I wanted punch the bf out..... Thing is I can kind see where he was coming from but he was still a total dick about it and had a whole me first and only I matter attitude.

Considering Japan's birthrate issues you'd think they be clearing the way for anyone who wants to have a kid to have them.

I don't see why he'd agree readily to his s/o having a child with someone else and being totally shut out.

As poster above said, imagine him being the infertile wife of a sperm donor. That she'd wish this child to be hers too is understandable.

He's as much the father of this hypothetical child than the non-carrying mother of the lesbian couple would be her mother.

But his attitude seemed to be that THEY should raise any child his BF fathered, so it seemed to me like he wasn't interested in the mother's rights at all. He basically seemed to be saying that if his BF fathered a child he wanted to be the one to raise it, not the mother. The fact that they started speaking in English about it instead of Japanese also made it seem like there was a cultural gap involved, or he was trying to exclude the women from the conversation by speaking a foreign language that, while they may have studied it in school, they probably are not fluent enough to follow the conversation well. The polite thing to do would have been to ask them if he could speak with his boyfriend privately about it instead of having the discussion in front of them. This makes him appear rude and thoughtless, and possibly a bit sexist, at least that's how the character came across.

In the long run, Kou-kun had the attitude toward the process that was exactly what the couple was looking for: He was amenable to donating and possibly being involved in the child's life, but was not wanting a parental role. His partner's attitude seems similar to the type of attitude patriarchal society has toward women. He seems to think his partner's body is not his to do with as he pleases. If he, for instance, chose to go to a sperm bank and leave a donation that would be used anonymously by some heterosexual Japanese couple, would he be angry with him? In a way, that is a service to society, especially in a country with a low birth rate problem like Japan. Is the problem that they know the couple and would know the child and therefore he would feel a need to be a father to him/her?

I guess where I really disagree with the argument that the child is as much his as it is the non-birth-mother's, is that Kou-kun is not choosing to have a child with the birth mother as a couple. He is donating sperm so the lesbian couple can have a child. So while genetically, the child is his, it is not his in any social, familial sense. The parents who made the decision to have a family are the lesbian couple. The child would not be Kou-kun's child with that couple any more or less than it would if he donated sperm to a sperm bank and a heterosexual couple with an infertile husband used that sperm to inseminate the mother anonymously. The only difference is that the two women WANT him to be involved in the child's life.

last edited at Jun 22, 2017 11:16AM

I don't really see the sexism in Michael's position. You could argue he's being somewhat selfish, but so is everyone else in this situation. He wants to have a child who will consider him its father and that's a perfectly understandable desire for him to have. In fact it's the exact same desire that the protagonists have. And here's his partner agreeing to help create a child, but a child who will never call him father.

Imagine if a gay couple approached the protagonists with a similar offer: have their child and be somewhat involved as aunts. Disregarding the difference in what their help would entail (pregnancy being more intensive than sperm donation), would you be angry at them for turning their friends down? Would you be angry with their desire to be mothers instead of aunts?

That's pretty much why I'm not fond of the idea of the protagonist that the donor should be that much involved in the child's life, makes things overly complicated for the donor and his family and for themselves.

I mean, that other friend who was ok doing it but didn't want it to be known would have been a good donor if they weren't so set on making him a "honorary uncle". :/

I mean, it's genetically related to him, sure, but a regular niece would be genetically related to him, too, and I'm sure Michael wouldn't argue that Kou-kun refuse his familial status as an uncle. I mean, they were all clear that he won't be part of the familial unit raising the child anyway, so the genetic relation is irrelevant, unless Michael also wanted to argue that adopted parents have less parental rights than a biological parent who's never seen the child.

It's a bit ridiculous for Michael to essentially demand Kou-kun never involve himself in a child's life unless Michael is allowed to exist as a parental figure. What if someone wanted to make Kou-kun a godfather? Would that be unacceptable, too?

I dunno. I can't even understand it, logically.

I mean, it's genetically related to him, sure, but a regular niece would be genetically related to him, too, and I'm sure Michael wouldn't argue that Kou-kun refuse his familial status as an uncle. I mean, they were all clear that he won't be part of the familial unit raising the child anyway, so the genetic relation is irrelevant, unless Michael also wanted to argue that adopted parents have less parental rights than a biological parent who's never seen the child.

