January 29, 2009

Doomed (his words not mine - I think this is great!!)

Good news ladies and all minorities!!! Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter Act into law today!!! Now what dot he fr's have to say about this? Poor Stan and Bob Batterbee are fit to be tied!!! Now us mean ol wimmin folk will be better able to stand up against female hatred from these men because we will make the same amount they do. These poor poor menfolk are losing their control. And we all know what happens when their kind loses control don't we? I feel for their wives if a woman was stupid enough to marry them. They are probably suffering tonight. First Obama gives money to increase support enforcement (which any single parent relying on the govt to collect child support will tell you the govt needs help in this area) and now horror of horrors - how dare this evil man sign this stupid law into effect? Why he is only making fathers a dying breed.

Get a clue guys!!!!!

From Stan:

To the Judas Escariots among us, we will all reap what you have sown. Here is another reward to the feminists for voting as a recognizable block. What did you do to help us vote in unity against our admitted and sworn enemies? You argued for and voted for these same enemies.
To those divorced and beat dead men who voted for Obama and Biden, we give you credit for another great job well done in helping to destroy fathers, men, families, and our country. This is another law based on one of the The Great Feminist Lies. It will be only one of many. We still have not seen 1% of the feminist agenda that Barak will force down America's throat. This is only the first week of his Presidency and we have $1 Billion for CSE and now the Ledbetter Law. He will pick up steam in the coming weeks. Brace yourselves.

From Bob Batterbee:

(email entitled "Doomed")

Obama signs equal-pay bill
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer 7 mins ago WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama signed an equal-pay bill into law Thursday before cheering labor and women leaders who fought hard for it and the woman whose history-making lawsuit gave impetus to the cause.Obama, choosing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act as the first bill to sign as president, called it a "wonderful day" and declared that ending pay disparities between men and woman an issue not just for women, but for all workers.With Ledbetter standing by his side, Obama said she lost more than $200,000 in salary, and even more in pension and Social Security benefits losses that she "still feels today." He then signed the measure that effectively nullifies a 2007 Supreme Court decision and makes it easier for workers to sue for discrimination by allowing them more time to do so."Making our economy work means making sure it works for everyone," Obama said. "That there are no second class citizens in our workplaces, and that it's not just unfair and illegal — but bad for business — to pay someone less because of their gender, age, race, ethnicity, religion or disability."Ledbetter said she didn't become aware of the large discrepancy in her pay until she neared the end of her 19-year career at a Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. plant in Gadsden, Ala, and she filed a lawsuit. But the high court held in a 5-4 decision that she missed her chance to bring the action.Obama appeared before a jammed East Room audience, and his entrance and many lines of his brief remarks were met with happy applause and yells.He paid special tribute to Ledbetter, who fought for the bill even though it won't allow her to recover any money for herself.And in the room were the living symbols of this fight: Nancy Pelosi, first woman speaker of the House, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who took her pursuit of the presidency further than any other woman, even though she ultimately lost to Obama in the Democratic primary season.Of Ledbetter, Obama exclaimed: "This grandmother from Alabama kept on fighting, because she was thinking about the next generation."First lady Michelle Obama hosted a reception after the ceremony in the State Dining Room.Ledbetter became a regular feature in Obama's campaign for the White House, addressing the Democratic National Convention in Denver last year and traveling to Washington aboard Obama's train for the inauguration ceremonies. Obama spoke strongly in support of legislation to change the Supreme Court decision during his campaign and the Democratic-controll ed Congress moved it to the top of the agenda for the new session that opened this month.The high court had a person must file a claim of discrimination within 180 days of a company's initial decision to pay a worker less than it pays another worker doing the same job. Under the new bill, given final passage in Congress this week, every new discriminatory paycheck would extend the statute of limitations for another 180 days.Congress attempted to update the law to extend the time, but the Bush White House and Senate Republicans blocked the legislation in the last session of CongressOpponents contended the legislation would gut the statute of limitations, encourage lawsuits and be a boon to trial lawyers. They also argued that employees could wait to file claims in hopes of reaping larger damage awards. The bill does not change current law limiting back pay for claimants to two years.Obama cited Census Bureau figures that women still receive only about 78 cents for every dollar that men get for doing equivalent jobs — "women of color even less," he said."Today, in the year 2009, countless women are still losing thousands of dollars in salary, income and retirement savings over the course of a lifetime," he said.This is more than just a women's issue, said Obama."It's about parents who find themselves with less money for tuition or child care; couples who wind up with less to retire on; households where, when one breadwinner is paid less than she deserves, that's the difference between affording the mortgage or not; between keeping the heat on, or paying the doctor's bills or not," Obama said. The measure, which amends the 1964 Civil Rights Act, also applies to discrimination based on factors such as race, religion, national origin, disability or age.

There are just no words for this

Here we have yet another instance of the abuses women must suffer. This is being passed around on various father's rights groups and touted as something that "should" happen if the woman cannot stop nagging. I am sorry there are just no words for this.

Click Petunia to see more of his digusting behavior, including the theft of several files from various sites to include Stop Family Violence (www.stopfamilyviolence.org)

Collins - an examination of the facts

Glenn Sacks states that the first problem is that Holly has made complaints of abuse against a wide variety of people. On this list are her mother, stepfather, an old landlord, a neighbor in the Netherlands, The new wife of Mark, Mark, and Jeff Imm. Okay so she has made those claims. Just because she says they are true and they say they are not true does not make them any less true. I have lived over 4 decades and in the course of that time have run up against some extremely caring people, and I have met some very nasty people. In terms of what is considered abusive, what I might feel is abusive, someone else might not think the same. So why is it up to an outsider to determine if Holly felt abused? I will not even argue this position with someone of Glenn's caliber. If a man says he was abused, it is believed by Glenn and by all of his cult (well some of his cult I should say because Glenn does allow a few posters who dissent on his forum, just so he can keep it interesting).

Problem two he claims is that Holly has made a variety of violence claims in several courts and they all have found against her. Again this means nothing as women in today's culture are very often found not credible due to the emotional aspect of these issues.

Batterers naturally strive to turn mediation and GAL processes to their advantage, through the use of various tactics. Perhaps the most common is to adopt the role of a hurt, sensitive man who doesn't understand how things got so bad and just wants to work it all out "for the good of the children." He may cry in front of the mediator or GAL and use language that demonstrates considerable insight into his own feelings. He is likely to be skilled at explaining how other people have turned the victim against him, and how she is denying him access to the children as a form of revenge, "even though she knows full well that I would never do anything to hurt them." He commonly accuses her of having mental health problems, and may state that her family and friends agree with him. The two most common negative characterizations he will use are that she is hysterical and that she is promiscuous. The abuser tends to be comfortable lying, having years of practice, and so can sound believable when making baseless statements. The abuser benefits to the detriment of his children if the court representative fails to look closely at the evidence - or ignores it - because of his charm. He also benefits when professionals believe that they can "just tell" who is lying and who is telling the truth, and so fail to adequately investigate.


In other words Holly was found even less credible with every allegation she raised. Just because this happens in court (according to a leading domestic violence expert) does not mean that a woman (specifically Holly) is lying about abuse. It could very well mean that Mark has played the abuser card, managed to woo the evaluators into his corner by doing as Bancroft has stated. He wowed them with his concern and knowledge and his care for the children 'appeared' to be that of a good father. Just because he appears to be a good father does not make him a good father. Glenn also states that any litigant is able to get an RO simply for whoing up. This is not true at all. In my own case I have attempted to get 2 RO's after the original permanent one was dropped by the judge and I could not even get a temporary order. In fact, in the second order I was told that obnoxious behavior is not against the law. So point two has now been countered. It is highly possible that due to Holly's naivete of court procedures and that the fact that once a court finds against you more than 2 or 3 times, any further reports will be viewed in the same light. Kind of a reverse boy who cried wolf if you will. She cried once without enough documentation (you see courts want proof even though this is civil court and only a preponderance of the allegations should have to be proven, many times the courts and the officers of the courts rely on the standard for criminal courts - beyond a reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt is possible in all cases of dv due to the very hidden nature of this crime).

Glenn then states that Zachary sustained the alleged injury not from his father, but at an amusement park. He sustained TWO (repeat 2, not 1 but 2!!!!) head injuries. The first was at the amusement park, but the second was by his father. So here we go again with leaving ut parts of the truth and only saying what you think the reader should hear (talk about your censorship).

