Whether the boyfriend in question was the father was not explicitly stated. Further, I'd argue that if you want to date a lady, her kids come with that as a complete package. My two cents.
No, dating a lady does not obligate you to support her children from other men. What a ridiculous take. Accepting their presence and being good to them, sure, but those aren't the same as being made to support them. If I started dating a woman and quickly asked her to fork over money to support my aging parents or my own family responsibilities, it would be rightly viewed as an unfair and manipulative emotional/financial hijack of responsibility. The opposite doesn't hold true?
that's the kind of attitude that forces women to reject her own children just so that she can find a new partner. sure, as long as dating only involves paying for the shared dinner whenever you spend time together, that doesn't create an obligation to do more, but as soon as you start supporting your partner beyond that, you have to accept that some of that support goes to the children.
What you're saying is absurd. Millions of women manage to take on an active dating and relationship life, without rejecting their children or piling unreasonable obligations onto their partner. Yet somehow you seem to imply that men are at fault if they don't rapidly open their arms to responsibilities that they never created.
It's called being and adult and regardless of sex/gender it means taking ownership of what's your responsibility. Yes, there is a point at which, in this case, a man will take on certain financial and care responsibilities over children that aren't his if he's with a woman who has them but the "when" of that is a subjective line that comes from mutual agreement, not some automatic social debt.
ok, i was exaggerating, but this has happened, maybe less in western cultures but in places where women are more dependent on having a husband that supports them.
when someone with children tries to find a new partner, that partner needs to be clear from the first day that if this relationship is going to go forward, the children are part of the deal. if the potential partner is not willing to accept that, then that is a non-starter for any long term relationship.
a single parent should not have to spend a year dating someone before it is clear whether their partner is willing to contribute to parenting the children if that is what they are looking for.
if a person is misleading their partner about their intentions then yes, they are absolutely at fault. do not date someone with children if that is not the route you want to go.
in any relationship it is the responsibility of each person to support their partner with all their personal issues. that is the purpose of a relationship. unless we are talking about a casual relationship, like being friends.
>that's the kind of attitude that forces women to reject her own children just so that she can find a new partner.
It's a harsh reality, but reality nonetheless. kids are already on the decline. Many men may literally be unable to help support a family of 5, especially with all 3 kids being so young. You gotta swing for the fences with someone who can do that support, or otherwise try to align with someone ready to bear that responsibility of a family they did not help birth.
Men are already absolutely worthless per unit on dating sites, so there won't be much sympathy on a male-oriented forum about dating troubles.
>as you start supporting your partner beyond that, you have to accept that some of that support goes to the children.
I suppose that's why many partners pass on a potential partner with children. May as well not pretend it's not a roadblock.