It's a bit ridiculous for Michael to essentially demand Kou-kun never involve himself in a child's life unless Michael is allowed to exist as a parental figure. What if someone wanted to make Kou-kun a godfather? Would that be unacceptable, too?

I dunno. I can't even understand it, logically.

It'd be easier to understand if you didn't obfuscate it as if we're talking about literally any child related to Kou. It's just his actual child, a child that he will be involved with as a family member. It helps to not add extra information that exists for no other reason than to make someone you disagree with look more unreasonable when trying to understand someone's position.

If you wanted to start a family with your partner, them going off to involve themselves in another family that you are separate from is clearly an issue. Maybe if Hiroko and Koyuki didn't insist on their donor being involved with the child it would be less an issue, but they're set on that for some reason and thus you get problems such as this.

It'd be easier to understand if you didn't obfuscate it as if we're talking about literally any child related to Kou. It's just his actual child, a child that he will be involved with as a family member.

It's not his child, though; the actual parents were very clear that they wanted him as a distant godfather that could babysit on occasion, just so they had an explanation to give the child for how they were born. He'd have absolutely no parental role in their life, and therefore he isn't their father, and they aren't his child.

last edited at Jun 22, 2017 7:29PM

It's obviously a complicated issue as clearly reflected in this chapter.

It's not his child, though; the actual parents were very clear that they wanted him as a distant godfather that could babysit on occasion, just so they had an explanation to give the child for how they were born. He'd have absolutely no parental role in their life, and therefore he isn't their father, and they aren't his child.

And that's the problem: they want a babysitter who's around when it's convenient for them. Michael wants to be a dad and start a family with Kou and wants to be involved with any children Kou is having. But that's supposed to make him some unreasonably selfish person crushing our heroes' dreams rather than someone who is basically in the same position as them.

Kobalos posted:

It'd be easier to understand if you didn't obfuscate it as if we're talking about literally any child related to Kou. It's just his actual child, a child that he will be involved with as a family member.

It's not his child, though; the actual parents were very clear that they wanted him as a distant godfather that could babysit on occasion, just so they had an explanation to give the child for how they were born. He'd have absolutely no parental role in their life, and therefore he isn't their father, and they aren't his child.

Not every man is okay with spreading his seed around, making kids and never wanting to hear from them, ever. This kind of men, actually, are usually considered "scum".

Or worse, being around them but being told that they're "just" a distant godfather, not their father and should have no say in their education.

Even if they are not carrying the child for 9 months, fathers exists. Having part of their genes transmitted and their bloodline continuing, is a strong feeling, and desire, for a lot of men.

That's also why I'm quite against surrogate mothers for gay men couples. There's enough childs up for adoption.

last edited at Jun 23, 2017 1:59AM

It's obviously a complicated issue as clearly reflected in this chapter.

what this person said!

and. yeah. I thought we weren't going down this route. Somehow I imagined we'd just get to the actual donor.

I don't see how the boyfriend is "sexist" either as someone above said. Possibly selfish. Possibly rude. but where does he do anything to indicate the gender of the people making the request had anything to do with it? I don't think he'd have OK'd this deal if it were a heterosexual couple either.

that said. I don't think I'd ever be a donor either.

This is a bit of a blank for me mostly cause I dont know Japanese law regarding ivf birth certificates etc

I don't really see the sexism in Michael's position. You could argue he's being somewhat selfish, but so is everyone else in this situation. He wants to have a child who will consider him its father and that's a perfectly understandable desire for him to have. In fact it's the exact same desire that the protagonists have. And here's his partner agreeing to help create a child, but a child who will never call him father.

Imagine if a gay couple approached the protagonists with a similar offer: have their child and be somewhat involved as aunts. Disregarding the difference in what their help would entail (pregnancy being more intensive than sperm donation), would you be angry at them for turning their friends down? Would you be angry with their desire to be mothers instead of aunts?

