You have friends here, Kelly, and I can understand the pain caused by your ex.

I have no doubt about your fidelity.

I know you are not speaking for feminists or even for all women. I do know that you are speaking of your heart and soul and that you would feel affronted in such a situation. But again I ask you to manage that affront and put it in proper perspective. It is an affront that does not have to be given heart-space. It does not have to be entertained. It does not have to hold you in thrall. It is the sort of 'initial impulse' that needs firmly rejecting and changing by a more reasoned, de-centred approach. One mark of adulthood is the ability to put oneself in another's shoes and see things from a perspective beyond oneself.

Trust is earned.

I'm sorry, but no way are DNA test results representative of the population; surely, in many such cases, they are taken because the father KNOWS his partner has been cheating. Surely it cannot be debated, that men who suspect their partners of having cheated, or KNOW them to have, are more likely to get the test done; this said, in order for the results to be representative, there would also have to be a skew in the sample, of men whose partners were LESS likely than average, to have cheated; which is simply implausible.

Women may cheat a whole lot more than is believed, and, contrary to popular belief, probably no less frequently than do men; but not enough for 'another man' to be the father of their offspring, in 60% of cases. DNA tests are, to an extent, a self-selecting sample.

Good point BD, but all this data about women ceating less than men is very dubious.

If say 30% of men say they are cheating and only 10% of women say they are cheating, it must mean that at least 30% of men are cheating with 10% of women - so an average cheating woman would have 3-4 partners. I dont think so. I think that women cheat as much as men but are simply discreet about it due to social opinion and pressure.

Quote from Richard

Good point BD, but all this data about women ceating less than men is very dubious.

If say 30% of men say they are cheating and only 10% of women say they are cheating, it must mean that at least 30% of men are cheating with 10% of women - so an average cheating woman would have 3-4 partners. I dont think so. I think that women cheat as much as men but are simply discreet about it due to social opinion and pressure.

Not sure if you misread it, but I meant that women probably cheat as much as men, in my post. Well, could be a bit more, could be a bit less, but I don't see that there's much difference, between the extent of male and female infidelity.

That is what I said.

Yes I agree with you 100%

Search the internet for a "DNA project" for your surname and your mother's maiden surname. Unless you have a very unusual surname, there will probably be one. These projects compare the Y-chromosome DNA for people who have a "paper trail", that is, a chain of birth certificates or other records, showing descent in the direct male line from a common ancestor. Often the common ancestor lived 400 years ago or longer, and there may be a dozen or more generations between him and people living today. Usually two men with the same paper trail also have the same DNA, thus proving that all of the women in both lines were faithful. It may be different in Wales, or among people today, but it appears that among those people who settled in Virginia 400 years ago, and their descendents today, the father designated on the birth certificate is the real father.

I'm late to this thread and it has moved fast.

Kelly Mac:

This is 6 out of 10 who took the test found out they weren't the father.

I would think that 10 out of 10 who took the test would expect they weren't the father.

In other words, this isn't representative of the population, but of the population who are with women they suspect of cheating, or know are cheating.

Who would really think 60% of females cheat? And on a regular enough basis to have a suspect pregnancy??

Really??

Yes KM. I was just about to rush to your aid but I read on.

Dyslexic-banana:

I'm sorry, but no way are DNA test results representative of the population; surely, in many such cases, they are taken because the father KNOWS his partner has been cheating. Surely it cannot be debated, that men who suspect their partners of having cheated, or KNOW them to have, are more likely to get the test done; this said, in order for the results to be representative, there would also have to be a skew in the sample, of men whose partners were LESS likely than average, to have cheated; which is simply implausible.

Women may cheat a whole lot more than is believed, and, contrary to popular belief, probably no less frequently than do men; but not enough for 'another man' to be the father of their offspring, in 60% of cases. DNA tests are, to an extent, a self-selecting sample.

So that's three of us with same view.

Several, quite separate, issues are getting intertwined here.

For example, one might be proof of paternity for legal, property, immigration or medical reasons -the practical approach.

A second might include emotional reaction, like the fear of men who may have been "cuckolded" or the fear of women that an act of fraud might be exposed.

The third, and probably the most relevant to MRAs is that we really don't have a sociopolitical apparatus in place to deal with this modern phenomenon. In the past it could be swept under the carpet so that everybody saves face.

"Women's Liberation" actually had the effect of liberating men who were already grown tired of pretending to be 'Patriarchs' in name only - sperm-donors and wallets. The men who rule (under female license) began to panic and, to this day, enact more and more anti-male laws to try and limit the damage.

The real and lasting effect of Feminism has been to set men free from old ways of thinking. That's another "genie that won't go back in the bottle". 'Celebration of paternity' (see my sig) has been always been a woman's weapon in the gender battle and "assumption of paternity" has been a major legal prop. With the advent of DNA testing, the truth begins to take precedence over age-old petty assumptions.

