[This has turned into a series. My follow-up to rational criticisms is here, my follow-up to the more emotion-based arguments is here, and this is a post inspired by a comment that might drive the importance of this issue home to women.]
In today’s current cultural and legal climate, most any husband (and a fair amount of boyfriends) who asks for a paternity test upon hearing his woman is pregnant will be greeted with weeping and cries of “How dare you not trust me?” from her and “How dare you not trust her?’ from everybody else. The assumption is that if she’s female she would never lie about that sort of thing.
As a solution, some advocate mandatory paternity testing. However, the libertarian in me isn’t particularly comfortable with making people do something. Fortunately, I don’t have a problem with requiring that people do something if they want something done for them in return.
That’s why I advocate something similar to what’s happened in Tennessee, only I expound a bit more. I don’t know the ins and outs of the Tennessee law, but here’s what I advocate:
1. That all paternity tests be entirely voluntary.
2. That a paternity be medically confirmed before a father is listed on the birth certificate (what it looks like they do in TN).
Of course, the feminists are perplexed:
However, I don’t understand why paternity tests couldn’t be required at the time of a paternity or child support dispute, rather than requiring the test for everyone.
So that soft-hearted males don’t get suckered into paying for kids that aren’t their own, that’s why. If you so much as ask for a paternity test, you’re the bad guy, and if you don’t ask for one and the kid’s not yours, you’re on the hook.
Another site advocates that [emphasis the author’s]:
Those born in wedlock or brought into wedlock are the husband’s — even following divorce, even if they are not their biological children — unless they formally disown them.
Which puts the entire onus to establish paternity on the evil dude who’ll be strung up by his genitalia if his suspicions prove to be unfounded. Such logic gives him every reason to play it safe and gives her every reason to play it risky. This mindset conflates the sanctity of marriage with the sanctity of the Female Imperative for alpha fux/beta bux. For some reason, Alte thinks that requiring ( every married man(unless he raises a major stink) to act as father to kids who aren’t his will “deprive women of an incentive to cheat, and interlopers of an incentive to sleep with married women.”
“If Bill gets me pregnant, if Ed even suspects anything, he’ll never have the balls to do anything about it. I’ll make him feel so guilty that he’ll never require a paternity test.”
“If I bang Isabella and get her pregnant, Bill has to pay for all the kid’s diapers and crap. Cool.”
Sounds like a foolproof plan to me!
Of course, there’s the children to consider. As this commenter says:
A presumption of paternity – whether legal or cultural (preferably both) – is necessary for the protection of the family and especially the children. Even if it turns out to be a “necessary fiction”. The honor of the husband is entirely subordinate to the ontological reality of his marriage.
What a great time to be a man! Your wife boinks some other dude, and your “honor” means nothing. It’s up to you to pay for your wife’s infidelity and let the “necessary fiction” of your wife’s basic decency dictate your life and drain your finances.
These idiots presuming to support marriage are giving men every reason imaginable to avoid it like the plague.
“The Blogmaster” continues:
Also important: the presumption of paternity eliminates another incentive for the wife to leave her husband, possibly even abandoning other children. Her lover cannot claim the child and further divide her loyalties. All of her children belong to her husband alone. If she wants her children, she must restore her marriage.
Actually, the fear that her husband will find out if she gets pregnant with another guy might provide even more incentive for her to maintain the sanctity of her marriage, not only as a “necessary fiction”, but through not sleeping with other dudes. Furthermore, if she leaves her husband, no child support for her. If he gives so much as a dime to those kids, it’s going to be because he wants to.
Which means that the husband would either dominate his marriage (like he should), or he can let her find out if the badboy with Alpha seed is willing to play beta and help to raise her kids after he leaves her.
In short, there will be consequences for her actions.
I’m aware that kids in this situation will get screwed over. However, like I described in The Red Pendulum, sometimes the only way to limit certain behaviors is to disincentivize them. The first few women under this system may find themselves in dire straits, but other women will see what’s happening to those women and therefore perhaps behave themselves so that it doesn’t happen to them, too.
Which would mean that it’s better for the children because you’ll have fewer wives boinking the stable boy and husbands who have reason to trust their wives other than “she’s female and therefore deserving of every conceivable benefit of the doubt.”
A major part of the Red Pill, an essential component of A is A is that incentives matter. The incentive structure that Alte, Rachel, and “The Blogmaster” advocate is one that punishes the loyal husband who gets screwed over and blesses the wife with his paychecks as she enjoys the seed of another man.
It’s what most states do now, and it isn’t working. As we harp on “deadbeat dads” while praising “heroic single moms”, we find ourselves with more children growing up without a father than ever before. I’ve little good to say about a man who boffs some babe and refuses to have anything to do with the kid, but shouldn’t we save at least a little bit of criticism for sluts both married and single?
I know we do it for the children, but dammit, nothing affects a young child more directly than the behavior of its mother. If she gets pregnant by some player, she’s relegated her kid to a life without a decent father. If she gets pregnant through cheating on her husband, then the sanctity of her marriage is a fiction. Pretending otherwise only ensures that it will happen even more.
She should be loyal to her husband, but she won’t be if we punish her husband for her screw-ups instead of her.
[Part II, in which I address my other point, to follow soon.]