Especially when the couple wants your boyfriend to be the kid's "uncle." Like maybe if all they wanted was sperm it would be one thing, but they're asking him to be a part of their kid's life, that's really not very cool for the boyfriend who wants to be a father himself - and yet for that the potential sperm donor says he's not ready.

Like, there's no simple and clean logical solution to that, but I can totally understand why the BF wouldn't be OK with it.

And that's the problem: they want a babysitter who's around when it's convenient for them. Michael wants to be a dad and start a family with Kou and wants to be involved with any children Kou is having. But that's supposed to make him some unreasonably selfish person crushing our heroes' dreams rather than someone who is basically in the same position as them.

How is that a problem, though? Kou-kun has a child that's genetically related to him but that he has no parental involvement with, nor any desire to be parentally involved with, which is pretty much exactly the same as having a niece or a cousin. I'm more than willing to babysit for my uncle or aunt if there's a need, but if a girlfriend of mine decided to use my willingness to exist as a genetic relative as leverage to demand I raise a child with her in a parental capacity, that would be ridiculous.

I just don't understand Michael's logic. His insistence upon being considered a "father" to the lesbian couple's child is nonsensical when you factor in that not even Kou-kun considers himself a father. It seems like either Michael doesn't understand that you can be genetically related to someone and not be a parent or he's trying to pressure Kou-kun into having children with him when Kou-kun isn't ready and this is a poor excuse for it. Either way, Michael is being unreasonable.

Not every man is okay with spreading his seed around, making kids and never wanting to hear from them, ever. This kind of men, actually, are usually considered "scum".

Consensual sperm donation isn't irresponsible unprotected sex.

Or worse, being around them but being told that they're "just" a distant godfather, not their father and should have no say in their education.

...But, again, Kou-kun was fine with that. That's what he wanted. Kou-kun didn't want the responsibility of being involved in a child's life because he didn't want to be a parent, and he was only considering it because the women told him that his role would be minimal. I understand Kou-kun's hesitancy and I think it's perfectly sensible.

The thing I don't understand, however, is Michael's insistence that he's also a father to the child. He's not. Not even Kou-kun wants to be a father, and it's his sperm.

Even if they are not carrying the child for 9 months, fathers exists. Having part of their genes transmitted and their bloodline continuing, is a strong feeling, and desire, for a lot of men.

There's nothing stopping him from doing that in the future, in fact, when both him and Kou-kun are ready to take that step. But, all parties involved in the current process agreed that Kou-kun would not be a parental figure to their child, and neither does Kou-kun want to be.

Weirdly, Michael is the only one who's insisting upon having parental rights.

How is that a problem, though? Kou-kun has a child that's genetically related to him but that he has no parental involvement with, nor any desire to be parentally involved with, which is pretty much exactly the same as having a niece or a cousin. I'm more than willing to babysit for my uncle or aunt if there's a need, but if a girlfriend of mine decided to use my willingness to exist as a genetic relative as leverage to demand I raise a child with her in a parental capacity, that would be ridiculous.

Because no amount of "But he's just an 'Uncle,' and noting more" will stop him from being the biological father. In cases where the donor is anonymous and completely uninvolved and unaware of the child's life, that's not a problem. But here's the biological father running around, and here's Michael, the father's partner who really wants a kid. When you stop pretending that there's literally no emotional weight put on being someone's actual father that isn't there as an uncle, it's a lot easier to understand.

I just don't understand Michael's logic. His insistence upon being considered a "father" to the lesbian couple's child is nonsensical when you factor in that not even Kou-kun considers himself a father. It seems like either Michael doesn't understand that you can be genetically related to someone and not be a parent or he's trying to pressure Kou-kun into having children with him when Kou-kun isn't ready and this is a poor excuse for it. Either way, Michael is being unreasonable.

They wanted a complicated situation where the biological father is openly and happily involved in the child's life, and, shockingly, that leads to complications. Wanting to have a child with your partner isn't unreasonable. Taking issue with your partner having a child whose life he is involved with and who you will likely interact with isn't unreasonable. It's a completely understandable reaction. People's emotional connection with children is literally the reason you get anonymous donations that come with clear, legal separation between the donor and the child.

