1 in 10 people are not fathered by the person they think is their dad

I understand what you are saying, but I'm having difficulty with the underlying assumptions.

Your post seems to imply the only person losing out here is the husband/partner. There also seems to be an implication that raising a child who does not carry half your genes is somehow inferior to raising a child who does not carry your genes at all.

I see it as a potential tragedy for all involved. The woman has a terrible secret she has to be confronted with every day for 18 years. The husband/partner has a relationship that isn't based on trust, but instead on lies. The kid gets the crap either way, whether from Mom who sees the kid as a reminder of her failings, or if Dad knows, he sees the kid as the result of his wife/girlfriend's lies and unfaithfulness.

It's a bad situation all around, but I expect the kid gets the worst of it unless both "parents" acknowledge the situation and get past the hurt, moving on with their lives, either together or apart. The problem here is not the kid, but the deception and indiscretion.

Very difficult to have a good outcome for the kid, which I see as the biggest tragedy.

We can't change the past, nor the present. Those are what they are. We can change the future, by learning from the past.

Perhaps that's my point. We can only affect our future. We hopefully learn from our past mistakes.

 

I know y'all don't need to concern yourselves with genetics but damn, brother! What did you just try to say?

 

I don't either... any more.

 

I would love to see this broken down via socioeconomic status. It is my assumption that the baby daddy culture among the poor of all races has a major impact on this percentage.

 

Always? No. But how many willing to dally men bother to ask?

When approached by a married woman who's looking, as opposed to a single woman who's looking, there are some clues in most cases. Yes, people lie. Yes, someone can put together a convincing story. People do get bamboozled. But not that often.

Mostly, people choose not to pay attention to the whole story, and just see what they want to see, hear what they want to hear.

How do you think politicians get elected?

 

I think it's the married person's responsibility (man or woman) to disclose their marital status. Someone hitting on you or responding to your flirting can be reasonably assumed to be available. Unless you believe that the majority of people are scumbags. Could be true.

 

Ha!

That raising a kid who is biologically yours isn't different than raising one that isn't biologically yours (from your sperm/egg).

I have a number of friends and acquaintances who put great store on having a biological kid (they tend to call them "a child of my own"), and others who want a kid, regardless of whether they adopt or have it via a donor or "naturally". In my view, a kid's a kid.

I just don't feel the need to create a biological half-copy of myself.

There are far too many kids who aren't wanted, who need decent parents, etc. I've dealt with far too many throw-away kids. It amazes me that a parent can do that to a child they brought into the world or chose to raise.

 

your discussion seems to imply married woman, single man.

in my experience about 90% of the time it is married man, married woman.

 

To a lesser degree I agree if the man knows she is married he's a bit of a scumbag. But not even an order of magnitude as much of a scumbag as she is. Remember, a single man has no obligation to a mate they made a commitment to......she on the other hand does, she is the one who is breaking the trust and acting in a far more inappropriate manner, he's just taking advantage of an opportunity. So in my book she is that much worse of a person.

 

I have raised biological and step children. Both are rewarding experiences. There is, however, something to be said for seeing characteristics of beloved but deceased family members in a child. A grandfather's eyes, an aunt's laugh, etc. It provides a comforting sense of continuity.

 

Only one person IS losing out here, potentially two. The man is living a lie (whether he knows it or not), and the child doesn't know who their actual father is (again whether they know they are illegitimate or not).

The woman is most certainly NOT losing out here. In fact she is WINNING on all fronts. Especially if she chose to "settle down" with a beta male provider's wallet, and cheated and got herself knocked up by some alpha scumbag.

I agree except for the first part you said there. If the woman was at all bothered she would have either copped to it right away, or never had cheated in the first place.

Can only learn from the past if the past is exposed for what it is. If women are allowed to do what they do and have no real punishment for doing so...its basically fraud getting impregnated by another man, then passing the child off as someone else's, potentially for the money benefit....then what have we (or more specifically they/women) learned? Nothing, except that they can willfully buck the system and their husbands with no recourse.

 

This seemed like a good spot for some Friday afternoon levity

 

And, most of the time, probably two people who know each other well before the cheating takes place.

 

That's a pretty black-and-white statement. You've never, ever, even once in your life done something you were ashamed of and kept it hidden?

 

Sorry, I don't see any winners here.

And as far as I'm concerned, the money aspect is definitely secondary to the integrity, honesty, responsibility and trust issues.


Suprised it took so long for some Maury clips to make it into this thread!