We live in interesting times.

Footnote: Old sepia photographs of my paternal great-grandmother show her, in her youth, as a stunning beauty with large piercing eyes, underscored by dark soft skin. My father passed that genetic trait to me and my sister.
In youth, this characteristic makes us look intelligent and sexy.
As the years pass we morph into bright-eyed frogs with loose skin under the eyes that you safely use to carry your shopping home. "Weird baggy goggle eyes" would be a better description.
My six surviving children (east and west) all have this genetic quirk and the elder three (one male, two female) have passed it to their own children.
There's little need of DNA testing but there's a still a remote possibility that an Asian woman could carefully select a secret lover that might just be able to reproduce the same effect. I'm not that paranoid - I just look at the eyes and try to see my own aging features reflected in an attractive young face.

Quote from KellyMac

Truly I do understand what you guys are saying. The pain caused by finding out one was duped later, and the pain caused by a negative paternity test are horrible.

But please understand also that having the test in the first place would kill a little part of my soul as well.

There's no good answer. I'm so glad that I won't have any more children.

But you could help out your children and grandchildren by insisting that a paternity test is done, even if we haven't managed to make it mandatory by then. If YOU insist it, rather than let the potential father be in doubt, then there can be no question of a loving couple doubting/feeling doubted between one another and you can feel sure that your grandchild truly is yours.

You see, it's not only for men - if you have sons then a paternity test is in your direct interest, too.

Added after 7 minutes:

Quote from Percy

Why is it necessary for a mother to deny simple, striaght knowledge from the father? Why should a father not be as certain as the mother? How is his uncertainty of any benefit to her except as in misuse?

Also, think about the fact that something like one in ten thousand people do not state their genetic mother correctly, in tests involving both child and assumed mother in DNA tests. I don't really know the cause but let's presume this is because of hospital mix-ups.

Now, as a mother, how do you feel about a simple DNA test to ensure that the baby you take home is the one that grew inside you? For a small fee, it's not so bad, eh? But it is (for reasons I don't understand) easier to confirm paternity - which tells you the same thing, right: that it's your baby you are taking home. That's surety for BOTH parents. Unless of course you don't trust him to have been faithful..

Added after 5 minutes:

Quote from byslexic_danana

I'm sorry, but no way are DNA test results representative of the population; surely, in many such cases, they are taken because the father KNOWS his partner has been cheating. Surely it cannot be debated, that men who suspect their partners of having cheated, or KNOW them to have, are more likely to get the test done; this said, in order for the results to be representative, there would also have to be a skew in the sample, of men whose partners were LESS likely than average, to have cheated; which is simply implausible.

I was involved in a genetic health study. This involved asking people to volunteer to have their DNA and the DNA of both genetic parents tested. This was a medical study, not a health cure, and everyone knew that no-one would be told the results. Of people with both parents willing to be involved, one in seven people misnamed their genetic father. I think that is the fairest test of all and is the reason I use 14% paternity fraud with great confidence.

60% seems kinda high. I think the actual estimated rate of fraud is between 5%-10% from what I've read. But I know of no definitive study. Its mainly guesswork from hospital records.

Douglas:

I was involved in a genetic health study. This involved asking people to volunteer to have their DNA and the DNA of both genetic parents tested. This was a medical study, not a health cure, and everyone knew that no-one would be told the results. Of people with both parents willing to be involved, one in seven people misnamed their genetic father. I think that is the fairest test of all and is the reason I use 14% paternity fraud with great confidence.

From a scientific point of view that sounds like a fair assessment. From several other points of view it sounds like 14% too many.

Back to basics:

Why should any man be held responsible for another man's children (that he already knows about) unless he chooses to accept them as his own?

Why should any man be held responsible for children that he never intended to create because his partner lied about contraception?

(Worst case scenario)
Why should any man be held responsible for children that he believed to be his, supported and nurtured them in good faith, formed intimate bonds with them and only discovered at a later date that he was a manipulated victim of paternity fraud?

To my mind that's a crime far worse than rape.

Rape is ugly and abhorrent because a man steals a woman's reproductive functions without her consent. Conversely, any dreams of impregnating the woman and forcing her to bear his child and support it, are usually far from the rapist's mind.

On the other hand, when a woman "rapes" a man, by stealing the fruits of his reproductive organs by deception, that's far more sinister and culpable.

In highly charged intimate encounters men often throw caution to the winds. Women do not. They know exactly what they're doing and why. They let their bodies take over, but if and only if, the circumstances are right. They are biologically programed to do it but barely understand it themselves.

Not only are they slaves to female hormones, they also assume that all of civilization, politics, technology, science and every aspect of community life should be driven by the same chemicals that run and fluctuate in their own circulatory system.

Female rape and deception of males has now become a wholesale, national, profitable industry. It's the status quo.
The tiny percentage of male on female rape by deranged males is the perfect scapegoat.