Seriously, parent-child relationships are incredibly powerful and complicated things and if you can't understand that than there's literally no reason to keep trying to explain this to you. And no, saying "but he's not the actual parent" does not somehow dissolve that.

Because no amount of "But he's just an 'Uncle,' and noting more" will stop him from being the biological father.

But that's irrelevant. My brother isn't biologically related to me, but he's every bit my brother. Meanwhile, I have genetic siblings that I would never consider to be family. Your insistence upon biology being the determining factor in familial relationships is both reductive and insulting. Adoptive parents are no less parents because they have no genetic relation to their child. Similarly, a biological progenitor has no innate right to the sociological label of "parent" if they don't fulfill that actual role in the child's life.

When you stop pretending that there's literally no emotional weight put on being someone's actual father that isn't there as an uncle, it's a lot easier to understand.

I don't understand this sentence. Kou-kun isn't a father and actively rejects that label. You can't just enforce an interpretation of a character that's not only openly false, but openly denied. Kou-kun does not consider himself the father. There's no "emotional weight" being placed on him. In fact, his objection is mainly to the fact that he'd rather not be involved at all, because he assumes the involvement they're asking for is more than it is.

the biological father is openly and happily involved in the child's life

Not "involved" to the extent your sentence implies. He'll exist as a distant relative or godfather--which Kou-kun actively wants--to babysit on occasion, but will have no parental role in the child's life. They basically just want to be able to offer an explanation to the child if they ask. They're not asking Kou-kun to be a parent, and Kou-kun doesn't want to be a parent.

That's why Michael's claim on the child is ridiculous. Michael has no social or genetic stake in the child's life; why is he insisting on being considered its parent? He's not, in any capacity.

Wanting to have a child with your partner isn't unreasonable.

And I never said it was unreasonable. My contention is the fact that Michael is asserting a place in a child's life that Kou-kun is actively rejecting.

If Kou-kun doesn't want to be the child's father, why is Michael insisting that he deserves a fatherly role? What about Michael's position allows him that authority over the child?

And no, saying "but he's not the actual parent" does not somehow dissolve that.

Biological relation is meaningless when all involved parties dismiss it as such. Kou-kun considers the biology irrelevant to parental responsibility, and so do the women. Michael is the only one insisting upon the biological component, against the wishes of his partner.

I don't understand the hostility in your post, tbh. You seem annoyed that I disagree with you and are behaving rudely towards me because of it. Please drop the patronising attitude.

last edited at Jun 24, 2017 4:46PM

But that's irrelevant. My brother isn't biologically related to me, but he's every bit my brother. Meanwhile, I have genetic siblings that I would never consider to be family. Your insistence upon being the determining factor in familial relationships is both reductive and insulting. Adoptive parents are no less parents because they have no genetic relation to their child. Similarly, a biological progenitor has no innate right to the sociological label of "parent" if they don't fulfill that actual role in the child's life.

No, it's not irrelevant. Turns out people have emotions and form strong bonds with children. The only one insisting on a single determining factor here is you, as you continue to do nothing but completely dismiss the relationship between all sorts of parents and their children. I never said adoptive parents are less parents than biological (this entire thing started with a discussion of Michael, who wouldn't be the biological father after all) nor that biological parents have the right to the legal and social title of parent. What I did say is that it's not some simple, easy process of never ever forming emotional connections with children that are stronger than the one's you're supposed to based on an agreement you made with your friends (or your partner's friends) and nothing else.

I don't understand this sentence. Kou-kun isn't a father and actively rejects that label. You can't just enforce an interpretation of a character that's not only openly false, but openly denied. Kou-kun does not consider himself the father. There's no "emotional weight" being placed on him. In fact, his objection is mainly to the fact that he'd rather not be involved at all, because he assumes the involvement they're asking for is more than it is.

I'm fully aware you don't understand it. That's part of the issue, though the bigger part is that you insist that your inability to understand means that parents and their emotional connection with their children are these simple things that you can just consciously choose to not have. And, of course, that if you ever want a child and become frustrated that your partner is more interested in having a child to give another family you are just being an unreasonably selfish jerk.

