor people can’t afford it, so it’s an insult to all hard-working normal nice middle-class folks if a poor person ever enjoys something.

BTW – I actually think this is the real engine behind the anti-choice and anti-contraception rightwingers, too. They really hate the fact that nobody has to spend money or “earn” the right to experience sexual pleasure. It kills them that poor peoples’ orgasms feel just as wonderful as their own!

red_locker
9 years ago

“I’ll be sitting on my eggs until they cough up beach front property and a pony. Till then, forget it.”

But, but…IT’S DENNY’S! You know, the place that the Muppets used to hang out at? WHO CAN BEAT THAT?!

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

OK, maybe a fainting goat. They make me laugh.

David K. Meller
David K. Meller
9 years ago

Oh, champions of the downtrodden,

It might be worth pointing out that the people who see unwed floozies feeding themselves( and their bastard spawn) at taxpayers’ expense on lobster and steak are having an awful lot of trouble keeping a roof over their heads, feeding THIER families on rice and beans, and keeping the clunker in good enough repair for another year to get to work on time–hoping the price of gas doesn’t top 5 dollars (US)/Gal.

This is NOT a case of rich vs.poor! The Billionaire NWO criminal elites already have everything their own way! This is a case of millions of struggling working people, trying to live responsibly, being taxed to death to support not one but TWO classes of parasites! One–admittedly the more destructive–are the banks, mortgage sharks, Wall St. Gamblers and big-time politically connected crooks which make up the ruling elite kleptocracy poisoning the economy,and the other, the welfarocracy–the people (mostly women, if you care to notice), largely in government, the “mainline” churches, the trade unions, the banks, and perhaps most importantly, the media and universities, who fund, aid and abet unwed motherhood, drug addiction, race (and gender) resentment, and sundry social and moral pathology turning our cities into sewers and what once was the greatest country in the world into a third-world hellhole! It is the middle and working classes, now disappearing and under armed siege, who PAYS for this lunacy–NOT the NWO billionaires and their agents!

Before you go off half cocked supporting welfare chislers, look at who is REALLY oppressed and downtrodden in the USSA-(United Socialist States of Amerika)!

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller

Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

Well, at least he admits that Wall St. is more destructive than so-called welfare chislers. Progress not perfection.

OSHIII
OSHIII
9 years ago

Really now? I can’t believe all the jackasses on these MRA forums seriously believe shit like this. “Women will have babies! Because in addition to being on the hook for another human being’s upbringing and support for 18+ years, they might get to use like $200/month SNAP funds to eat at restaurants!” — and then get stuck with the monthly costs of everyday feeding, clothing, housing, caring for, keeping warm, keeping cool, entertaining, healing, tending, daycare, babysitters, doctor visits, school supplies, getting like 2 hours of sleep a night for much of the first year, constantly worrying because children are expensive and you fear you might not be able to provide everything they require….

But hey! 200$ a MONTH! JACKPOT, Y’ALL!!

OSHIII
OSHIII
9 years ago

Really, I have a hard time seeing this sort of nonsense as much more than material for victimization fetishists.

cynickal
cynickal
9 years ago

Yes, but nearly to the level that Universities are! After all Universities are funding drug addiction and turning our cities into sewers while driving this, the once greatest country in the world into a third world hell-hole!

Disclaimer, I’m pretty sure you need a good grasp of higher learning and critical thinking to make an efficient sewer system. And while third world hell-holes are cheaper, you get better quality out of first world hell-holes. Just look at Sunnydale High.

Pam
Pam
9 years ago

I can’t believe all the jackasses on these MRA forums seriously believe shit like this.

Of course they do. These are the same jackasses that bitch and moan about women divorcing their husbands on a whim and “kidnapping” HIS children (y’know, the children that he might “babysit” on the odd occasion) so that they can get RICH on the few thousand dollars in child support that they might receive.

David K. Meller
David K. Meller
9 years ago

Unwed mothers CHOOSE to have sex without marriage. Unwed mothers CHOOSE to get pregnant by those “fathers” without marriage. Unwed mothers CHOOSE to undergo pregnancy without marriage–and often without their child’s sperm donor. Unwed mothers CHOOSE to have the babies out of wedlock, without a two-parent household to care for them.
Unwed mothers CHOOSE to keep the baby(ies) rather than give them up for adoption.

Now tell me, OSHill—and those who agree with him/her–about the hard life that said unwed mothers undergo because of a responsibility that they had no right to assume, and they had no right to inflict upon other people (see my post above);people who CANNOT SPARE that $200./mo because they did the responsible thing, married, work hard, and they NEED that “jackpot” to help feed, clothe, and educate THEIR children, keep a roof over their own heads, and meet their family and community obligations!