Glenn then says issue number 4 is that a reputable child psychiatrist disputes Holly's claims. he (the psychiatrist says this because the children appear to be doing well under the father's care while the father had custody. Do you the reader honestly think that Mark would be kicking the children's dog, slamming their heads into walls, punching and shoving Holly with a psychiatrist present. Also we must look at this logically. We are talking about 2 young children here. What if this scenario was present instead. Dad abuses child and then tells child, if you tell on me they will take you away from me, your mom is crazy so you won't go with her. Then father attempts to woo child by buying child something or promising to not abuse. This is typical of your batterer and the honeymoon, escalation and abuse cycles. The abuser escalates in his anger and violence until you have the actual incidents of violence. he then enters into the honeymoon phase. If an adult victim can be wowed by this and think things will change, how is a child to react? Jennifer and Zachary were quite probably scared out of their wits. The issues of child abuse and domestic violence have been around since creation, only to be recognized as such in the 20Th century. In fact, child abuse was not viewed as a crime and the first documented case of child abuse was brought on by the ASPCA in the late 1800's. However, the system is far from perfect. In reading Jennifer's website, we see that Zachary spoke to his therapist/psychiatrist about his fears of his father. And yet again we have a professional who cannot see the writing on the wall. Jennifer and Zachary have both disproved Glenn on this point clearly and without a doubt. I will now drop this due to their requests. Future posts will not be entertained. I wish Jennifer all the best. I wish Zachary all the best. I wish Holly all the best. I also pray that God puts a veil of protection over this family and keeps them safe from the harm that might occur from these rabid father's rights groups. These groups and those who run them really should get a life.

January 28, 2009

Stalking an abuse victim and her children through the 'Net and offline

One must wonder what would possess a man who by his own words has an extremely fulfilling and happy home life with two children and a wonderful wife t do this. What do I mean by this? He has endeavored to take on 'proving' Holly Collins and her children wrong. He wants to brand Holly a liar, he wants the world to think she has some strange disease which is not even listed in any medical book as a RECOGNIZED mental disease or condition. What is the mysterious malady of which I am speaking? Why PAS dear readers..... Parental Alienation Syndrome. Apparently Jennifer's father wants people to believe he is a nice guy (more on that later) who has been victimized in the worst possible way. His ex-wife Holly has stolen his children and spirited them away to the Netherlands. And GS has decided it is his mission to prove this woman wrong. He wants to re victimize the victim, as her abuser has done over and over. And this is just Holly, I have yet to start on what he is trying to do to Jennifer and Zachary. It might also be noted that Zachary remains quiet on these issues. Even though he is now an adult and no longer under the jurisdiction of the US court who gave custody of him to his alleged abusive father, he still REFUSED to return to the States. He REFUSED and as far as I know, still REFUSES to speak to his father.

And then we have GS sitting all high and mighty is his nice house in California, being a good little househusband, running his websites, charging men's rights groups 10 a week to run a dinky sized ad in the hopes that one of his cult followers would click on one of those ads. nice little racket going there. Get these already quite possibly unstable men riled up, charge others money to place small banner ads on your site and be able to stay at home with your children. Geesh where do I find a job like that?

Now folks you have a slight background on this (and please Jennifer if you notice any corrections needed on what has been posted to date please email me). It is now nearly 2 am, I must get my beauty sleep, so the fireworks will have to wait until tomorrow. I do promise it will come :-)

Okay enough fooling around, now it is serious time

Well the time has come folks and it is now time to get serious. Sadly I knew this day would come. Some people are like dogs. Give them a bone and they will never let go until the bone is in shreds, torn into tiny little slivers. This is now what is being done to Jennifer Collins, Holly Collins, Zachary Collins, and to Holly's minor child whose name I will not mention due to his age. His natural father (from what I have read) can only be classified in the questionable category. What type of father who claims to be interested in a child's best interest wants to root the child up from the only environment he has ever known and from his entire family? I will offer my own opinion on this and it is green and there are quite a few of them and they have pictures of dead presidents on them.

Amazingly we have yet to hear any denials from the now famous father of Jennifer and Zachary. No denials.... nothing.... One must wonder why this is? And of course we have the ever famous (maybe in his mind and the minds of his cult followers) man who has decided to make it his life's mission to rip this mother to shreds as a dog would a good bone. I will say one thing in this post before I get to the hard work. The children in question were 7 and 9 when the mother fled the US. This is old enough to form an opinion about something. To delude yourself into thinking that these children could not have possibly remembered themselves or their mother being abused is quite frankly - in a word - disgusting.

Now folks the posts you have been anxiously awaiting are on the way. This could very well be a several day project, so please be patient. He has pretended to engage in a full investigation of Holly's charges and claims, yet he only presents one side of the issues. I will now take all of his claims and using the Internet will show why his claims and how his claims can be proven false. Also be warned, this post will probably not provide the entertainment value of some of my previous posts. But then again, it just might. This is something I need to do. I feel as though I know Jennifer, although we have never met. I see my own daughter and sons in her eyes and in Zachary's eyes. I see myself in Holly's eyes. I only hope that things can start changing.

Holly, Jennifer, Zachary... this is for you. I can only hope I will do you justice and bring to light the truth. My prayer is that you Holly will see this and say yes yes yes over and over again, this is what I meant, this is what I was talking about. SHE gets it. Well I get it because I live it. So with that my sisters in this war, I salute you. Let's get on with this.

Porky porky porky (this is so fun what a DUMAS!!!)

Now I am having some fun in order to prepare for the heartbreak of my next post or two (that really depends on how much I can stomach of the subsequent posting and the thought that must go into it). Porky is so incensed at this site and has decided to create his own 'educational' blog, for those out of the loop. While I found this amusing to say the least, I stumbled upon his site completely by accident. He had been posting as anonymous (one of the many) on this site. He then created his own user id on Google and a 'new' blog.

Well it is not new (now this site here is new lol), it is simply a rehashing of old worn out tired ideas that hopefully will soon be 'Gone With The Wind'. After several posts on his site, he reveals his true identity. He has now revealed that two commenters on Glenn Sacks website are one and the same. If you go look (I don't have time right now as I am formulating my thoughts on my next few posts which are just so much more important than some worthless MRA) you will see 'nelson' and 'Michael Claymore' posting on the same articles written by Sacks. Now one must wonder, does this MRA have a slight case of dual personality? Oh I guess since he is Claymore, nelson, and porky - he can possibly qualify as having multiple personalities.

Now this is interesting and quite amusing :-) One must also wonder if porky aka nelson aka Michael Claymore will say anything about this post? Nah, because to do so would be attracting attention to what he refers to as a feminazi, crazed woman....Hmmm is that what sacks meant by LOONIES?

One other piece of advice MC aka nelson aka porky.... when designing a website, you should really think of all the users on the 'Net, not just yourself. Creating a page that looks good on your huge monitor set at the highest possible resolution will NOT look good on another computer which is set at 800 by 600 resolution (or quite possibly even smaller). Design 101 - go to school dude.....


Have you seen the new porky sty? OMG lol and that is what took him days and weeks to accomplish? That would be a 4 hour project for me. Blogger.com is so wonderful - they make it easy to create an onlilne forum...Why mess with easy when I have so many thoughts running through my brain that must come out? These men are such bozos - I must shout from the rooftops so the world can see.

Ahhhhhh poor MRA baby is all upset because the government is giving away money......

This poor little baby has his panties in a knot because the government under Obama is attempting to fix the mess left behind with years and years of this mess. Will he be able to fix it before we have another Great Depression? Before people are on ration cards as we once were in times of war? And what has this poor poor poor MRA all upset? In a 13 page summary report, one sentence on page 12. Anyone care to hazard a guess as to what the subject matter of this one sentence in a 13 page report would be? Two words and the first is CHILD. I will leave the rest to your fertile imaginations.

January 17, 2009

More De Nile from a 'victim' MRA

As I mentioned before, Many men's rights and father's rights group have public archives or allow just about anyone on their groups. Many times I get sent these emails from a person or persons absolutely disgusted by the actions of these MRA/FRs. I am sharing one below: (coming soon - have to run to the store) hope you are awaiting this anxiously :-)


I promised this to you almost 2 weeks ago and had to undergo more abuse from my batterer so was unable to post. Circumstances have now changed (as you will see by my subsequent posts) and I am now angry again. Here is the cheese guy from an FR group. (Email forwarded to me - thank you mole!!!)

If you want to see alienation, go to the web site below and put in
XXXXXXX. You will see were my ex has alienated me from my kids by
falsely accusing me of domestic. Falsely accusing my father and at the
same time saying I kept them unsafe and I did not see them for four
months that time. Have records of were I was denied over 200 visit days
from OCT. 2006-oct.2007. My relationship with my children I guess will
have to wait until there older.

Well, my two cents on this situation? If you did not do the crime then you won't do the time. But if a judge felt there was reason for an RO against you, then my advice to you? Stop being abusive.... You might be surprised at how far you would get if you tried actually being.......nice? DUMAS!!!!

UPDATE 2: Any of my faithful followers wants a laugh about this, send me an email and I will send the pertinent info :-) You will see at least 7 or 8 dv cases in which this guy is a party, plus a divorce and a foreclosure. What a prize huh?