Not "involved" to the extent your sentence implies. He'll exist as a distant relative or godfather--which Kou-kun actively wants--to babysit on occasion, but will have no parental role in the child's life. They basically just want to be able to offer an explanation to the child if they ask. They're not asking Kou-kun to be a parent, and Kou-kun does not want to be a parent.

He's involved. He's there. The reason you don't get your friends to be your sperm donor is to prevent the donor from being involved with the child and complicating the situation. We can all pretend that everything always goes as perfectly as it was planned and that no complications will ever happen so long as that jerk Michael stays silent about his own desire to have a family.

That's why Michael's claim on the child is ridiculous. Michael has no social or genetic stake in the child's life; why is he insisting on being considered its parent? He's not, in any capacity.

He's insisting on being a parent to his partner's child because he wants to be a father and its his partner's child. And maybe don't go on about not having a stake in a child's life when discussing a manga about homosexual parents where one parent is always lacking in stake when compared to the other. God forbid the partner of a biological parent dare want to be considered a parent while not being one of the protagonists.

And I never said it was unreasonable. My contention is the fact that Michael is asserting a place in a child's life that Kou-kun is actively rejecting.

He's asserting that he wants a place in a child's life and that he has a problem with the literal child he wants being out there if he has no place in their life. Because he doesn't live in the weird fantasy where he can just turn off his emotions and form a legal agreement with others to have no feelings for the child he wants.

I don't understand the hostility in your post, tbh. You seem annoyed that I disagree with you and are behaving rudely towards me because of it. Please drop the patronising attitude.

I'm annoyed because someone who can't even understand why Michael might have an issue is kind of annoying. It's not that you disagree, it's that you've just decided that anyone who disagrees with you is just being wholly unreasonable and has no logic to their position. Imagine seeing something you really want, like a life goal of yours that will form a major piece of your future. Then imagine that your partner wants to come into possession of such a thing and then immediately gives it away to someone else right in front of you. I would hope that you could understand why you might have some issue or frustration with such a situation.

Lifecharacter posted:

No, it's not irrelevant. Turns out people have emotions and form strong bonds with children. The only one insisting on a single determining factor here is you, as you continue to do nothing but completely dismiss the relationship between all sorts of parents and their children. I never said adoptive parents are less parents than biological (this entire thing started with a discussion of Michael, who wouldn't be the biological father after all) nor that biological parents have the right to the legal and social title of parent. What I did say is that it's not some simple, easy process of never ever forming emotional connections with children that are stronger than the one's you're supposed to based on an agreement you made with your friends (or your partner's friends) and nothing else.

Ok it starts getting hard to read. Kobalos gives you facts from manga that Kou doesn't want to be child's father and is perfectly willing to act like distant uncle. And yet you are now suggesting Kobalos is using some general, made up examples to explain their point. You talk how bond between biological father and child is so strong, important and not easy to erase. Nobody denies it, but in case of Kou he himself said he doesn't want to be child's father, so he himself doesn't feel any strong bond. Sure he can change his mind later etc. cos biology, but right now he has no desire to be anything more than a occasional babysitter. So yea, you are the one that keeps on dismiss how things look in actual manga and instead base it on your viewpoint trying to insert feelings that were not show in manga, as something that is factual.

I'm annoyed because someone who can't even understand why Michael might have an issue is kind of annoying. It's not that you disagree, it's that you've just decided that anyone who disagrees with you is just being wholly unreasonable and has no logic to their position. Imagine seeing something you really want, like a life goal of yours that will form a major piece of your future. Then imagine that your partner wants to come into possession of such a thing and then immediately gives it away to someone else right in front of you. I would hope that you could understand why you might have some issue or frustration with such a situation.

