Post: #1

I was speaking to a psychiatrist who specializes in divorces. No I wasn't seeking therapy, just someone I bump into from time to time.

She said that 20 to 25% of children in legal marriages are not the husband's. Then she threw out that they still had to provide financial support. Don't hate her, she actually thinks that stuff is pretty unfair. She is a pretty stand up person.

I was a bit shocked that the rate is that high. She is a credible source imho. Not some nut and if she was a feminazi or something I am sure she would have lowered the rate.

I tried searching for articles, but I guess my search skills are not that great.

Pretty shocking, but maybe I shouldn't have been shocked. She said women always know who the father is and only once was a woman surprised to find out (paternity test) she was wrong as to who the father was.

Enjoy your weekend!

Post: #2

I'm not surprised. Read the book "Sperm Wars" and you'll learn that only about 40% of Men across human history have been successful at continuing their lineage with offspring. Women are much higher at about 80-85% success rate.

http://amzn.com/1560258489

Post: #3

Did she say that 20-25% of the children are not the husbands and that the husband KNOWS? I.E. he married a woman who already has a kid. Or is she saying that 20-25% of husbands think the child is actually theirs, but it isn't?

Post: #4

We need to push our own talking point:

"1 in 4 men are victims of paternity rape."

Post: #5

(06-14-2013 11:28 AM)RioNomad Wrote:  Or is she saying that 20-25% of husbands think the child is actually theirs, but it isn't?

I believe this, I think most husbands would like to believe that the kid is theirs unless they know their wife is a total whore. If that is the case, the guy got what he deserved.

Post: #6

(06-14-2013 11:28 AM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  We need to push our own talking point:

"1 in 4 men are victims of paternity rape."

We also need to fight evils of Matriarchal "Cuckhold Culture".

Post: #7

(06-14-2013 11:28 AM)RioNomad Wrote:  Did she say that 20-25% of the children are not the husbands and that the husband KNOWS? I.E. he married a woman who already has a kid. Or is she saying that 20-25% of husbands think the child is actually theirs, but it isn't?

If it is that they are rising some other man's kid and they know it, the real figure might sky-rocket beyond the 50% or 60% because cuckolds are the last to know if they ever do.

Considering how much effort the well-thinking and the feminazis are taking to forbid paternity test without the consent of the mother, always for the sake of the kids, the fatherhood scam might have reached epic levels.

Post: #8

This figure sounds high. Among guys who seek paternity tests, about 30% are not the dad. But that's among the self-selected group who already suspect they're being conned. So for all husbands it only goes down to 25 or 20%?

I have no doubt it's an outrageous percentage, but I wonder. I've seen figures of from around 2 to 10% in paternity studies, but maybe feminism in academia is skewing the numbers.

Post: #9

"I met someone, and she knows what she's talking about, and she said some statistic"

Is there anything that backs this up?

For instance, in Germany, cuckoldry rates are about 1%

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2...btHt_mW8uc

Here they discuss why these high figures, from 20-30%, are likely sampling bias. People who are suspicious of being cuckolded are more likely to actually be cuckolded. They are suspicious for real reasons. But even the majority of them are still the biological parents.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2...btHuPmW8uc

Post: #10

I don't see how a guy could go without knowing that the kid wasn't his. Simple DNA test. This just shows me that 20%- 25% of men are beta.

Post: #11

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/artic...to-cuckold

To Have and To Cuckold
What's the real rate of men getting duped into fatherhood?
By Cecil Adams • October 19, 2007

Slug Signorino
I just read in an academic paper (Macintyre and Sooman, Lancet, 1991) that in modern populations, the cuckoldry rate—i.e., the rate at which men are deceived into raising offspring that are genetically not their own—is 10 to 15 percent. This would make genealogy and family reunions a moot point. What’s the straight dope? —Curious, via e-mail

Cuckoldry: The word alone, conjuring as it does some Chaucerian vignette of a smiling wife and her paramour exchanging sly glances under her husband’s nose, pretty well gets across the social baggage attached to this topic. The notion of guys being duped has for millennia inspired a potent mix of anxiety (on the part of potential cuckolds) and snickering (on the part of everyone else).

