You were obviously raised by a step who didn't like you (though after seeing your posts I couldn't really blame him or her) or you were dumped by a woman who didn't want to deal with your baggage/your kid. Have you ever considered therapy instead of posting semi-psychotic letters on salon? You use insults instead of sound arguments. You begged people to answer whether gender would have made a difference and when several people responded, you acted like a threatened and marginalized child. Grow up Colt and get a life! Leave the discussion boards for the adults who actually want to engage in intelligent discussion.

I don't dislike kids in general, either. Depends on the kid. Mine's fantastic, of course, and I have some amazing nieces/nephews at a wide range of ages.

I too think the LW should run away fast, both from the idea of moving in and the whole relationship. You're right, she's the only one here who has a choice, and she should darn well excercise it. And at the risk of making assumptions about her beau's motives, if he has been soft-pedaling the amount of time and effort this is going to take on her part, then that is his bad. I can definitely see the seductiveness of it tho - he's got this great potential solution to several of his life's major problems - sex, childcare, and cooking. Not sure I wouldn't be tempted to jump at that myself! But it can only lead to tears in this case, as she's not good replacement mom material (nor to be fair should she be at that age).

What I take exception to is her presenting all this as the kid's fault - if it weren't for this one minor problem, her life would be perfect and her way forward would be clear. She's probably doing that because she's feeling defensive about this major life choice she's about to make. Understandable - people blame others out of their own insecurity all the time - but no less disagreeable. She shouldn't blame the kid for being alive, for having health issues, for preferring mac and cheese.... It's not his fault that he is the fly in her otherwise perfect lobster bisque. Did he ask to be put in this situation? Do you think it's good for him to be stuck with her? Where is his choice? That's all I'm sayin....

BTW, thanks for pointing out my moral superiority. I have plenty of character flaws, though, and to be honest I don't particularly like kids in general either, at least not other people's. I just don't believe in punishing them just for being in the way of my desires or ambitions. Guess I'm just more sensitive than you. hehehe

@ Colt -- I'm agreeing with you! My post must not have been clear.

To whomever it was who took issue with those of us who are noting the LW's selfishness: Lookit, no one -- no one -- has said that the LW should move in, that she's selfish for not moving in. No one has said that. Please read. What we're saying is that she seems to be thinking of this child as an inconvenience, as an obstacle, as a pain in the ass -- and that is bothering some of us. The boy was there all along! C'mon! Did she think he was going to disappear? She sounds like she wishes he would!

Consider: She had an unwanted pregnancy, yet she criticizes HER BOYFRIEND for not "wrapping it up" (a really yucky turn of phrase, in my mind). None of you sees the hypocrisy there? She was in exactly the same situation! She is clearly revealing a frightening degree of me me me.

And Colt is right. There are people younger than 23 in soldier's uniforms, in charge of third-grade classrooms, stationed in foreign countries as aid givers. Age is no excuse. They aren't all out "smoking a bowl." Don't freak out -- I'm not saying the LW should go to Afghanistan. I'm just saying it's her attitude, not her age. She is old enough to take responsibility for her actions, and to SEE that progressing a relationship with a father means that the guy's kid is going to be part of the deal, for chrissakes. It's out of line to bitch about the child they way she did. He was there first.

Come over to the Table Talk site (in 'Private Life'). I am surrounded and taking heavy casualties, and could use some backup!

She is selfish, not because she doesn't want to raise the kid, but because she feels entitled to have this guy as her boyfriend for some reason and thus feels she can judge him for having had a kid before she ever came along. That, is the epitome of immature selfishness.

In my last post. Especially after reading -- Karey43's letter.

My bad.

I gnerally don’t bother responding to idiots or trolls, but let me clue you in.

You wrote:

Way to project your misogynistic hatred on someone you don't even know! If you reread the letter and people's responses, you would find that no one is simply saying run from the situation. Its the fact that the LW wrote a long list of reasons why she wasn't ready for this in her life and never once says anything positive about her boyfriend.

Apparently it’s completely all right for you to transfer your judgment hatred on someone you don’t even know, but getting beyond your hypocritical first sentence, she actually did say some very positive things about the boy friend. Perhaps your misandry blinded you to reading those parts of the letter. The letter writer includes the following positive attributes about the boyfriend:

• “boyfriend has cleaned up his act -- he graduated from law school a year ago”

• Takes care of a child that is “by no means an easy child to take care of”

• Does not run away (like the mother) from the child who on occasion, “has had a few pretty violent temper tantrums -- throwing and breaking things, biting and hitting his dad, etc. Also, his mom is not in the picture.”

• “I love my boyfriend”

I judge this against someone who’s been dating this person long enough to move in, and yet says the following gem:

“but no matter how much people help the presence of a kid will still crimp my style”

Seriously, how banal is this LW. What the hell did the LW expect?

You continue on with:

As for judgment against the father, he should be a more concerned about the emotional impact that this kind of transition would have on his son. Most parents wouldn't have a partner move in with them until they knew with a fair amount of certainty that the person was going to be sticking around. With a 23 year old (woman or man) who is still in school and who still likes to party, he would be negligent in making that assumption. Lawyers who are just starting to practice law often don't make nearly as much money as you think they do. Unless he graduated in the top of his class at a top law school and was on his law review, he'll have to pay some serious dues just like any other profession. It really does seem like he's looking more for a solution than a partner in life.

Thanks for the tips there, but as previously stated, do you think the letter writer has communicated to the father how much she resents the kid. Cary choose to ignore it (maybe it was Burning Man excitement). The first 9 pages hardly brought it up, or at least didn’t choose to call her on it.

“t does take a village to raise a child and that's why the father should be utilizing his family and longterm friends to help with the child as much as possible. However romantic liassons, especially with someone so young, are rarely stable. He should not be relying on her for the care of his child.”

The laughable liberal hypocrisy: It apparently only takes a village, when the government’s money is involved and you don’t have to be one of the villagers. Grow up people, she may not be a horrible human being, but she is by no means exceptional (except exceptionally self-centered). If you see yourself reflected in this Twinkie, perhaps it’s time to question your own morality.