Additionally, they–and their children–deserve better than to have the unwed mother’s fatherless spawn grow up to terrorize their schools,parks, streets, and neighborhoods, as well as have the daughters of unwed slut grow up to breed more of the same 13-16 years down the line!

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K.Meller

mythago
9 years ago

“Fatherless spawn”? Women can reproduce parthenogenetically as long as they’re not married? WHO KNEW?!

shaenon
9 years ago

Additionally, they–and their children–deserve better than to have the unwed mother’s fatherless spawn grow up to terrorize their schools,parks, streets, and neighborhoods, as well as have the daughters of unwed slut grow up to breed more of the same 13-16 years down the line!

I agree entirely. That’s why I support helping to feed, educate, and care for these children, so they can grow up to do better than terrorize the neighborhood (like Heathcliff!) and become teenage parents. I’m glad we’re on the same page here, because there are so many people who seem to have this weird notion that poor kids deserve to suffer for not having well-off parents. I’ll never understand those people.

mythago
9 years ago

@shaenon, you misunderstand. Those poor kids deserve to suffer because their mothers were brazen strumpets who fornicated outside of marriage! (The men with whom they fornicated, eh, whatever.)

Shora
9 years ago

Women have sex sometimes even when they can’t support children!!! HEAVEN FORFEND.

Sometimes the “choice” to bring a pregnancy to term is, depending on the state, not a choice at all due to limited access to affordable abortion services. Oh but wait, you sound like a pro-lifer. All the better to look down on a woman for having children when you forced her to it! And if you can degrade and marginalize and pigeonhole those children as they grow up, ALL THE BETTER.

Also, let’s go ahead and ignore the fact that when a mother is raising her out of wedlock child alone, it’s because the father abandoned their child!

Also, people just above the poverty line actually aren’t paying $200/month! People who are more well off pay more taxes! Those people just above the line where they could use the benefits probably appreciate that they’re there in case they need them! I know I do!

MissPrism
9 years ago

Hmm. Single men can adopt, can’t they? If single parenthood on benefits is such a gravy train, jump aboard, guys!

Ponkz
Ponkz
9 years ago

DKM, the families you talk about struggling to make ends meet quite often need the woman to go out and work too because just one salary cannot cover everything, yet you have made it clear you don’t think women should work. So please, spare us your fake concern – you would happily see plenty of men who are members of poor and/or working class families kept in poverty, if it keeps those bitches in the kitchen.

Orion
Orion
9 years ago

I’m pretty sure putting your kids up for adoption makes them cost the state more, rather than less money.

comrade svilova
comrade svilova
9 years ago

As Shora says, if you’re so close to the poverty line that you’re jealous of food stamps, you can at least be glad that they are an option for you if you suffer further economic set backs!

We need a more progressive tax code though. 🙂

blitzgal
9 years ago

A recent audit just showed that there was $60 billion in waste and FRAUD by private contractors during the War on Terror. The oil industry gets $35 billion in subsidies every year. The agricultural industry gets $25 billion (we call them farm subsidies but these are not small family farms sucking up the majority of that money anymore. It’s Big Agra).

We’re talking hundreds of billions of our tax dollars going to corporate America. But what do regular Americans wring their hands over? Someone who spends a hundred bucks in food stamps on fancy cheese instead of eating rice and beans every day like they “deserve” (because we all know that you’re only poor because you’re lazy and you’re only rich because you work really hard). We waste so much time fighting with the people who are at the bottom with us instead of looking up at the folks who’ve been taking a massive dump on the middle class for the past forty years. Divide and conquer, baby.

darksidecat
9 years ago

Children and their caretakers are valuable human beings who are valuable to society, as people, and, in the case of caretakers, as workers taking care of an essential part of the population (i.e. children). Ensuring a basic standard of living for these people is a societal duty, or it should be.

I want to add that I love how Meller seems to think women make babies all on their lonesome. Why aren’t you really keen on making those “unwed fathers” pay child support if you are so dead against social support? (note, not all single mothers were never married, and many unwed births occur to partnered people)

Something to mention as well, someone pointed out that we are likely talking fast food restaurants, and this is true, but what no one has mentioned yet is that homeless people, including homeless families, and people in low income temporary housing do not always have access to a stove or microwave to cook meals with. This may be the only chance for many people to feed themselves or their kids a hot meal.

thebionicmommy
thebionicmommy
9 years ago

Okay, let me get this straight. MRA’s do not want single mothers to ever receive government aid to help them while they raise their children. They also do not think fathers should have to pay child support for their own children. Now I understand. MRA’s want single mothers and their children to starve.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Meller, your slip is showing with the “unwed slut” comment. Why the slut hate?

kristinmh
kristinmh
9 years ago

I think I can safely say that, at 20 weeks, my pregnancy has already cost more than a fast food combo.