Perhaps for these reasons, some possibly iffy statistics on cuckoldry—or nonpaternity, as the killjoy experts more often call it—have wound up with an outsize place in discussion of the matter. In fact, that’s the real point of the article you read. Sizing up the conventional wisdom on nonpaternity before the advent of widespread DNA testing, the authors find that though societywide nonpaternity rates of 10 percent and higher have routinely been cited in studies and textbooks, these numbers prove to have scant solid data behind them. Among the estimates they found:

• More than 30 percent nonpaternity—obtained from a researcher’s remarks at a 1972 symposium on medical ethics, referring to a study (apparently conducted decades earlier in a single English town) that was never completed, much less published;

• 20 to 30 percent—from another aging and unpublished U.K. study; and

• 7 to 14 percent—from a 1990 study that relied not on any biology-based testing but on self-reporting by readers of a British women’s magazine on the frequency and timing of their off-the-books intercourse.

It’s hard to believe such rickety numbers would’ve featured in the discussion at all if their implications hadn’t been so juicy and there’d been more reliable numbers to focus on instead.

Roughly 20 years into the DNA-test era, better paternity data are available, and scholars have devised better ways of breaking them down. For a 2006 survey, anthropologist Kermyt Anderson took 67 studies that estimated nonpaternity rates and sorted them according to “paternity confidence.” Categories included the high-confidence group, e.g. nonrandom genetics studies of parents and children who, Anderson reasoned, would be unlikely to volunteer if someone suspected the results might show that Dad wasn’t really the kids’ father; in the low-confidence group were straight-up paternity-dispute test data; and a third category contained studies from which one couldn’t conclude anything about fathers’ confidence.

Seen this way, the numbers yield a pretty convincing pattern. The median nonpaternity rate for the high-confidence group was a not-too-scandalous 1.7 percent, whereas the low-confidence group showed an unsurprisingly high rate of 29.8 percent—about what one might guess from watching a few weeks of Maury Povich. If you combine the first group with the can’t-conclude group, which showed a rate of 16.7 percent, you get a rate of just 3.3 percent for cases that aren’t plainly sketchy enough to inspire a family trip to the DNA lab. While Anderson cautions that there’s currently no way to judge what percentage of total births are low- or high-confidence, and thus what an overall nonpaternity rate might be, he does use figures from a confidence study he conducted in Albuquerque, N.M., to guess that the rate for that city as a whole would be safely under 4 percent.

Such a figure squares a lot better with other recent surveys than those double-digit rates do. In a 2005 paper, Australian sociologist Michael Gilding reads available evidence as suggesting a nonpaternity rate for Western countries of between 1 and 3 percent; another comprehensive study of international data agrees we can’t yet draw any conclusions about across-the-board rates but says that minus paternity-dispute cases, the overall rate looks to be about 3.7 percent.

While papers focusing on specific population segments may be of limited general use due to sample-size issues, some fascinating small-scale research supports the macro findings. For a 2000 study, Oxford scientists collected DNA from 48 men with the last name Sykes living in a particular section of northern England. On genotyping the Y chromosomes therein, the boffins found that (a) unexpectedly, there seemed to have been, centuries earlier, a single ur-Sykes with whom 44 percent of the living Sykeses shared a unique string of genetic info, and (b) over 700 years the Sykes nonpaternity rate had been only about 1.3 percent per generation. Now, if one Sykes’ wife got together with another Sykes on the side, any resulting nonpaternity wouldn’t show up here. But assuming women who married Sykeses were neither atypically unadventurous nor surprisingly prone to Sykes-swapping, this too suggests that cuckoldry isn’t nearly the epidemic it’s been made out to be. —Cecil Adams

Post: #12

At some point, you look at a kid and kind of know it isn't yours. These guys just swallow it. Just like Maria Shriver looked at the housekeeper's kid and KNEW it was Arnold's. It started with denial, then the anger built up enough to force her to confront him about it. I'm sure the housekeeper's husband looked at him and knew the same thing - that the kid wasn't his.

Post: #13

Post: #14

The wikipedia article is helpful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternity_fraud

Also - the government seems to be obsessed with cracking down on civil liberties in order to protect us against 'terrorists' (who kill less people each year than swimming pools). And a logical endpoint for such actions would be a nationwide DNA databse - with samples taken at birth.

But - it seems unliley this will happen since it will throw up alot of controversy as men find out their wives were cheating on them.

Post: #15

Reminds me of a joke I heard a few years ago, maybe not the funniest.

Old couple sitting around the table. Old man asks his wife, "You know after all these years I have always wondered one thing, why our last child just didn't look or act like our first three." "He's yours," she replies.

I am doing a paternity test for sure for each kid I have.

Post: #16

That is a good one.

Post: #17

I've heard more about 10% to 15%.

The other factor you guys have to consider is that is that it's 10% to 15% OF PEOPLE WHO TEST. These numbers have never been measured from truly random sample, so there's some huge selection bias going on.