January 16, 2009

My Ecdysis: Throw Your Shoe at Bush on January 20, 2009

My Ecdysis: Throw Your Shoe at Bush on January 20, 2009

Now the significance behind the obviously small child in ARMY boots? This is to commemorate the fact that one of my nephews has done 3 tours in Afghanistan, thankfully to come home alive each and every time. His baby cousin misses him and wants him home for good. So J, this is for you and your family and all of those over there, please come home, come home soon and come home safe!!!!

If you want to do the same simply click the 'Shoes for Bush' Picture above and follow the directions. I would also post on the original blog so as to keep this going.

Just when i thought they had calmed down to a dull roar

Andre Lieven Says:

January 16th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Georgia Girl avoids facing the consequences of her misandry:

"I have in mind a general profile of a typical MRA, but I don't wanna sit here and duck the arrows, so I'll pass."

Too cowardly to back up your claims, eh ?

How typical for the common sexist feminist bigot.

The truth that bigots such as GG and jeana wish weren't true is that MRA's are working for actual Equality. Equality in front of the law, such that the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" applied to BOTH men *and* women.

The article and thread titled "She admits she framed him, but he's still charged" shows clearly that men ARE treated in the law as being LESS than any woman. Thats sexism, and thats WRONG.

Those who defend wrongful sexism, including misandrous sexism, ARE sexist bigots. QED.

This was in reply to these statements:

jeana Says:

January 16th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
“and while you're at it, notice the sexes of the various players and their roles”

Ok, so instead of this being about what an awesome job the pilot did and the emergency workers, it is really more “boys are better than girls” because all of the helpers in the article were male.

But while you’re busy noticing the sex of those who helped the passengers, also please note their functions. Divers, police, pilot, and an Emergency Services chief. That is their JOB. They did their JOB. Thank you, dudes, for doing your JOB.

I hope no one is implying that if there were female officers that they’d just let the passengers drown????? Maybe they’d be too busy applying lip gloss.

One non-professional, a male passenger, was also credited for helping women and children. Great for him. Not his job, but he helped out. More people should be like him. The lady with the baby on her shoulder who he helped—should she have helped out the men in business suits?

I, for one, am very glad that Jeff Kolodjay was not an MRA. For if he was, he’d have trampled the women and children on his mad dash to get out of the plane.

and these:

Georgia Girl Says:

January 16th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Sully is my hero!

It also warmed my heart that more than one of the male survivors put the lives of women and children above his own. That clearly indicates, to me, that the majority of men in our country do not fit the MRA profile.

Georgia Girl Says:

January 16th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Wayne, you have described traits that are not exclusive to MRAs, but to mankind.

I have in mind a general profile of a typical MRA, but I don't wanna sit here and duck the arrows, so I'll pass.

Basically this post goes on and on ad infinitum about how wonderful men are, and how women are crybabies and always victims and always in need of rescuing and how these particular men (well at least the vast majority of them anyway) will not help because they are tired of being victims themselves. Thankfully both GG and jeana can hold their own against these MCPs and need no help from me. I however thought that MY readers should get an example of the levels to which these MRAs will stoop when writing about the 'victimization of men.' I am only on post 45 as of this writing and am nearly 100% disgusted with what I have read. Some of the cult followers have 'claimed' that women REFUSE to take jobs as police officers, divers, EMT, fire rescue personnel. One even claimed there were - get this - ZERO female responders at Ground Zero. Men do typically take these types of jobs more often than women. The tides are turning however. Fifty years ago you would never see a female EMT or fire fighter. They are gaining ground today however. And the notion that NO women were on Ground Zero is defeated with this link and this link.

Oh and my favorite (gag) MRA has surfaced again.

Bill Christen Says:

January 16th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Kinda like when the first Space Shuttle blew up. You would have thought that the only person on board was the female teacher.

BC you have about no brains as well. The ONLY reason Christina Mcauliffe was mentioned so often is because she was NOT an astronaut. She WAS a schoolteacher, so therefore she was DIFFERENT. Just because she happened to be a she is of no call. If you recall, there have been two shuttle catastrophes and in the second (all were military/astronauts) two were women. On the first shuttle disaster, there were also two women (one of whom was Mcauliffe). These women were mentioned no more and no less than the other MALE astronauts. To say that society is anti-male because Mcauliffe was mentioned more is simply - words don't describe you BC. You are in a class of your own. One must expect that with your fantasy level, however.

Andre Lieven at it again (shakes head in amazement that he ACTUALLY believes himself)

Andre Lieven Says:

January 16th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
jeana cluelessed:

"Do you want news reports to say, “And a MAN helped out the victims! Can you believe it, a MAN!!”"

Why NOT ? The daily news is FULL of reports that say "A BAD MAN did (X)".

Why can't it, Equally, say that "A GOOD MAN did (Y)" ? Or, "A bunch of Good Men did (Y)" ?

Why do you so OPPOSE Real Equality ?

Ummm Andre - the papers and TV news stations DO run stories about people all over the world every day who do good things. They also inform the public of those who do bad things. And sadly it is men consistently over time who "do bad things" - more so than women. It should also be pointed out that when a woman does the ultimate in horrendous (IE - the taking of the life of a child or the mere allegation of that act - such as Casey Anthony) we are constantly bombarded daily with her actions, words, thoughts. We are BOMBARDED with the thoughts of those close to that case. Where is the followup to Bruce Pardo? What of the followups with the survivors? Why is this not done? Simple....Men are quite often the type of perpetrator who would take the lives of his children, of his wife (ex-wife). Men are more frequently, MORE violent than women. Men cause more damage when they are violent than women do. This has come to be somewhat 'expected' (although it should not be). So we will see one or two articles on the 'bad men', and then they fall by the wayside. Simply put - bad men do not make controversy. 'Bad women' do...

I could continue on and on with this post but I think all of my faithful readers get the picture. Andre Lieven (in post 78 at the Petunia link) also discusses the Titanic survivor/fatality rates, delves into some severe misogyny in and of itself. And one last parting remark regarding the Paul/Linda debate....I would save PAUL simply because he has given much more to society. He is one of the Beatles for gosh sakes :-) Seriously though, I would give my life if it meant saving both of them. I would hope I would never be in the position to choose between saving one person or another. Given a choice the only time an easy choice would be made would be a child versus an adult. That would be a no-brainer. The child would ALWAYS come first.

Andre Lieven Says:

January 17th, 2009 at 12:03 am

.....-Whats the difference between NOW and the KKK?
The KKK has a dress code.-

Can we get any more disgusting than this?!?!?!?!?!?!

And it seems Andre Lieven is hung up on the KKK and NOW? What is his hangup? MEN have traditionally had it easier than women. White men have it easier than anyone else. This is a fact of life - no matter how you spin it Andre. Get over yourself and your poor misguided feelings of oh woe is me.......


There!!!! Have I got YOUR attention? Georgia Girl might not want to come out, and jeana might put up with your crap over there on that blog, but I will call you and the others on your disgusting actions and behaviors. So stay tuned!!!! You asked for it, you got it.....

January 15, 2009

Domestic sphere should be kept private?

When one parent has a well-founded fear that their former partner is abusing or neglecting their child, however, evidence for the courts can be hard to come by. The domestic sphere is largely opaque to the outside world. That is how it should be for the most part—invading the privacy of that sphere is usually unwarranted.

Now this statement is obscure at best and misleading at worst. Does the author intend for us to believe that spying is okay if it is done for a reason? Or is it only fathers who are allowed to do so? Or is this to state that ALL domestic issues (home life) should be kept private? I am sure these abusing and battering men would love that.....

January 13, 2009

More minimumization by an abuser?

Even if this Court disregards Mrs. XXX mental instability, the only portions of the State’s petition which her testimony could even remotely be considered to support are the State’s allegations that Mr. XXX had hit Mrs. XXX and left bruises on her, that Mr. XXX hit one of the children with his cane in either June or July of 2004, and that Mr. XXX had used hot sauce as a punishment upon two of the children.


The next witness called by the State was XXX XXX, the father of the minor children. Mr. XXX consistently denied all of the allegations contained within the petition, other than the hot sauce punishment. As to the hot sauce punishment, Mr. XXX submitted into evidence a parenting book wherein the hot sauce punishment is recommended. Whether this Court or any other may be morally opposed to said punishment is irrelevant, to adjudicate children deprived because someone followed the recommendations of a nationally published parenting book is improper.


The next witness called was the paternal aunt of the children, XXX XXX. According to Ms. XXX testimony, she and her brother are estranged. There is even a protective order in place between them. Accordingly, it seems clear that Ms. XXX would say or do anything to sully the character of Mr. XXX. Accordingly, her testimony should not be considered “competent” evidence.

