Sounds like a mismatch. Honestly I can't see why a man would date a stripper, let alone impregnate one (unless by accident casually)? This looks like trouble.

Its almost a non interest story from a red pill point of view -couple disagree over spending but this time its the man who sounds less reasonable. However, then you get down to the "abuse" section in the advice where the writer says its a "dangerous dynamic" and suggests escape plans and gives a link to the domestic abuse hotline. This assumption is frankly verging on the criminal and its a huge problem in today's society.

"Man wants partner to go halves on things she is not that keen on" is not abuse, its a mismatch. Either it needs re-negotiation or splitting but to assume potential abuse creates a very risky dynamic for the relationship itself.

These days the moment a woman hints possible abuse the only thing a man can do for his own protection is bug the hell out of that relationship. Now sometimes its a good idea but other times they really just needed a grown up chat about what they think the priorities are and about boundaries. So you can make an unborn chid fatherless and make the mother very unlikely to ever put the kid in contact because of the imaginary "abuse" (that every man she gets with does) or you can have a grown up chat about it being her (very easily made) money. Its not equal work but it is her money, so its not his business. Default liberal answer -do the damage to the kid. Protect women from their own inability to have adult conversations.

I have never had a relationship with a woman in which she has not just about monthly wanted me to buy outright something for the house that I did not want to personally buy. Its not usually that much but its just normal that people have different ideas and women certainly naturally think that what is yours is hers. What is needed is people not to be butt hurt about boundary assertions. Ironically, I have always been wary about always refusing to spend on everything women want. According to the Duluth model of abuse (which the courts have adopted) if you do not have access to the other's money in a a relationship it is abuse! so she would be abusing hm! I have seen lawyers adverts on this "Housewives, if you don't have access to cash on demand in a relationship, it may be abuse. Hire us to take your husband to court"

As an aside, I would never recommend dating any woman who makes money easily. She does not value real work, she does not know the value of money. Women are bad enough with shared money when they work hard.

Didn't even offer him the pussy. Just knew he was an orbiter and expected him to do his duty while paying half.

"Manout!"

Good call that man.

I totally get single mums wanting a break from the kids. But they need to do this fairly. Either go with another single mum and take turns or book where there are kids entertainments laid on. Or explain fully what you are expecting someone else to do for you and then pay them back somehow (personally I wouldn't take pussy as payment here but some guys might. Personally I would expect a week of help on a project I had in return).

Its the assumed entitlement to be helped that is a societal problem. Remove women from doing their natural job in the family context and there is no longer any entitlement for help from wider society. Within the family it is fair they expect a bit of help when tired, just as they should come out and help you fix a fence or a car when you need an extra hand.