Married once, gelded twice

Imagine if the sexes were reversed in this story:

Some time ago, a friend told me that she was planning to leave her husband but was waiting for him to get a vasectomy. She said she knew she’d have to hold his hand through it to make sure it happened. Once the procedure was done, she planned to break the news that she was going to end the marriage.

Why, I hear you ask?

She felt that he could barely manage to parent the children they had and that she didn’t want him to be distracted by more kids.

She doesn’t want the man she’s leaving to be distracted.

She said that she had been warning him for years that she was planning to leave and so it shouldn’t be a surprise.

Ah, clearly from the “nobody owes anyone s**t” school of relationship behaviour. If  divorce laws were sensible, women wouldn’t be able to repeatedly threaten to leave their husbands while staying in the relationship for years.

She later reported that when she told her husband of her decision to end the marriage for good, he told her that he was upset to learn this after having had the vasectomy and that he believed it would hurt his chances of finding a new partner.

Frankly, this man’s balls were removed long before the vasectomy.

Her response was that she was pretty sure that women weren’t going to be interested in having children with someone his age anyway (he’s middle-aged).

Translation: being sterile means hotter, younger women who want a family won’t be interested in him.

This woman is employed by an organization dedicated to reproductive choice and plans to work as a counselor.

This doesn’t surprise me. From what I’ve seen, the pro-abortion movement in the US is chock-full of lunatic feminists who hate men.

I have been troubled about what she told me for months and have considered disclosing the information to the organization, but I’m unsure: Would I just be “tattling” on what I find to be reprehensible human behavior? Or would this be a reasonable act in response to the highly inappropriate behavior of someone working in the field of reproductive choice? Please advise.

The answer from the NYT on this question amuses me:

There’s a significant body of research in social psychology suggesting that our conduct in one type of situation often doesn’t generalize to others. You can be an honest broker and a dishonest husband. That someone has done something awful in the context of a difficult marriage, then, doesn’t prove her to be an awful person in every other respect; and it certainly doesn’t establish that she’d be unable to discharge her professional obligations.

I look forward to them applying the above standard to Brett Kavanaugh.

Share

14 thoughts on “Married once, gelded twice

  1. In law there’s a guideline of matching the case in front of the court to precedent, a statute, a contract clause, whatever it is. The ideal is “It matches on all four feet” and the more matches, the stronger the case.

    The complainee works in the field of reproductive choice. That’s generally an euphemism for abortion clinics but there may be elements of relationship advice and reproductive health too.

    If all the complainee does is empty wombs, there’s no match. The fact that she deliberately fucked up her ex’s reproductive choice is neither here nor there.

    If the complainee’s job includes counseling and advising women on whether or not to have an abortion, then she’s disqualified. In her own case she gave abusive advice with substantial negative consequences.

    Does the husband have a civil case against her, yes he does, but the burden of proof is going to be extremely heavy.

  2. Hoping the guy finally wised up-
    Firstly see about reversing the vasectomy – it can often but not always be done- that’s assuming he wants the possibility of more children for himself.
    Second try out the hot young fillies- unlikely to go anywhere, but you never know.
    Finally find someone decent, maybe a lady who already has all the kids she wants.
    He will of course need a good lawyer, and will need to brace himself for limited access to his own kids if he’s lucky.

  3. Frankly, this man’s balls were removed long before the vasectomy.

    Harsh, though probably fair. I still have a soft spot for guys in these untenable situations since, unlike so many other aspects of life, men and boys are not taught the true nature of women by anything but experience. Given the prevailing culture and the fact that 95%+ of the authority figures in a boy’s life are female I feel empathy more than scorn for those who get blindsided.

    …lunatic feminists who hate men.

    Double redundancy there.

  4. Further thoughts.
    If he is middle aged she must be much younger or the vasectomy is pointless.
    I wouldn’t take her word for his alleged poor parenting skills (or anything else) especially since she claims not to want him distracted from hers- if she thought him a bad father she’d want him away from them.
    Posit he actually doted on the kids and would put up with anything to stay with them.

  5. My sister in laws marriage was pretty much doomed to failure but anyway but one particular batshit thing she tried was to insist that her husband went for the snip because she’d had her tubes tied after her last pregnancy.

  6. Does anyone know how divorce settlement child care payments are calculated in the US? In NZ and the UK, having kids in a new relationship reduces the amount of child maintenance a bloke has to hand over to the ex-wife. Seems like her actions were the logical way to sure up the post-settlement income stream to me.

  7. One could argue she’s doing the best thing by her children, making sure that their father’s time isn’t split between them and their half-brothers/sisters.

    One could also argue that tricking your husband into getting his bombs defused and then leaving him is not ultimately in the best interests of her children.

    Either she’s daft, barmy, or Bloke in Lower Hutt is right and she’s trying to maximise child-support payments.

    Anyway: I thought vasectomies were reversible?

  8. OT: GRU goons caught hacking into OPCW. Among their personal possessions:

    – a bottle of Stolichnaya (so we know they were Russian)
    – a to-do list with “undermine Western democracy” crossed out
    – a photograph of Vladmir Putin personally shooting down MH17 with a bazooka

  9. “Frankly, this man’s balls were removed long before the vasectomy.”

    If he ever even had any. You’d think he’d want those kids DNA tested…

  10. Matthew,
    There’s no guarantee that a vasectomy reversal will succeed. Published success rates are around 60%, but there’ll be a fair amount of selection bias in those figures, so the true number is certainly lower.

  11. Agree with Micheal, above. I’d just add one extra point to his second last paragraph. If the woman in question has a healthcare profession that has a regulatory body eg. Nurses, Drs, psychologist, social worker (in some countries) then behavior like this would certainly bring strife with them, even if it did not occur within their role as a health professional. Im a psychologist and there is absolutely no way that I could act in such a manner without falling afoul of the board were someone to complain. It may not be enough to be stripped of my registration but the process is the punishment with these boards. Plus having a black mark becomes a giant pain in the ass each year when having to reapply.
    Alternatively if she works within a govt dept it is likely they also have a code of conduct that she is in breach of. Report, report, report.

  12. “– a photograph of Vladmir Putin personally shooting down MH17 with a bazooka”

    That one was probably photoshopped, given that he has at his disposal a whole army of terrorists to carry it out and another army of useful idiots to dismiss any fuck-ups. Meaning there is nothing for him to worry about if he delegates.

Comments are closed.