Now, one must ask, is this indeed another abuser out to minimize his own actions? Or is he another one of the lunatic fringe MRA/FRs who feels he was justified? By his own words he feels he was justified in using a hot sauce punishment on at least 2 of his own children. Now in this blogger's opinion, that is tantamount to abuse of the worst kind. Imagine the horror about being given something by your parent, someone you trust, only to suffer the horrid taste and possible effects of hot sauce poisoning? One must also wonder what book TELLS a parent to torture their child with hot sauce?

One must also wonder why his sister is so dead set against him? Could it be she is one of those who find abuse morally repugnant and find those who would commit such evil acts morally bankrupt?


A quick web search has revealed that Focus on the Family might very well be the author of this questionable activity of using Hot Sauce as a disciplinary method on a child.

We are live on WordPress now

I have taken the step and expanded our horizons. I have imported all of my blog posts to Wordpress so users can locate us here at BlogSpot or at Wordpress. Click Petunia to visit us at Wordpress....

The loonies thoughts......

Now, is Glenn really revered by all who run into him? Even those he 'supposedly' supports are unhappy with him.....

Post from another blog about the man himself (and in his own words no less)....

Well it seems that GS does not want to be lumped in with the loonies he caters to. I wonder how those 'loonies' feel? Read below:

January 12, 2009

New Projects

My associates and I will be undertaking several new projects over the next few weeks. They will be revealed here as time permit. Although at this point, I do not care what the rabid FR/MRA types say or do. I am in the process of researching the second issue and seeing what the legalities of it would be. I doubt there would be any however. A sneak peek into the first project - I will be scouring the 'Net and finding all those stories of abuse by MEN. Those stories that the anger filled MRA/FRs say do NOT exist. Why do these stories not exist in their eyes? Well because they BELIEVE that women are more violent than men. They in fact have several blogs/sites which show all the abuses perpetrated by women, in a vain attempt to show just how violent women are. I intend to debunk that theory. Once I get the search terms dialed in, expect many stories of physical and sexual violence, and murders. I do not think I will have an issue finding these types of stories as you read them in the paper daily. The second project is under wraps at the moment and will be revealed at a later date. This project however, will have a direct impact on abused women and will help to protect us from those intending harm.

January 10, 2009

More on Collins

I should add that one of Glenn's ever faithful followers made a comments regarding the picture Jennifer Collins chose to post on her blog when speaking of Glenn. Now Glenn has posted about some obscure band (OTEP) and used a picture to post about this band. Take a look at the picture of the female lead singer. She is scowling (growling), eyes shut tight, teeth clenched, unkempt. Now I am sure Glenn as well as myself knows that image is everything. He is trying to present OTEP as some psychotic individual.

Again I do not agree with the music, but to take someones choice to listen to this away would be taking away my right to choose what I hear. I remember my mother hating my music choices (Guns and Roses, The GoGo's, Lita Ford, Blondie, and more from that famous decade - lol). I also remember when she finally 'got it' and decided that we really weren't listening to music that was all that bad. She remembered listening to the Beatles in her youth and young adulthood. She wasn't one of the crazy Beatle-mania followers, she simply liked their music.

Now my children and nieces and nephews listen to Britney wailing out Womanizer, If I were a Boy, Get the party started, Girlfriend, Promiscuous Boy, and Milkshake by others I could very well do the same as my parents and their parents before them. Or I could listen to these songs and determine why I deem them offensive and then maybe they won't be so offensive. I also feel that if I am open to my children (as evidenced by my nieces and nephews), I will be sought out.

Same goes for my young child who loves Hannah Montana. Dad hates that little blond hussy (as he calls her) and refuses to allow her to see HM. I on the other hand will watch with her. HM while I do not think she is more for the younger girls - she is not bad and quite entertaining at times. I mean does anybody recall sneaking out of your house to go to the movies or to hang out with your friends?

The point of this whole conversation however, is to show that cultist from over there are so gleeful to point out Ms. Collins evil doings and wrongs committed towards GS, he (GS) does the exact same thing towards OTEP.

OTEP keep making your music. I will NOT buy it, I hope my children will never buy it, but there are those that like it and in those people you have a following. Freedom to express ourselves is wonderful isn't it?

Rap Misogyny & J-Shin's 'Baby Mama Drama'

If you choose to go to this site you will see every single post attacks the original poster "LorMarie". She correctly calls out GS when he has failed to mention the prevelance of female hatred by men in rap songs. He tries to make up for this by making a post about rap. I have two things to say about this post. First - he posts the ENTIRE lyrics to the other two male hate by female songs on his site and on this post he conveniently only pulls out the lyrics which will fit his agenda. Second - TOO LITTLE TOO LATE GS.

Read all comments here:

huilenowl Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
LorMarie, a reader, was also correct in retorting that "male rap artists can rap about degrading women" without protest, calling it a "double standard."

I am sorry but this statement by LorMarie is utterly false. Do a google search of mysogyny, rap lyrics, and you will see how false this feminist retort is. It is basesless, factless and attempts to absolve women of her ilk from holding women like beyonce responsible and accountable. Their are no books, programs or congressional members broaching the subject of misandry, there are all of the aforementioned when it comes specifically to rap and mysogyny.

There are no classroom discussions denouncing beyonce, but male rap lyrics are routinely the subject of classroom discourse. Male rap artists do no play their mysogynistic songs on Good Morning America to the delight of Diane Sawyer, or on Oprah-- Beyonce however does. The double standard that LorMarie wants to protest doesn't exist in any manner shape or way that she wants to pretend it does.

Mister-M Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Except that LorMarie was incorrect in stating that male rap artists sing misogynistic lyrics without protest. Other than that, the article has some merit.

Marc A. Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
That you, Huilenowl, for taking the words right out of my mouth. I totally agree. I was about to respond to that and was glad to see you already did. I do not see how anyone can say it is "without protest" when there is tons of protest. I specifically recall when Nelly had to cancel his show because Black women protested his lyrics. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4816719/

How is that "without protest"? I hear of similar opposition all the time.

Even worse is the claim that this is somehow a "double standard when in fact the double standard is exactly the OPPOSITE. Nobody challenges misandry when it's all over the MAINSTREAM. Commercials, comedy, humor, etc. You are absolutely, 100%, CORRECT. Misogyny gets pushed to the fringes and "shock" DJ's and then still gets protested, while, as Warren Farrell puts it, "Male bashing is a Hallmark card."

john Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
lormarie is wrong....conservatives have spoken out against rap (i don't call them artists-lol...they can't even sing)...i've heard them do so on the radio and tv....but....you won't hear liberals speak out on thisi believe because they are too busy kissing up for their votes....and they are to scared to loose their support

Marc A. Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
"won't hear liberals speak out on thisi believe because they are too busy kissing up for their votes....and they are to scared to loose their support"

Not true. Liberals and feminists speak out about this alot. And they're hypocritical when they do, just as the conservatives are, because they both ignore the misandry and only speak about misogyny.

When it comes to gender issues, I see plenty of hypocrisy in both left and right camps.

Lance Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
GS: "LorMarie, a reader, was also correct in retorting that "male rap artists can rap about degrading women" without protest, calling it a "double standard.""

Sure...right...when has the Today Show ever done a segment on anti-male lyrics? Rarely if ever...but they hit the anti-female lyrics all the time.

The double standard is in the fact that society seems to recognize that anti-female lyrics are wrong...but they seem to let pass anti-male lyrics.

This is just another "me-too" from LorMarie I think. Is she right to point out anti-female lyrics? Sure..but don't try to get props by saying that there is an anti-female double standard going on when the double standard is clearly anti-male.

Lance Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Oh, and what huilenowl said.

ManCan Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
The key to victory is white men and black men getting together for their common interests, and bashing each other's music makes that a lot harder.

ManCan Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
"Anti-female lyrics" are not wrong.

pj Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
‘Baby Mama Drama’, a truthful song that accurately depicts the situation for so many fathers whose children are born out of wedlock!

I believe it could also be called the Truth song, I'm lovin' it !

The detractors sound a lot like the narrow-minded, backward, ignorant elitist kooks that used to burn Beatle albums by the hundreds in the middle of the street back in the day.

And we all know what happened to 'vile, degrading and violent' rock n' roll, and especially the Beatles!

I formally dub the magnificently hypocritical criticism of so-called 'misogynistic' Rap as the:

'The Triple Slander Standard'

sonja Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
'"Anti-female lyrics" are not wrong.'

Care to expand on that, ManCan? I'd be interested to hear your reasoning.

TF Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Black males are more intimately familiar with growing up in a matriarchy. Art is a depiction of the artist's perception or imagination or reality.

lormarie Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 6:31 pm
There are no classroom discussions denouncing beyonce--huilenowl

That's because Beyonce was singing about an image that male rappers regularly present about themselves. Her song also lacked the anti-male and female degredation and violence often present in rap music. I swear, the onset of NWA and Easy-E sent rap down the drain, LOL.