No, he has no rights whatsoever for a child. You are ignoring the crucial point that Kou was asked to give sperm so couple can have a child. It's not like he made a child randomly and then give it away to someone who asked, despite his partner wanting to have child. He is doing a favor and without doing it, he wouldn't have means to have a kid anyway. Kou is not giving child away to spite Michael. Imagine you want to buy a house and live with your partner in it, but you don't have money for it. Then your partner's friends decided to buy a house for themselves and took a loan, but they needed someone to back up for them in case they can't pay it off, so your partner agreed to it. Would you then go and say that you have right to live in the house because you are partially involved into making it? That is the same case here. They could ask for anyone's sperm. Kou agreed to it and agreed to not be a child's parent or involved more than necessary. So his bf from all people has no right to the child, because it's not theirs. Sure, he can be angry etc. but he really has no rights to and throwing a tantrum over it, actually make him pretty self-centered and not a good partner to be with. If anything, he is the one who doesn't understand the situation at all and is so set on having a child he is dismissing everything else to match his needs. He is just acting entitled. Also he is the one who has strong bond with the child, despite not even being biological father, which kinda beautifully destroys your entire argument.

last edited at Jun 23, 2017 11:17PM

completely dismiss the relationship between all sorts of parents and their children.

But I'm not talking generally - I'm talking specifically about this manga. I don't understand why you're insisting on forcing a generality to my statements that isn't there.

If you won't do me the basic respect of reading my posts, I'm not going to reply any further. Feel free to continue insulting me based on an invented caricature of what I've said.

Ok it starts getting hard to read. Kobalos gives you facts from manga that Kou doesn't want to be child's father and is perfectly willing to act like distant uncle. And yet you are now suggesting Kobalos is using some general, made up examples to explain their point. You talk how bond between biological father and child is so strong, important and not easy to erase. Nobody denies it, but in case of Kou he himself said he doesn't want to be child's father, so he himself doesn't feel any strong bond. Sure he can change his mind later etc. cos biology, but right now he has no desire to be anything more than a occasional babysitter. So yea, you are the one that keeps on dismiss how things look in actual manga and instead base it on your viewpoint trying to insert feelings that were not show in manga, as something that is factual.

If Kobalos wants to limit their argument to facts from the manga, then I suggest they not start discussing how being a sperm donor who is involved with the resulting child's life has no greater meaning than that of any other genetic relative like a niece. And when they actually limit their arguments to facts from the manga, I won't then respond by discussing how there's a little more to that relationship than that, and thus a little more to Michael's issue than him taking advantage of Kou's agreement to babysit a niece that is just a niece and nothing more to pressure him.

No, he has no rights whatsoever for a child.

And nowhere did I indicate that he did.

You are ignoring the crucial point that Kou was asked to give sperm so couple can have a child. It's not like he made a child randomly and then give it away to someone who asked, despite his partner wanting to have child. He is doing a favor and without doing it, he wouldn't have means to have a kid anyway. Kou is not giving child away to spite Michael. Imagine you want to buy a house and live with your partner in it, but you don't have money for it. Then your partner's friends decided to buy a house for themselves and took a loan, but they needed someone to back up for them in case they can't pay it off, so your partner agreed to it. Would you then go and say that you have right to live in the house because you are partially involved into making it?

No, but then I wouldn't compare the desire to have a child and the existence of the literal child you want to the desire to have a mortgaged house. For one there's the emotional weight to it all that apparently doesn't exist because why would you ever be emotionally invested in having a child with your partner, and then there's the difference between "I'm no ready for a kid" and "we can't afford a house." One's a state of financial reality and the other's a personal view on the status of their life and their willingness to start a family. I swapped them around a few times so it's a puzzle to tell which one's which.

That is the same case here. They could ask for anyone's sperm. Kou agreed to it and agreed to not be a child's parent or involved more than necessary. So his bf from all people has no right to the child, because it's not theirs.

Sure, he can be angry etc. but he really has no rights to and throwing a tantrum over it, actually make him pretty self-centered and not a good partner to be with.

Good to know that taking issue with your partner fathering a child that he gets to be involved with to some degree but who you will always be separate from even though it is literally the thing you want makes you a bad partner who throws tantrums. Though maybe if they didn't want to have to deal with the complicated issues of involving the sperm donor in the child's life, going against all good sense, entitled jerks like Michael wouldn't show up and ask to be included in the complicated mess they want to bring his partner into and to have a more meaningful role than honorary babysitter.

But I'm not talking generally - I'm talking specifically about this manga. I don't understand why you're insisting on forcing a generality to my statements that isn't there.

If you won't do me the basic respect of reading my posts, I'm not going to reply any further. Feel free to continue insulting me based on an invented caricature of what I've said.