Here’s what you have to buy when you’re pregnant:
– prenatal vitamins (~$20 bottle, every two months or so)
– very over-priced maternity clothes – I can still wear about 30% of my non-maternity tops, but all the pants I’ve ever owned are right out. Fortunately I could borrow a few pairs from a friend and my mom bought me one expensive new pair, but it’s still a big expense.
– New bras every 3-4 weeks
– A 10% increase in the food budget as you have to be super diligent about your diet
– Extra public transportation costs as I’m not able to bike long distances anymore…grr…
– A replacement wedding ring (which I still haven’t bought!), as my hands are too swollen for me to wear my real ring now
– A couple of pairs of shoes – feet are swollen too
– A maternity winter coat, as I’ll be giving birth in February

All in all, I’ll probably spend an extra $1000-$2000 just on being pregnant, mostly on needed clothes, food, and transportation. Note that I’m not counting any of the baby stuff or lost income.

But, on the bright side, I’m no longer spending $$$ on alcohol, so I guess it evens out. XD

And living in the liberal paradise of Canada, I don’t pay a cent for maternity care. Even midwives are covered. I can’t imagine having to pay out of pocket for check-ups or any of the zillions of tests they want to do to you. I would probably have put off having a baby for another 10 years to get into the position where I could afford that.

Pam
Pam
9 years ago

Why the slut hate?

For having sex outside the bonds of domestic slavery to which their proper owner is entitled.

thebionicmommy
thebionicmommy
9 years ago

kristenmh, I feel for you. I have two children, so I understand the woes of dressing during pregnancy. I bought a lot of my maternity clothes from garage sales, and only bought a few retail items for special occasions. I couldn’t justify spending much money on stuff I’d only wear for a year. I think it’s even harder to dress in the postpartum period, because you’ll be too small for your maternity clothes but not small enough for normal clothes. I had to buy an in between wardrobe with lots of elastic from the “Active wear” section of stores. By the way, my feet never went back to their pre pregnant size. For each pregnancy, they went up a half size permanently.

vacuumslayer
9 years ago

Yes, because raising children on your own is such a barrel of monkeys!!!

vacuumslayer
9 years ago

I didn’t have to start shopping at maternity shops ’til the end of the 2nd trimester…but it wasn’t cheap. Sadly, the quality of Motherhood clothes sucks donkey balls.

vacuumslayer
9 years ago

Oh, and BTW, let’s not even get into the cost of RAISING a child. If you’re looking to make children as a means of making money or scam the system somehow, you’ll be sorely disappointed with the results. KIDS ARE FUCKING EXPENSIVE.

filetofswedishfish
9 years ago

Hell. We had food stamps when I was in High School or so, cause my mom had divorced my father a couple years before. We were *ashamed* of being on them because of the stigma associated with “taking handouts”. And I knew a ton of other people on the same program who purposely grocery shopped at weird times to avoid letting others see them using the EBT card. So, for one, I can’t see a ton of people using it at restaurants (from my own experience, anyhow), and secondly, once the people on the benefits get the money? IT’S THEIR MONEY DAMNIT. It’s not like we’re out there nosing into what large corporations are doing with the money they get in tax cuts, or nosing into what CEOs of the TARP-recipients are doing with their bonuses, which would amount to roughly the same thing.

cynickal
cynickal
9 years ago

as well as have the daughters of unwed slut grow up to breed more of the same 13-16 years down the line!

I thought that was the prime age for MRA’s. Anything older than 16 is tumbling into “hag” territory.

I just can’t keep up with MRA “logic”…

zombie rotten mcdonald

as well as have the daughters of unwed slut grow up to breed more of the same 13-16 years down the line!

..and in an upcoming thread, the same MRI will wring his hands and wail about the declining birth rate!

Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

@DKM,

You make an excellent argument in favor of vigorous enforcement of child support obligations.