Now if Beyonce were to sing a song depicting AA (African American) males as subhuman male "hos" who should be beaten or performs on stage with a noose, I'd say we have a problem. Until then, I don't think that her song is any worse than much of what is played on the radio (including country, rock, R&B) by male and female artists.

perspicacious Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Back to the song lyrics...no start with the title. Baby Mama. Maybe if young black AND white people thought of babies in terms of husband and wife, there would be more respect for one another and a better outcome for the children. The song is junk that only serves to further push a wrong idea about what reproducing *human beings* is supposed to entail. JMO.

I will be updating this as new comments are posted as I can rightfully imagine there will be few posts to commend Glenn on his half assed post regarding rap.

Nelson Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
This idea that misogynist lyrics arent criticized is claptrap. The Stones were criticized for "Under my thumb" decades ago, then there was GnR and NWA in the eighties and nineties. All these guys got heavy heat for their lyrics, meanwhile Beyonce gets a free ride.

lormarie Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Nelson Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
This idea that misogynist lyrics arent criticized is claptrap. The Stones were criticized for "Under my thumb" decades ago, then there was GnR and NWA in the eighties and nineties. All these guys got heavy heat for their lyrics, meanwhile Beyonce gets a free ride.

GNR also caught heat for using the "N" word in "One In A Million." A term ironically used by "N"WA in their very name. Strangely enough, it did little to dampen their (GNR) popularity.

BASTA! Says:

January 11th, 2009 at 12:19 am
> GNR also caught heat for using the "N" word in "One In A Million."

Isn't that a textbook example of a red herring?

ManCan Says:

January 11th, 2009 at 3:26 am
Most of the lyrics aren't "mysoginist," anyway. It's mostly just rappers bragging about all the hot b*tches they've nailed. But when a man discusses his adolescent desires and frustrations we need to have a debate about it to make sure he isn't persecuting women; when a woman discusses her feelings it's healthy. How ridiculous can you get?

ManCan Says:

January 11th, 2009 at 3:32 am
Quite frankly, I would like to see more music that is "anti-female" (or anti-feminist, more specifically). Songs about women pretending to be helpless, exploiting the system, failing to raise children on their own, lying about men, etc. I hope the word "ho" won't be used because I wouldn't want prostitutes to be unfairly compared to the kind of women I'm referring to.

Danny Says:

January 11th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
All I can say is that I have yet to see a male singer come up with a song that shows male against female violence and actually have the video applauded when a clip of it is played on a daytime talk show.

John D Says:

January 11th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Here is as close to a recrimination as a black comedian I think could possibly come.

Chris Rock detailing how hard it is to defend rap music anymore.

The main thing about rap (regardless of the color) is that they hail from a totally different culture.

What is this culture? The poor urban slums. The only thing nearly universal about these homes is that they are fatherless. Some 98% of homes in poor urban slums are fatherless.

Maybe this is an indication that the great feminist science experiment/gameshow "trade dads 4 checks" was a miserable failure.

Porky porky porky......or should I say nelson?

Here is another charming bit of anti-male sentiment. This piece is called Menocide (as opposed to the proper term, which is androcide, but one cant expect such a woman to have a vocabulary much beyond that of any other brain damaged psychopath.) and its lyrics were written by a poor excuse for a human female with the unlikely nom-de-guerre of Otep Shamaya, which I believe is Egyptian for “Blithering Idiot”.

You 'claim' to be documenting cases of male hatred by females, yet I can count at least 3 occurrences of female hate by YOU in this above quote. Leaves one to wonder....

'You have lost a lot of my affection and respect because of your...relationship with your father'

16 (Editor Note - Post Number)
AnonymousPamphleteer Says:

January 8th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
If using surreptitious video and audio were legal in more states and more contexts, it would showcase nicely how female behavior is so often at great variance from what our courts like to pretend.

And it would be a great way to catch the tiny minority of males who truly are physically abusive.

You mean females who are trying to escape a battering, abusive man? Oh and nicely put again (more perpetuation of the myth) that only a tiny majority of men are physically abusive. What about all the 'controlling' man who are abusive in other ways? Like verbal, psychological, financial, medical? My ex runs the gamut of these. I have proof as well which will be made public in less than a decade, quite possibly sooner if things go HIS way.

17 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Attila L. Vinczer Says:

January 8th, 2009 at 9:33 pm

Thankfully, although still sad, my boys aged 6 and 8 have figured it out and have even at the age 3 and 5 asked me why is mommy so mean to you daddy? I am having a tough time teaching the children to not hate their mother. I have never said a single bad thing about their mother no matter how much I would sometimes want to explain to the children how and why I feel the way I do about the reason of our divorce which the children inquire about often.

You are right TF. I am lucky to see my kids as I was the subject of a failed false sexual allegation and unbelievably just two weeks before Christmas the ex managed to engage CPS (CAS Children’s Aid Society in Canada) who nearly separated me from my children who were actually taken into their custody for about two hours while CPS blackmailed me into signing an Agreement under duress threatening me that they would place the children into foster care if need be if I did not comply. Big mistake for them as I have irrefutable evidence and will take them to task in court. I did not cave in and I prevailed as the children are with me once again.

The children now hate CPS and their mother even more. I am concerned that I will be accused of turning the children against their mother which I never have and have no intention to do as she did it all to herself.


Quite ironic that 'Atilla' is concerned with PAS being used against him since his children hate their mother. Is this not what the abused moms have been saying all along? And those rare mothers who do manage to keep the child safe from an abuser by retaining primary residential custody, is this not echoed by them as well? I know I say it quite often - the children will hate their father unless he stops abusing me - their mother.

25 (Editor Note - Post Number)
fish Says:

January 9th, 2009 at 9:05 am
(I should also note I've seen many cases where a noncustodial parent is an ass and claims it's PAS when it's just kids reacting to a controlling and/or abusive jerk).

Why these apologies? Cant there just be a story about a jerk woman? Why does there need to be some sort of admission about men to get people to read the article? Where does this guilt come from?

Why should it be noted? Is it necessary to deface men to get people to read further into an article about women?
Well fish, lets see why this should be mentioned...because men can and do act like jerks. They do abuse women and children. I speak to countless women who have lost custody in court to an abusive man. I retained custody simply because I told the judge what he wanted to hear. If it were up to me, the children's father would only have supervised visits until numerous requirements are met, first and foremost a minimum of 6 months of batterers counseling. Second, he would lose all gained unsupervised time at the first sign of any abuse, whether physical or not. These are the two most important but there are many others. Oh and I should add wah wah wah fish is crying about the poor poor menz and why are womynz even mentioned? It is always the poor poor men who suffer. Yeah okay here is YOUR sign.

30 (Editor Note - Post Number)
AMan Says:

January 9th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Glenn said: I should also note I've seen many cases where a noncustodial parent is an ass and claims it's PAS when it's just kids reacting to a controlling and/or abusive jerk

I have no issue with this but why when it comes to insulting bad men, both women and men have no issue in demonising men. But when it comes to women, we don't?

I mean the mother in this case is (emotionally) abusive and a total jerk. Judges treat women with kids gloves. If they want equality then they should be dealt in the same fashion men are dealt in the court and media. These women are vile.

Are you referring to all women or just the relative few whom Glenn calls out on his site? Sre you guilty of what you accuse women of - calling all women bad for the few that are profiled in the media?

33 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Mister-M Says:

January 9th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Imagine if she was of the public stature of Alec Baldwin. Oh, wait, she's a woman. She wouldn't get vilified like he did.

Baldwin was vilified? What shows are you watching? he has retained his lucrative contract with NBC and in fact they REFUSE to release him from said contract. He was invited on the View and numerous other shows to pander on about PAS. He has written a book about PAS for which he receives royalties. This book has 50,000+ reviews on buy.com. Baldwin is reallllllllly suffering from all of this. Now lets look at the other side of this issue...His child was called vile names by her father in a voice mail message. Her parents have been fighting over her for years. Gee I wonder who is the true victim here? Documented cases of abuse perpetrated by Baldwin abound, none that I have seen about the mother (except on MRA/FR boards) are available. Who is REALLY the victim here?

34 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Badger Says:

January 9th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Offended_Dad Says:

Wow, does this mom ever think the world revolves around her, or what?

Not surprising considering the gender. Generalization I know but me thinks far more wimmin believe the world revolves around them than men do.

And what do you call the myriad of men's rights websites (like GS)? What do you call the constant whining of men on this board and others? What do you call the constant attacks any public figure takes when stepping forward and talking about women's rights? What do you call the constant attacks women's rights bloggers take from MRA/FR figures?