I seem to be the only one showing you the basic respect of reading your posts. I mean, I could ignore that part where you weren't talking specifically about this manga, but that would be, as you said, disrespectful.

Lifecharacter posted:

If Kobalos wants to limit their argument to facts from the manga, then I suggest they not start discussing how being a sperm donor who is involved with the resulting child's life has no greater meaning than that of any other genetic relative like a niece.

It was just a example and pretty good one, because that is what Kou agreed to. At best he will be just like a uncle that babysit his niece. Again it is you who keep bringing the whole biological parent bond as a argument that somehow changes everything. Kou doesn't posses any desire to be a father and is willing to be just a glorificated babysitter. He doesn't plan to treat child as his, so I really don't get why you insist on shoehorning in the genetics and insisting that being blood related is all that matters and it makes Kou's relation to child somehow more important, even if he himself doesn't see it that way. And making Michael's insistent of being involved into child's live even more ridiculous, when even Kou doesn't see himself as child's father.

And when they actually limit their arguments to facts from the manga, I won't then respond by discussing how there's a little more to that relationship than that, and thus a little more to Michael's issue than him taking advantage of Kou's agreement to babysit a niece that is just a niece and nothing more to pressure him.

Michael is the only one that makes it more complicated than it really is.

No, he has no rights whatsoever for a child.

And nowhere did I indicate that he did.

Here for one example.

Lifecharacter posted:

He's insisting on being a parent to his partner's child because he wants to be a father and its his partner's child

He wants to be a father and it's his partner child (even though Kou agreed to not claim it) and that somehow gives him right to demand both him and Kou are more involved into rising it than Kou agreed and had no problems with.

No, but then I wouldn't compare the desire to have a child and the existence of the literal child you want to the desire to have a mortgaged house. For one there's the emotional weight to it all that apparently doesn't exist because why would you ever be emotionally invested in having a child with your partner, and then there's the difference between "I'm no ready for a kid" and "we can't afford a house." One's a state of financial reality and the other's a personal view on the status of their life and their willingness to start a family. I swapped them around a few times so it's a puzzle to tell which one's which.

Ok you are being so dishonest right now, though you were already pretty dishonest to begin with. I tried to explain it to you in simple terms, but I see any metaphor just bounces off you. The point was, it's not Kou's child and definitely not Michael's. You talk about emotional weigh, then maybe take under consideration that Kou himself might not be ready to have a child? That is maybe the reason he can so easily not think much about being a sperm donor who is a babysitter sometimes? Michael never asked him about it, because only thing that matters to him is his desire to have a child. Just because kid exist, it doesn't mean Michael is one to take it and doesn't mean he has any rights to bitch about it. Sure, he wants it, it has his partners DNA, so what? Kou gave his sperm so some couple can have a child. When he will actually feel like rising a kid with his partner, I'm sure he will then adopt or find a way to make one so they can rise it together. It really comes off as Michael doesn't care about Kou at all and only care about having a kid, no matter what it takes. Unless somehow Michael owns Kou's sperm and have rights to anything that comes from it, it's not his child and he doesn't get to decided what happens with it. As far as I'm concerned he is just trying to steal someones kid.

Good to know that taking issue with your partner fathering a child that he gets to be involved with to some degree but who you will always be separate from even though it is literally the thing you want makes you a bad partner who throws tantrums.

Kou is not fathering it. He is not a parent. At best he will just babysit it from time to time. He is not responsible of rising it in any way. For all intentions and purposes it is like looking over someone else child from time to time and it's definitely not Michael's child in any shape or form. So if for him it equals to his partner having a child and he wants to be more involved into rising it, then yes, he is throwing a tantrum. Again, you keep insisting Kou will be a father and will have more prominent role, when it was explicitly said, he has no desires to and is perfectly fine being there just from time to time when it's convenient.

Though maybe if they didn't want to have to deal with the complicated issues of involving the sperm donor in the child's life, going against all good sense, entitled jerks like Michael wouldn't show up and ask to be included in the complicated mess they want to bring his partner into and to have a more meaningful role than honorary babysitter.

