My recent interview about paternity fraud on LBC Radio, along with a female medical ethicist, generated an unusually high number of comments. I’m delighted to see that William Collins has used it as the starting point for another of his consistently excellent articles – here.
The logical corollary of making the child the sole financial responsibility of the mother, if the mother retains her ‘ownership’ of the child, will be an even greater number of children abused by women, and a vast increase in the use of the Infanticide Act (which is already based on disproved psuedo-science) to kill off defenceless and burdensome children.
Possibly they might not “want” it, but it’s the logical corollary of their other demands. Make a child the sole financial responsibility of the mother with no State support and illegitimate pregnancy would disappear overnight.
Surely feminists want women to have 0% financial liability for their children, with male partners (whether present or absent) or taxpayers – men, mostly, who pay 72% of the income tax in the UK – paying for their little darlings and themselves in terms of housing, benefits, childcare subsidies etc.?
Many years ago I talked to a guy who worked on the research for ICI Cellmark diagnostics. The scientists did not understand why the accuracy of their animal tests were not replicated in humans.
He went and talked to the nurses on maternity wards. The husband visited in the evening, the lover in the afternoons. Biologically the Alpha male who can father healthy offspring is not the Beta male who will stick around and raise them.
Primitive societies are matrilineal; patriarchy demands quite a sophisticated social structure and maybe we should remove State subsidy for children and give the feminists what they want -100% financial LIABILITY for their children.