“Men are human waste--kill them”

Okay now it seems Glenn is targetting a 'Nu-Metal' group who has a song out titled Menocide. First one must look at the obvious. Who has heard of this group? I certainly haven't, Glenn complaining about Beyonce is more apt to draw my attention than this group. They are not mainstream. next we must look at the prevelance of this type of music. How many girl metal bands are there? I did a search for this and here is what I found (courtesy Wikipedia). Notice that some of the names on this list are actually fairly mainstream singers (Lita Ford being one). Also notice if you scroll down to Otep, you will find a link to the band's page on Wikipedia. Amazingly enough what does one discover? The lead vocalist is female, but all the other band members are MALE!!!! I am not in any way condoning the music given to us by this band, but I like many others, have the choice to listen or to not listen. I choose to not listen. One last note, if you read the lyrics as written, the singer (IMO) is simpply saying that she is being killed (smothered?, degraded?, minmized?) by herself and by others. Again, Glenn could find much better things to blog about besdies some little known to many band called OTEP. Like how about discussing the well known rappers who degrade and villify women on a daily basis. Or that these rappers are much more mainstream? How about the music made by men that says things like women should get down on her knees and worse? No discussion of that activity now is there? Read bleow form some cult remarks....

3 (Editor Note - Post Number)
jim Says:

January 9th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
i like the female circumsision part.... funny that no one talks about it happening to men in our ouwn countrie(s)

Funny how it is that MEN decided males should be circumcised and MEN decided females should be circumcised...yet no mention is made of that.

5 (Editor Note - Post Number)
The Dapper Swindler Says:

January 9th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
Perhaps if someone recorded the antithesis to this song, ie about women, and played it to people who had never heard of it, then gauged their reaction. I suspect we'd get some very telling results about which people value more - men or women. Not that we don't already know the answer to that of course. It's obvious.

Funy thing is we do have it....it is called rap...

11 (Editor Note - Post Number)
David G Says:

January 9th, 2009 at 11:35 pm
"Men are human waste--kill them"

Actually you have to admire her honesty. She's articulating how society thinks of men - disposable and sub-human. And look at the male suicide and longevity figures - we ARE being killed off.

You are being killed off? If it is suicide, then again MALES are the ones doing the killing, not females. Why don't you learn accountability, instead of blaming?

15 (Editor Note - Post Number)
menscollegeactivist.org Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 12:20 am
She mentions Salems burning of witches in her lyrics....Am i mistaken or was it not 2 young girls that were responseable for the mass hystyeria that got these "withches" burned.
Funny how local hysterics blame men, when it was in fact young women who called in the Klan type hysteria, by making the false accusation of witchery, against other women.

Children 'began' the hysteria, but it was MEN who carried out the evil and vile killings of the supposed witches.

17 (Editor Note - Post Number)
John Kimble Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 12:54 am
"She mentions Salems burning of witches in her lyrics....Am i mistaken or was it not 2 young girls that were responseable for the mass hystyeria that got these "withches" burned"

What an excellent point - I guess fatal false allegations by women aren't exactly a new phenomena.

Many also forget that one third of the "witches" executed were in fact male.
And 2/3 were female. Your point? Mor ewomen were still killed due to the hysteria of a few children fueled on by some angry men. Again Men killing MEN and WOMEN.

18 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Just a metalhead Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 1:14 am
This is typical in the more extreme side of metal, lyrics that are violent, provoking, disgusting, racist, mysognynist, misanthropy, etc... Plus most of the time this is just a game, a fantasy, a way to expunge frustration and rage and nothing more. This is probably the case here, I mean she's the only female in a group of 4 in a genre vastly dominated by men. And personally I don't think there are many metal bands that are big enough to be considered "mainstream" or to use them as an example of how society is favorable to hating men and Otep is not one of them. Only reason I know of the group existence is because the name sounds a bit like a much better group called Opeth.

If I may be excused a bit of sarcasm "Wow, a metal song includes hate-filled ramblings, stop the presses!".

Also, to defend metal a bit, it's a much more diverse genre than most people think, there's a world of difference between Dream Theater and Burzum, one's a group reknown for musical prowess, flowing melody and clear voice and the other is a group formed of only one (mad, neo-nazi, christian-hating, murderous) man, with shrieks, horrible production and feverish music. Most metal artists would shirk at having their music called "commercial", that's actually an insult in the community, few metal musicians live from their music and most labels are independent and are run by people passionate enough by the genre that they dedicate a lot of time and effort in it without much return.

To be fair, I have included this post. This commenter is right on the money. If you listen to this (OTEP music or any metal) then more power to you. I myself choose NOT to listen to this. However it is not my right to take that right away from someone else. How often have you seen on the news of a woman who has killed a man simply based on the fact that OTEP discussed it in their music? Yet you often hear of young adult men raping and abusing women bvecause of rap music (or so they claim).

20 (Editor Note - Post Number)
David G Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 2:53 am
Notice the Nirvana t-shirt - an ALL-MALE band the last time I checked.

David, maybe you should go check out this band. They are a 4 person band - one female and 3 males. At one time they had 2 female mebers, but the decision wa smade to make the second female leave due to her age (too young in the other member's opinions to be touring).

25 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Nelson Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 5:17 am
Sounds like she's been reading the Scum Manifesto.

And yes, this is another good example of how society tolerates hatred of males in a way it would never tolerate hatred of women, blacks or gays. This woman should be thrown into jail along with all the other psychos, at the very least she should never be allowed to have male children.
One word nelson aka porky -RAP!!!

28 (Editor Note - Post Number)
David M Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 7:55 am
I get sooo tired of these immature women. They have been convinced that they don't "need " men. Most women can't last 24 hours without a man.

Stop living in your fantasy land sisters.

And how do you propose to live without women? Oh yeah I remember - surrogacy - slavery of women in order to continue YOUR lineage...

30 (Editor Note - Post Number)
peter Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 8:15 am
In the eyes of the Feminist Court we are Human Debris. When this "Debris" cannot pay child support due to excessive child support, no contact with my children and the weight of the Divorce Industry then I am "Wanted" in the worst way. Hyprocrites, thieves, liars, and lawyers. I may be exiled from this country but the truth will stand for me.......someday.

One dumb question here, peter....What does seeing your children have to do with paying your support? We women are told over and over like a mantra to our brains, you MUST allow dad to see the kids, whether he pays support or not. Why is it again, something that is good for the gander is NOT good for the goose? Or could it be that you are simply too angry and REFUSE to pay support? You state yourself you are in 'exile'....

32 (Editor Note - Post Number)
jeana Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 11:04 am
I’m sorry, Robert Franklin, I must have missed which feminist commentators praised this song. Could you point me to them?

And I would expect some kind of comparison to the violent, misogynistic lyrics that are in rap music. I guess what’s good for the gander is good for the goose. Or is can only guys sing about raping and beating (and who knows what else) girls?
Woohoooo I knew jeana would not be long before posting to this thread. Well I will fall to the standrads laid down by these men and completely fulfill their expectation with this....
LMAO :-)

34 (Editor Note - Post Number)
jake steed Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 11:23 am

the point is that if a male wrote this song there will be an outcry from feminists.
the point is that why cant you feminists take things easy sometimes and stop bitching about stupid things.

because feminists bitch about stupid things it means men have to do it too to have EQUALITY.

for instance 99.9% of men dont give a fuck about those "boys are stupid....throw rocks at them" because we can take things easy.

but if it were "girls are sissies ...hit them with bricks" then there will be an outrage from the feministas.

if they take things easy there will be no REACTIONARY bitching about stupid things on glen sacks


35 (Editor Note - Post Number)
jerry Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Jeana, perhaps no stated support for this song, but we have definitely seen lots of support for

Boys are stupid throw rocks at them

and of course, that wonderful old chestnut:

A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

Not much support for the song menocide itself, but there seems to be lots of support, cheers, booyahs, for women expressing the concept behind the song...

how much longer do we need to hear about the "Boys are Stpuid" product line? As a mother of male and female chidlren, I would never allow any of my children to wear such garbage. A parent that does is not looking out for their child's best interests. I do not like those products and most women I know concerned over abusive men gaining rights through family court by using techniques such as named on many MRA wesbites would not allow their chidlren to wear or own any of these products.

We have reached 38 posts as of this writing. I will display all new women hating comments below as updates until there are no longer any new posts.

Glenn has changed his display preferences

This will be a short post but I wanted to alert our readership that Glenn Sacks has changed his display preferences. I am unable to link directly to the posts made by his cult. So I will now show the comment number (because that does show) and when that is removed, I will offer up the main page link with a search term to locate the post (for non-computer people simply use your CTRL a F keys to do a quick search). They can make it hard on us, but we will NEVER go away.

Glenn Discusses Single Motherhood/Fatherhood by Choice Movement on The Ron Smith Show in Baltimore

5 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Claudia Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 11:08 am
In the United States, unlike many other countries in the world, divorce is unilateral (one person decides) and no-fault (no reason needed). In addition the woman in this government sponsored action is richly rewarded by her decision to divorce. In a marriage, it is not if she will divorce him, it's when.

The single dad movement is a consequence of this, but it is spit in the ocean.