The rules are clear for both sides and nobody has issues with them. The only person who has problem and is making it more complicated than necessary is Michael, which is clearly only driven by his desire to have a child and because of that he is acting entitled and selfish. If anything he is jerk, because he wants to use the situation for his gains, ignoring his partner's intention. He turned Kou's good will into hell for mothers and child. Even if he would succeed would it be really what he wants? Would it be what Kou wants? They would have to parent the child as a four and not only it would make bigger mess with kid having 2 moms and 2 dads, there would be the issue of sharing kid's time equally. It might fulfill Michael's desire to have a child temporary but in long run its nowhere near the thing he actually wants. You almost suggest that since Kou is biological father and Michael wants kids, they should just take child and rise it together, totally ignoring Kou's agreement with couple. Because Michael wants a child and can't stand that his partner decided to do a good deed and share his sperm to help other homosexual couple. Which would be both totally asshole thing to do to couple as well totally ignoring whatever Kou actually wants a child right now.

Nothing we've never heard elsewhere.

The stock arguments are the same everywhere. "Think of the poor child". "Won't they turn gay?", "How will they explain they have two mothers/two fathers?"

Not realizing that they are the ones who think about it the wrong way.

hurray for this manga and congrats to the mothers-to-be!

so this question is for those that may have more direct knowledge. has society and the laws in Japan changed enough that a noticeable number of lesbians and gays are now having children? i'm also curious how the children are entered into the family registry (which appears to be addressed in a later chapter)? finally, has any new LGBT legislation (other than city ordinances) percolated to the national level addressing marriage equality?

Japanese societal mores move about as fast as molasses in winter.

Not to mention, Abe himself hates the idea.

I get a generational last-gasp feeling around the current government, tbh. And I used to live in a part of Japan that probably supported LDP last election. (Though my part of that conservative prefecture actually voted Socialist, FWIW).

On the bright side, once it's seen as shameful and backwards to not have gay marriage, internationally, Japan will come around.

last edited at Jul 31, 2017 1:02PM

BTW my visceral reaction to Michael was similar to a lot of people's. But at the end of the day, they were simply a dead end. The best way is to move on, no harm, no foul. And that's what the couple did.

Regarding the opinion of other ppl towards gay couples and ignoring some controversies around him, it was Louis C.K. (US Commedian) who said:

"It doesn't have ANY effect on your life. What do you care?! People try to talk about it like it's a social issue. Like when you see someone stand up on a talk show and say "How am I supposed to explain to ma child that two men are getting married?"... I dunno, it's your shitty kid, you fuckin' tell 'em. Why is that anyone else's problem? Two guys are in LOVE but they can't get married because YOU don't want to talk to your ugly child for fuckin' five minutes?"

and regarding the public opinion in genereal:

After having registered life partnerships since 2001 in my country (Germany) our government voted just a few weeks ago to make the civil marriage open for same sex couples as well. For maybe a week after that there were ppl all over the media telling us this would be a huge fault, the end of the world, a religious disaster, yadda yadda whatsoever. When a week later the Bundesrat approved of the new law and our President signed it, there was hardly any media coverage. Now that the world apparently hasn't stopped turning it's like noone gives a shit about it anymore.

I think - even in a land like Japan most people aren't actually against homosexuality or couples marrying because they disapprove of them, but because they don't actually know much about it. If the media would cover it AND talk about it as something absolutely normal, most ppl would - imo - take it as something that's just as normal as "traditional marriage".

last edited at Jul 31, 2017 2:24PM

Japanese societal mores move about as fast as molasses in winter.

Not to mention, Abe himself hates the idea.

I get a generational last-gasp feeling around the current government, tbh. And I used to live in a part of Japan that probably supported LDP last election. (Though my part of that conservative prefecture actually voted Socialist, FWIW).

On the bright side, once it's seen as shameful and backwards to not have gay marriage, internationally, Japan will come around.

Considering that Taiwan recently became the very first nation in Asia to allow same-sex marriage, with even Australia remaining on the fence, I fear it may still be a while before we see Japan coming round due to external pressures. Maybe, just maybe, the younger generations will be able to exert enough pressure from within though to drive change; but seeing as we are talking about Japan here, this may end up being somewhat harder than in most other places.