I think this is a very interesting topic indeed.

I don't understand Redstar2000's comment about paternal rights being reformist, as most men in the world are working class. Defending worker rights is very important in both the working class movement and defending against reactionary forces, like the religious right.

I also don't really understand, why though people are talking about men having a say on the issue of abortion. We should do nothing but support women, whether we agree with their decision or not.

The main point that I would like to make clear is that as communists we need to look at this from a class perspective. In the thread it all is based on gender, which really is not very helpful.

First, the issue should not be recognized as paternal rights, but secondary parental rights.

This is because, working class people includes male fathers and female lesbian mothers, of which neither gave birth to the child.

Enforcement from the state to make secondary parents pay for children, further degrades the average proletarians financial resources. They have signed no contract, they have made not pact, they have been fucked over.

Proletarians do not owe capitalists anything, because we do not have any real Rights.

Secondary parents do not owe the child 'bearer' anything, because they do not have any real Rights.


The capitalists have property, thus allowing them financial security, meaning they don't have to worry about parental rights, because they are not pushed further into poverty.

Secondary parents are oppressed because they have few 'rights' but do have financial 'responsibility'.

Without allowing workers, that are secondary parents, a say in whether or not they want to contribute to their child's life.


End of the day, the financial responsibility on individual proletarians will always be present, in our current system. But making someone pay for something they could not oppose, at least in my eyes at the moment seems like bull. I this happened to me, i would not have a problem denying payments.

Ps. im only talking about when a secondary parent is forced to pay, when they were not given an option. If they did want a child, then i agree they should pay.

Please tell me if my idea is bullshit. Hehe

I don't understand why anyone of us should care...because it's not, in the usual sense at least, a class issue.

I mean, do you really want to argue that millions and millions of working class men are being "unjustly deprived" of their children or suffer from the "outrageous burden" of supporting them?

Most men who seem to be raising this issue are upper middle class or higher and have ample resources to either get their kids awarded back to them or to pay court-ordered child support with visiting rights.

Working class men usually can't afford child support and often successfully evade it; which is why working class women with children are so damn poor!

Under capitalism, children are an expensive luxury...and ordinary people who have and raise them have basically "signed over" most of the rest of their lives.

If there's a "communist position" in all this, it's that we should be telling young women DON'T HAVE KIDS!

Because the way things are set up, you will really be "in the shit" if you do.

Unless, of course, you can marry a really rich bastard...that's your only chance -- not a very "inspiring" message.

redstar2000,

What a load of shit, how in hell is that a ‘communist position’ the only communist position on that aspect of this issue should be, it’s up to the individual.

Do you think that has something to do with dropping birth rates? At least a factor.

Utter bullshit, I have no idea were you get some of this stuff.

From seeing lawyer ads in the sports pages of the bourgeois media..."Specializes in Father's Rights", "Divorce on Your Terms", "Get Custody of Your Kids", stuff like that.

Do you think ordinary working guys can afford to hire divorce lawyers?

Or ordinary working women, for that matter.

I actually witnessed one of these cases once when I was in court for another case entirely. After some talk between the judge and the elderly divorcing couple about their economic situation, the judge ordered the guy to pay $10.00 a week alimony to his ex-wife. And bluntly told him that if he didn't do it, he would go to jail!

I don't think you grasp either how precarious life is down towards the bottom of the "food chain" or how meaningless the custody squabbles of the middle class really are!

That is a rather selfish way of looking at it. Childless, I hope.

As far as I know.

If that makes you happy, thats great