The single mother is the hope of the future. The money is on the table and the bet made, as there are now more families with single mothers as leaders than any other arrangement.

At the end of the day kids need and want their natural father and mother.

Quite ironically there is a post above this one which the MAN says that he speaks to his female friends and they all know they have the upper hand in a divorce. Must not be where I live, because all the women I speak to know they do NOT have the upper hand. I only have one comment towards this poster....You state that one person can decide to end the marriage and that person need not list any reason whatsoever. Well I did not want to end my divorce, I just wanted to end the abuse. So I guess under your theory, I could have been able to and should have been able to - end my marriage. And what of the children in our marriage? Should they continue to see father abusing mother? I cut nearly all contact with father out except for court ordered times and there is no abuse in my house. The rare exception is when contact is made by abusive dad. Children go to dads hosue and what happens there? Dad is Disneyland daddy. Dad badmouths mom. Dad tells children - you are just like your mom and then later goes on to say how bad mom is. What messages are being sent with his hate spewing. Children return to mother and a sort of deprogramming must take place. Children whine, scream, hit, abuse animals, refuse to comply with simple requests (pick up your toys, take a bath, time for friends to go home, time to wash clothes, time to set table, time for bed). After a few days of deprogramming the children are now back and whatever was sent home from dads has disappeared. Children ask what they can do to help - mom can I do dishes tonight? Mom see my room it is spotless (well not exactly spotless but at least you can walk on the floor without stepoping on cars, legos, or dolls). We then have about 6 or 7 good days - children do the few chores and their homework - and then the down cycle starts again. Children know that "dad" time is quickly approaching so they revert back to the "I don't have to do this". While the violence displayed when returning from dad's house is not as prevelanty it is still there to a degree. Child then goes to dad's and the cycle begins anew.

Should this child be exposed to the nastiness at dad's simply because he has rights? What rights does this child have?
6 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Tom Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 11:16 am
I am planning on having a baby using a surrogate in 3-4 years.

I do agree however that it is a pretty expensive way to go: IVF will cost you $100,000 a pop, and is not guaranteed to work out (i.e. you may have to try multiple times).

Another alternative: have the same woman carry the baby and give her egg. It costs a lot less ($10,000 I think??) but comes with very high risk. If the mother decides to keep the baby at the end, the court will most likely grant it to her over the surrogate agreement, and you'd be liable for child support without ever seeing your child - not even for a day. That's a pretty horrible scenario!

Finally, taking care of a baby is a lot of work, if you want to keep your job, you have to pay for day care ($1,600 / month) or a maid (same amount but you need an extra bedroom).

And don't forget that baby clothes, food are very expensive too :)

So you need at least a 3-bedroom house (if you want a live-in maid), plus $200,000 for the medical procedure (2 tries), plus at least an extra $2,000 per month to pay the maid and baby needs.

It's not cheap, but if you can afford it, there is no doubt that it is the smartest thing to do (in my opinion anyway).

Please see my previous post on this cultist. Now words that time - no words this time. Don't need any, his insanity speaks for itself.

9 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Tom Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 11:53 am
To Danny:

There are options, you just have to be creative ;-)

For one, you can have the procedure done in a country where medical costs are a fraction of what they are in the US (think Russia or India).

Two, you can rack up some credit card debt to finance this; so what if you can't pay it back? Will they repossess your kids? Of course not.

Single parents have a lot of state and federal programs available for them, check them out.

Four, don't you think that your parents would love to baby sit your kids? That may be a way to save on the day care / maid..

More of this wonderful rhetoric from Male Supremists - take kids away from mom (or in this case make mom non-existent from the start) and get your family to 'babysit'. More of this logic can be seen here.

13 (Editor Note - Post Number)
Rev. Richard Says:

January 10th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
I'm a single father, and have been for seven years. There are some economic issues, but what really keeps us strong is keeping a positive relationship between their mother and I. They talk all the time on the phone and have a yahoo chat account to communicate with her as well.
If it were up to me, I wouldn't have become a single parent, but my daughter is really a happy child and knows she's loved by both of us.

This is all well and good Rev. Richard. I am happy for you. Now what do you say to all the women out here whose exes are extremely controlling and abusive? What do you say to the women whose exes said one thing before marriage, and then quickly flip-flopped after she was being controlled by him? Oh I know, women ALL lie about being abused, women ALL lie about how bad men are in order to get the best settlement from divorce possible. That is TRULY how all MRA acticists believe.

January 8, 2009

On to our second naming.....OUR PIG PAGE!!!!

While speaking with my associates, I threw an idea on the table about a page I have been wanting to start for some time now. It has to do with the extreme women haters (both male and female versions) and the need for a page about them (with links to their posts on the woman hating websites as well as some of their more blatant misogyny. I have several good ideas for this page (Pig sadly is already taken - thanks Liz but I was trying to think of a play on words using PIG. I have several suggestions from my associates - any other takers out there? Simply comment on this thread and when we get several I will have a poll to determine the winner.

privateeye4justice aka 'Israel Lettelier' at it again - be warned BMCC

Just a warning to those attending BMCC (although I am sure this has happened before):

Patriot: Instead of making your comment so lengthy, invest that time in lining up someone with a Media Staff card, who can infiltrate through the front door at this conference and record, report, and interview the programs, so that evidence and proof that this organization is promoting discrimination comes out of it, that in turn can lead to federal, state, and local criminal charges. Someone who has even a small cable tv spot, radio program, any newspaper columnist, or free lance writer.


Do you have connections with anyone that fits that bill? Stan

Now men are expecting monetary reimbursement for the donation of a kidney?

There are just no words for this guy.....

When his wife needed a kidney transplant, Dr Richard Batista gave her one of his, attorney Dominic Barbara said.

Now that Dawnell Batista has filed for a divorce, Richard Batista wants his kidney back as part of his settlement demand. Or, Barbara said today, his client wants the value of that kidney: An estimated $1.5m (£993,000).

Porky da Pig on Female Serial Killers

Western society spends a lot of time avoiding mention of violence committed by women. For example, if you ask of those you know “What percentage of Serial Killers are women?” would any of them guess that one in six convicted serial killers is a female?

I must ask this question then.....What are the other 5 of the 6 serial killers? Dogs? Cats? Pigs? Children? Oh wait let me think here.............. (LIGHTBULB ahha moment!!!) MEN!!!!!!!

Polish Knight - welcome to OUR world - the world of TRUTH

Polish Knight is yet again attacking Jennifer Collins, Holly Collins, and their family. Right in the open and then he goes on to say that Jennifer cannot provide any proof of attacks? OPEN YOUR EYES NIMWIT!!!!
PolishKnight Says:

January 8th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
One thing I'm hoping will continue is that the feminists and lawyers continue to represent "dog" cases such as this and Holly Collins. They have yet to come up with a legitimate case of an abuser exploiting PAS.

Bob Batterbee on Female Mutilation

Read on a website BESIDES Wikipedia about Female Genital Cutting by clicking on Petunia (new name coming soon - get those suggestions in!!)

This is adisgusting practice which at best belittles women and at worst ahs killed many. This is often done with NO anesthetic and with no oversight as far as sanitation. This is more patriarchy in action. Many well-known activists have taken a stand against this practice (Alice Walker is one).

When I first heard of this I was vexed as to why something so rare and isolated was being portrayed as a world wide issue. It is not . Just another feminist exaggeration of fact. Below is a link to the definition and below that is a feminist outreach.


Stan's panties are in a knot

Copied from an email so generously sent to me from a member of an FR group :-)

Poor poor Stan.... He is so upset and has his little panties in a knot because some women (and men) are getting together to have a little conference and discuss some divorce and custody cases that have gone extremely awry. They will be talking to abuse victims (and some of those abuse victims will be talking to the professionals as well) about how abused women can protect themselves and their children. And Stan the Man - good PATRIOT that he is - is all a-blubber and wants it to stop. No more BMCC says Stan.

Stan............. go fly a kite!!!! I could think of some other things to say but seriously would you want me to go there?

I must ask though Stan - have you ever gone to the BMCC? How do you know what they promote? Oh I know - because they protect BATTERED MOTHERS, this means they are anti-dad. Now if I was someone who utilized illicit substannces I would ask Stan for some of that good stuff he be smoking lol. But since I am not one of those illicit substance users, I must simply sit back and nod my head in deisbelief.

HATE FEST, 2009 Dear Friends Activists, Non-Custodial Mothers and Fathers, and Parents Rights Groups and supportive organizations; You will find a roster for this conference of hate, bigotry, and violence toward men,boys, children, and even women at http://www.battered motherscustodyco nference. org/presenters_ 2009.htm

You will not see Errin Prizzey, Wendy McElroy, Stephen Baskerville, Grayson Walker, or any number of the well credentialed Activists, Researchers, and Authors who have any other view than the Feminist sanctioned rabid male hate presented at this conference in a sometimes ohh soo patronizing manner. They will not even receive an invite to attend.