KathleenB
KathleenB
9 years ago

I think they’re referring to the cash portion of welfare benefits – you can take the cash out at an ATM or a store. Any food item that would be taxed in Michigan (fountain drinks, food prepared in-store like rotisserie chickens, and anything at a restaurant) is not allowed to be paid for with food assistance. If the place takes the cash part of the Bridge Card, you can pay for whatever with it. And why the hell would the restaurant care if they could take the card at point of sale when putting in an ATM would probably be cheaper and more people could use it? It’s not like the state just hands out access to Bridge Cards, you have to keep records and there are spot checks, and the fines for faffing around can be ruinous.

zombie rotten mcdonald

Before you go off half cocked supporting welfare chislers,

who around here has been supporting banksters and hedge fund managers?

Pam
Pam
9 years ago

I just can’t keep up with MRA “logic”…

Simply practice holding two contradictory opinions at the same time, and you’ll be well on your way to keeping up with MRA “logic”

KathleenB
KathleenB
9 years ago

And how do I know this, you ask? Because my husband and I currently get food benefits. We have no children, we both work (though not as much as we’d like, hence the food stamps), we both pay taxes. I refuse to be ashamed for working my ass off as much as I can (again, in MICHIGAN, the shittiest economy in the country at the moment) and still needing help. Anyone (DKM, MRAL, NWO) who feels the need to shame me for this will get nonsense in reply, because this is fucking non-negotiable. I receive government assistance AND I am a human being.

kristinmh
kristinmh
9 years ago

Thanks, Kendra. At least I could borrow stuff from friends, and I don’t need an office wardrobe – I can’t imagine having to get enough professional-looking maternity clothes for a 9-5 job.

VS, I was unlucky enough to outgrow my pants almost immediately, though I did spend a fair amount of time in the “baby bump or beer belly?” zone.

Amused
Amused
9 years ago

I don’t know about anyone else here, but I personally got pregnant mostly so that I could eat hospital food for a couple of days. What could be more awesome than overcooked turkey and green beans that look and smell like they’ve already been through someone else’s digestive system? All those insurance premiums I paid for so many years finally paid off. And, 9 months of pregnancy and the horror of childbirth, plus the hassle of actually raising the kid were all totally worth it. I mean, free meals, people!!

vacuumslayer
9 years ago

TO-TA-LLY. I’m bummed the great minds of MReddit have figured us out, though.

shaenon
9 years ago

Okay, let me get this straight. MRA’s do not want single mothers to ever receive government aid to help them while they raise their children. They also do not think fathers should have to pay child support for their own children.

Look, it’s very simple.

1. Men shouldn’t have to support their children.
2. The government shouldn’t provide any support for children (if I remember Meller’s rants correctly, this includes abolishing public schools, because who needs literacy?).
3. Women should have sole financial responsibility for their children, and also of course do all the work of raising them.
BUT
3a. Women shouldn’t be allowed to do any kind of paid work, because that’s Manly Man Stuff, and Real Manly Men feel emasculated by any contact with women that doesn’t involve depositing sperm and running for the hills.
3b. In fact, it’s best if women don’t leave the house at all, for fear they might come in contact with a man. They should sit at home with the shades drawn and wait for some kindly soul to push food in through the mail slot. (If we were working under NWO’s rules, we would be allowed to go outside, sit in the middle of the street, and cry until people threw food at us, but I think Meller would consider that paid work and therefore out of bounds.)

Oh, and also:

4. A single woman who has kids is a slut whose children should starve to death to destroy the dangerous Slut Gene.
5. A single woman who doesn’t have kids is destroying civilization by not reproducing fast enough, if she’s white.
6. A married woman is a bitchy leech (or leechy bitch) ruining her husband’s life, regardless of whether they have kids, unless she’s been through Meller’s special woman-obedience-training program, which, strangely, no woman has ever volunteered for.

So as far as I can figure it, if you’re born female, you can be a halfway acceptable human being if you’re a woman of color who takes a lifelong vow of chastity (but don’t become a nun, because that’s treading dangerously close to having a job), or if you’re a white woman who volunteers for Meller’s naughty discipline program. Otherwise, sorry, evil.

RedandGonzo
9 years ago

Along with the baseline hatred of women, does this also strike anyone as an example of the MRAs’ fascination with turning society back to the good old times of the 1880s, early 1900s? No services for the poor or women! No access to quality public education, it only leads to a feminist oligarchy. If the wanton unwed mothers have kids, make ’em work in the mines and steel mills to support the family, like the good old days? Sheesh, it’s like they read The Jungle as an example of a perfectly functioning society.

Now, of course, they only really take this libertarianism stance on things they hate (for example, women). I’m pretty sure they’d be willing to fork over our “hard-earned tax dollars” to start government agencies and programs they’d like. For instance, a bunch of fedora wearing G-Men–the mostly manly of many menz–who’d track down all those false rape accusers like Ness did with Capone.

1 2 3 8