What should this Woman Tell Her Son?

So let me get this straight. She cheated on her loving husband, got pregnant with a mixed race baby, and decided to keep it, and this limp wristed dumb ass of a "man" just stuck with it?? LMAO

I'm sorry but no man should have to have the mixed race bastard of another man yapping at his heels demanding the same treatment as his REAL kid. This is just an insult of the highest order and the fact that this total dumbass is sticking with it just shows what a loser he really is.

Better to kidnap his biological run off to another country to avoid alimony and child support than deal with raising a mixed cuckold bastard, a daily reminder of what a loser you are, or have the biological kid raised in a moral environment where it's perfectly okay to sleep with and have the babies of anyone you want while married.

 

Hopefully they have sued the guy for child support.

Regardless, it will be hard to explain to the boy that his mother is an unfaithful *** who doesn't keep her word.

 

Nope, under all State Laws any children born while inside a marriage is legally the problem of the husband, not the cuckold daddy. This is his legally his kid. Not only is he stuck with it, if he divorces his wife, he's stuck paying for the little spawn till he's 18.

Welcome to marriage 2.0, where cuckoldry is rewarded and encouraged. After all, it's just another "alternative" lifestyle.

 

exactly..... even if this wasn't a mixed race kid, the point is still valid. The fact that it IS a mixed child will only show to the world that it is not his. At least with a same race bastard, you can fake it if you want to keep your dirty laundry private.... there is no way you can 'hide' this

 

I'm sure this guy will be a great dad and that he will love his daughter every bit as much as he loves his son.

The appearance of a child is not what "shows the world" it is his.

It does take a man to be a dad. Not seeing any "men" on this thread.

Just low end DNA donors.

 

Let's set the record straight.

At a time during their marriage where the marriage was obviously in trouble, probably due to a lack of love being expressed by the husband, the woman had an affair with a black man that resulted in her becoming pregnant. She could have choosen to have an abortion but decided against it (something that most religious conservatives would agree with). The husband and wife, because of her pregnancy, were forced to face the problems in their marriage, Because they already had one child together they decided to work out their marital problems (something that most religious conservatives would agree with). They also mutually agreed to keep the child as opposed to putting the child up for adoption (something that most religious conservatives would agree with).

But because the child was of "mixed race" the racists, which are predominately "religious conservatives" based upon scientific studies, seem to object to the decisions by the couple to not terminate the pregnancy by abortion or to keep and raise the child of the wife or for them to work out their marital difficulties and stay married for the benefit of each other and both children. While I can't be certain I would assume that the "racists" would also refuse to marry a white woman that has a mixed race child as well. It's sad when racial prejudice is the foundation for personal opinions.

To answer the question of "What should the woman do?" She should tell the truth. The couple's friends will accept the truth. If someone can't accept the truth then they're not really friends and are probably racists so who cares about them anyway.

 

The man already knows the child isn't his and already accepted and loves the child as if it was his own. There is no "dirty laundry" and I commend both the husband and wife for working out their marital difficulties. They have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of and nothing to hide from their friends. It amazes me that some people think it should be kept a secret when the couple should be proud of what they've done and acommplished together as a couple. Almost all marriages endure difficulties and it's wonderful when a couple addresses those difficulties and overcomes them. The decision they made was right for both of the children and right for the couple. Who can possibly condemn the decisions they made?

 

The husband decided not to punish innocent children for the sins of their mother? Sounds like an awesome guy who has his priorities straight.

Actually, she should do whatever works best for her and her family. That might include telling her son the truth now; or it might mean waiting until later. It might mean telling a glossed-over age-appropriate version now, and expanding on it later. It might include telling their friends the truth; it might not.

The son should know the truth once he's capable of processing it. That doesn't mean "once he can understand what adultery means". Only that he can understand the idea that his sister has a different father but the same mother.

The son appears to be about 5 years old; that's old enough to understand, IMO. But it's the parents' call. There is no right or wrong answer here, other than the son should be told sooner rather than later.

Heck, the "adoption" story isn't that far off: the husband has essentially adopted the daughter. But that will probably cause issues for the daughter later on, so I'd avoid it.

 

spoken like a woman who has multiple baby daddies....


no issues raising mine or other's ovary-fruit.... I have proven both. But I wasn't raising a baby had by the mother cheating on me....

If the child is my race, it opens up options of whether or not we'll pass this baby off as mine, and keep our dirty laundry secret. I'm not for advertising everything to everyone. However.... if the baby is black.... that presents a little bit different situation for the white father who got cheated on.

your wife is an adulterous POS, a tough enough issue to deal with in the first place..... but on top of that... here's your daily reminder of the fact your wife is but a bad argument away from screwing someone else. Enjoy the next 18 years dude....

 

Sons are products of sex and his mother had a great night , what is the problem in that?
Exclusive sexual rights are part of the religious nonsense that violate the very nature of man.

 

always the man's fault, huh? lol

there is never a justifiable reason to cheat on your spouse, either gender. Sorry man-hater





I almost quit reading you at that point, since you only want to find a way to blame the man... .but I couldn't resist...

That's fine.... I agree with her not aborting, too.

I see your running theme..... try and bash not only men, but the religious right as well.....