Another thing, is you always have to break these numbers down by ethnicity, job, income, culture, education, religion, etc. I bet you would see significant variation in different segments of society, or even different types of professions.

Post: #18

(06-14-2013 01:14 PM)Tytalus Wrote:  I've heard more about 10% to 15%.

The other factor you guys have to consider is that is that it's 10% to 15% OF PEOPLE WHO TEST. These numbers have never been measured from truly random sample, so there's some huge selection bias going on.

Another thing, is you always have to break these numbers down by ethnicity, job, income, culture, education, religion, etc. I bet you would see significant variation in different segments of society, or even different types of professions.

I will agree with you on that. Same thing about the divorce rate. When you start breaking it down some groups have higher than the average and some below depending on all the factors you mentioned.

I will admit your links on how to find a wife on the 7 and 8's thread was pretty solid. I imagine, the women with the qualities mentioned in those articles would have a rate much closer to 0.

Post: #19

My doctor friends say it happens all the time. They do genetic screens on parents to check for inheritable diseases and if there's a genetic potential they'll check the kid to see if the kid is carrying the bad genes. Apparently it's a not infrequent occurrence for the genetic testing to reveal that the baby is not related to the husband. No clue on the frequency but it's common and these 'fathers' have no idea. The general ethical practice is to not tell the dads for the sake of the kids.

On a related note there's an immense amount of pressure to convince dads that they look like their kids. My exes cousin got knocked up. She swore up and down that it was her fiances. When the child was born the doctor even pointed out that the kid had some facial feature in common with the fiance that was supposedly pretty rare. In a brief moment of clarity the fiance decided to have a paternity test and the kid wasn't his. Then the cousin said oh, it must be this other guy I got drunk with one night. He got tested, wasn't his. She then went through 3 other guys until finally finding the father. Her excuse for not being to identify the right father was, "I only remember us having anal sex". For some unknown reason the fiance ended up staying with her and agreeing to help raise the kid who wasn't his. It's a fucked up world.

Post: #20

I will never had kids.

But for those who have had kids.

Let's say when your kid was 8 years old. And you have spent years and years bonding with the kid and raising him. And then you found out it wasn't yours.

Would you walk out on the kid?

And if you wouldn't - is there an age where you could imagine walking out? Say when the kid is 1 year old or 3 years old?

I always found that an interesting question since I will never be in a position to answer it. I have decided I never want kids.

Post: #21

(06-14-2013 01:47 PM)cardguy Wrote:  I will never had kids.

But for those who have had kids.

Let's say when your kid was 8 years old. And you have spent years and years bonding with the kid and raising him. And then you found out it wasn't yours.

Would you walk out on the kid?

And if you wouldn't - is there an age where you could imagine walking out? Say when the kid is 1 year old or 3 years old?

I always found that an interesting question since I will never be in a position to answer it. I have decided I never want kids.

Paternity tests nowadays are super simple and cheap. You just swab some saliva from under your kid's tongue and you send it in and get it analyzed for less than $100.

Post: #22

(06-14-2013 01:47 PM)cardguy Wrote:  Would you walk out on the kid?

This happened to a cousin of mine. Found out when the twin boys (yes twins) were 13. In an argument with the wife - she blurted out - "they aren't even yours !"......."

After paternity tests- he found out that they weren't his.....

He walked........ and maintains very little contact with the boys .... once - maybe twice a year a phone call ?

Post: #23

wow - that seems really cold in a way. Does it strike anyone else that way?

Post: #24

(06-14-2013 02:25 PM)cardguy Wrote:  wow - that seems really cold in a way. Does it strike anyone else that way?

I disagree that its cold to walk out on kids that are not yours biologically if you were duped into thinking they were. This guy is putting his time, money and resources into the advancement of another guys kid. Once he learns the reality that the kids are not his he has ever right not to be judged by walking out and starting over with another woman who will have his biological kids. After all life is finite and raising someone elses kids is a huge investment in time and money so it is justifiable for him to just bail on the bastard kids and start over with a new family of his own kids.

Post: #25

(06-14-2013 02:25 PM)cardguy Wrote:  wow - that seems really cold in a way. Does it strike anyone else that way?

Yes, it's cold. But at the same time, everyone uses the "best interests of the kids" argument to force men to submit to all kinds of abuse. Most men walk not because of the kids, but because they can't stomach being around the woman any longer. Yes, the kids do suffer, but how can a man look at children he was duped into supporting, knowing they aren't his, and that some other dude got a free ride on his dime. It's an impossible situation, and every day when he looks at ALL of them he can't help but feel humiliated.