Snnneeeakkyyyy, but my morals aren't contradictory like your "it was the man's fault she cheated" statement knowing good and well you would never find a good reason for the man to cheat on his wife.

another nice assumption. I would have issues with any bastard child concieved during my marraige.... not just a mixed race baby. Mixed race simply puts your dirty laundry out for the world to see....

as usual... when in doubt, use the race-card at all times in political discussions and try and hault any real dialouge about the issue by calling your detractors, "racists" Liberal studies 101

I agree, truth is needed. but to simply think everything will be hunky-dory by telling the truth is a HUGE false statement. Laws are written says this guy is responsible no matter if he gets a divorce or not, and that is a crock of B.S. it's not his baby. How can you tell? BECAUSE IT'S BLACK!!!11 We don't need Maury Povich to get us DNA results for that. Yet, guess what the non-daddy will have to do? Pay for a DNA test, and keep paying child support during the entire process.

The simple fact that this girl got knocked up in the first place shows exactly how responsible she is.

- - - Updated - - -

which is fine if you BOTH agree to that going into the marriage.... and not simply have one decide that because she's pissed at her hubby and horny.

- - - Updated - - -

which is fine if you BOTH agree to that going into the marriage.... and not simply have one decide that because she's pissed at her hubby and horny.

 

Why not? if your woman sees a much younger man with a nice body who are you to deny her the pleasure and why she must ask for your opinion ? it is just sex .

 

I hear ya.... if you want that kind of relationship and you find a spouse that is ok with that... more power to ya.... absolutely no judgement there. That, to me, is not cheating or adultery.

but if you enter into a monogomous relationship, then simply cheat after..... that's different.


if you can't be faithful, don't enter into a union with someone who expects you to be. Find someone who is agrees with that lifestyle and enjoy life.

 

From the attitude of the husband i understand that he is probably thinking to get into "exploration" too , since the lady already did it and the dude is about to do it (if not already) i guess that the issue was not faith but not telling the truth about their personality and the kind of relationship they wanted in the first place.
When it comes to relations people say what they want right away but after a wedding they feel that they should do what others expect them to which is wrong so more power to sex and less to social norms

 

While this post addresses the issue of "age-appropriate" is also endorsed the fact that the turth needs to be eventually told to the children. I agree that it's the parent's decision as to when and how the truth is to be told but lying or deceiving the children is wrong. Eventually the truth has to be revealed. I belienve that is the "right" answer and don't think there's any doubt related to it.

For now the children may need to only know that the husband and wife are their parents and that they are both loved very much. The "biological" explanation can wait until they can understand it.

 

Spoken like a sperm donor who contributes little else to the child.

Absent a DNA test no one except the mother is really certain who donated the sperm.

Everyone knows who the dad is.

 

Actually I'd say he did just the opposite, since his own children are being made to suffer for her sins by his failure to divorce her.

 

one way or the other, a breakdown occurred.... whether it was one or both "cheated" or they weren't open about wanting an open relationship.... either way, fail happened.


2nd fail was, if you don't want kids, use protection. pretty simple concept
and if you are running around behind your partner's back, you (*)(*)(*)(*) sure use protection.

 

I couldn't tell you WHICH black man was the father, but show a picture of the baby, the mother and father, and I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt who is NOT the father. When you're they white (fake)father.... that's all that matters. Yet he would still have to "prove" it's not his by expensive DNA tests at his (not hers (expense)

but that's an entire different issue I'm not happy with.

 

That's a tough thing to lay on a 5 year old, he will probably struggle with his feelings for his mother, perhaps also his feelings for his father and little sister. The truth is important but so is the mental well being of the child, they process things differently. Telling family friends will eventually make it to the mouths the the children's friends and there will be taunting, not sure I would be inclined to tell anyone outside of the family anything.

As far as the guy's choice to stay with his wife, he obviously decided she was worth working it out. I think the decision to father the younger child shows immense responsibility and good morals. Not something everyone could do, heck most people would not have been able to get past the cheating part.

 

Can you?

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&tbo=d&biw=1920&bih=955&tbm=isch&tbnid=o38h7dMUbC08qM:&imgrefurl=http://www.okmagazine.com/news/everything-you-need-know-about-paris-jackson-michael-jacksons-daughter&docid=X7MNQljve81w0M&imgurl=http://www.okmagazine.com/sites/okmagazine.com/files/imagecache/node_page_image/article_images/parisjacksoninside.jpg&w=330&h=274&ei=muX-UKTLDZL68QTd_YGQCg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=1095&vpy=474&dur=2356&hovh=205&hovw=246&tx=107&ty=113&sig=106353845807810947055&page=1&tbnh=130&tbnw=156&start=0&ndsp=68&ved=1t:429,r:36,s:0,i:262

http://www.celebritysentry.com/post/kadeems-blog-nicole-richie-hair/

 

I see your point... but I'm specifically talking about this kid, who is already black looking enough that the older brother (still a toddler) is asking why baby sister looks different than the rest of them do. (per the story)

 

So you're claiming that the children would be better off with divorced parents?

 

uhhh, the guy is not his parent, the black guy that fawked the white dude's wife is the parent....

 

It would seem with the limited info given that the husband choose to have his family remain intact including the little girl, which I think gives him the right to be called the parent/ father of the little girl. Since this never came up before I assume the biological father is not in the picture. Biological contribution does not make one a parent.