We can soon expect another 'White Paper' from this group claiming 'international outcries' against the rampant battering of only women as if all women were battered and none were batterers.

We can expect the "White Paper' to exhort the police and courts for whom this collection of myths, misstatements, misdirections, and outright lies will target with a goal of hurting and harming men even more with greater loss of due process and more false and groundless arrests for merely being male.

I have never seen any professional conference in my many years that is so wildly and viciously biased and promoting of hate and abuse of all men and boys for the acts of a few men who are outnumbered (overall) by the women who are abusers, batterers, child abusers, and murderers.

Of course the White Paper will not cover the well researched, documented, and peer reviewed studies and findings that cover women's battering of men and children.

There will be no semblance of perspective on just what very minor percentage of households have real violence.

There will be no reporting on the overall numbers of women perpetrators versus overall numbers of men perpetrators when the same definitions of violence are used on both.

The lies, misdirections, myths, misstatements, and outright hate excreted from this conference will do more to harm more women, children, and men than it could ever help.

These 'faux' professional conventions misdirect funding and services into uses and approaches that are ineffective at best and at worst not just perpetuate Domestic Violence but increase it mathematically.

Let us be ready to answer the vomiting of false news reports and diarrhea flow of 'new findings' that are nothing but retreads of the same old lies we have heard and successfully fought before.

Let us be ready to discredit these haters or humanity in their quests for more money, power, and popularity while sacrificing the rest of us to their goddess of Feminism.

Feminism (not parity or equality) is a decadence of a too wealthy society. We are no longer wealthy.

Here are some of the direct programs and affects of Feminist sponsored government programs supported by this Conference:

A large part of our impoverishment as a nation is is the same thing that has impoverished so many men and women, the Feminist Lie and the government funding to present a facade of respectability for Feminist programs such as paying healthy women to not work.

Further, the government then gives theses government sponsored "stay at home moms" day care so they do not have to take care of the children they are ostensibly being paid to stay home and care for (crazy enough for you?).

It gets even more bizarre as the fiscal candle gets burned at both ends and the middle.

And, then we jail impoverished men who are disabled, ill, laid off, etc... for being impoverished, but only if he is a father and divorced. Jailing a man costs between $60,000 and 80,000 per year (Author's Note: The cost to incarcerate a person in prison is generally around 64.64 a day - click here for a chart of breakdown of actual expense categories for 44 states) so we not only pay the mother big bucks to kick the man out of the children's lives, we then pay big bucks to keep Daddy in jail. We jail Daddies who are innocent in a "No Fault" divorce and of nothing more than not being able to keep up with the ridiculous taxes called child support assigned by the courts with no rhyme or reason based in reality. These taxes on NCP Daddies sometimes are greater than their gross earnings.

The child support is awarded in hearings for divorce where in 70 to 95% of the time the man is presented with a divorce filing he doesn't want that tells him he has "No Fault" then continues to take away children, property, money, future income, civil rights, freedom to travel and more. "At Fault" real criminals have more rights and due process.

And, I have not even covered the prognosis for the children of divorce where Dad has been cut out of his children's life in 'No Fault' divorce.

Lets count the resulting rape, pedophilia, murder, substance abuse, prostitution, and child abuse resulting from this Feminist policy of 'kick daddy out the door, ignore the Constitution, give him just the clothes on his back, and tell him "See Ya!" '. Removing Daddy turns the kids into 'Feral Humans'.

Watch this conference for anyone suggesting that maybe the 'No Fault' Daddies should not be divorced or kicked out of children's lives. It will never happen.

This is what Battered Mothers promotes at its conferences.

This is going to all of my lists. I would hope that each and everyone of you does the same.

This conference needs to be exposed for what it is, a symposium promoting hate violence, and bigotry.

Patriot Dad

January 6, 2009

Name our pig

Okay I love the name Petunia but it is so.....I don't know.....ordinary. I want a name that will exemplify our work bringing the true nature of MRA/FRs to light. So here is my challenge to you - the reader. Send me your suggestions. I will pick the best 6 or 8 of the suggested names and we will have a poll on this blog. Oh and our piggie has been female from day one - this is not set in stone. If you think of a great 'male' name - send it in!!!! I would prefer to keep her a her lol, but we are pretty flexible here at Glenn's Cult!!! Click Petunia to send in yoru suggestion. Multiple entries allowed :-)

Teen Violence Date Rape (more from patriotdad aka Stan)

Read below and respond please!!!!! We must show that MRA are fond of throwing around distorted statistics for their own evil purposes. An allegation unable to be proven does not equate to a false allegation. You can either copy the link in his diatribe or click our friendly mascot, Petunia

I watched the news broadcast this evening. It presented teen violence as an assumed male on female act. I went to the ABC website and found a written article.

http://www.abcnews. go.com/WN/ comments? type=story&id=6586148

This article still avoids the truth. It does not openly lie. But it sure puts a spin on it that screams 'date violence is violent boys only'.

If you care at all about protecting both our daughters AND our sons, go to the website and voice your opinion as soon and as often as you can.


The Patriotdad

January 5, 2009

Men on the issue of help for those living at or near poverty

To see the original comment which started this thread click Petunia. Then go here, here - more MRA, here, and here. Good (bad?) parts summarized below (as always - in 'their' words)

Mr. Bad Says:

January 5th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Argh! Bad tags. Try again:

jeana said:

"They just have far less patience than women and aren’t willing to take any crap. They get angry more often and at littler things. I’m not sure that’s really better. That’s why you need women: to soften the hard edge of dads."

What a steaming pile of horse manure. Women are no more patient, nurturing, less violent than men are - men are just different about these things.

However, jeana, I don't particularly object to single mothers by choice. What I object to is single women choosing to be mothers and then presenting me (and other taxpayers) the bill for her choices. All the while doing a spectacularly dismal job of being a "mother" by raising a family of career criminals.

You want to raise a kid on your own? Knock yourself out. But truly do it on your own instead of just pretending by taking all the credit for the good things while at the same time blaming society, especially men, for the poor outcomes and then billing the taxpayer for child support via WIC, welfare, childcare subsidies, school lunch programs, etc., etc., etc. And then, when you've done all that and the kid ends up in a criminal, we end up paying the bill for his arrest, prosecution, incarceration, etc., etc., only to pay for the kid's welfare, counseling, umemployment, etc., once he gets out.

jeana Says:

January 5th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Mr. Bad,

I also don’t like being presented with a bill for a poverty stricken single mother who choose to have a baby when she clearly knows she shouldn’t have one. I don’t agree with people who say that everyone has the right to have a baby regardless of their situation. But once the kid is here, what can you do? You can’t let them die in a gutter somewhere.

However, I don’t really object to helping a pregnant poor mother get nutritious food, poor kids (from 2-parent families too) getting their one hot meal a day free at school, and child care subsidies that allow a woman to work and decrease the burden she is to society. I am also for men getting subsidized (free, actually) medical care, their kids getting free meals if they’re poor, and child care subsidies if they need it. People are poor and there’s no magic pill to get them out of poverty.

I would object (if I were an MRA) not to any of the programs you mentioned but to single females getting pregnant on purpose and roping a guy in to pay for child support when he clearly didn’t want to become a father.

Pankaj Says:

January 5th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
"However, I don’t really object to helping a pregnant poor mother get nutritious food, poor kids (from 2-parent families too) getting their one hot meal a day free at school, and child care subsidies that allow a woman to work and decrease the burden she is to society."


Should people be forced to do "good"? The quotes define subjectiveness of the idea.
Should people be punished for earning a living through hard work?

jeana Says:

January 5th, 2009 at 11:19 pm

First of all, there are indeed people who “beg” because it gets them $300-$400 a day. They’re not actually poor; it’s a lifestyle choice. That being said, there are lots of poor people begging that are actually poor and don’t (at that time) have any other options.

So you’re comparing people who would severely injure kids to get more $$ with poor moms? And then you have the nerve to suggest that the state should have the right to step in and take away a poor woman’s kids because being poor means she is somehow morally unfit? I remember when some Republican years ago suggested that all kids on state aid be taken away from their parents and put in orphanages. I bet you’d be for that.

Do you also think that poor men, who are unfairly mostly ignored by welfare systems, should also be ignored and even have their kids taken away from them? Even if you believe that men are super duper parents and way more important than women in their kids’ lives?

And you make the same argument that lots of conservatives/libertarians make—you are loathe to have the government pay for anything for the poor and instead insist that wealthy people (and charitable organizations) take care of it. The major problem with this, of course, is that this would never, ever happen. (Why don’t they do it now????) Plus, it’s not fair for some poor person to hope to maneuver a patchwork safety net system (which many do anyway) in order to get help. There is a purpose for government, and that is to exist to help the people. Maybe you forgot this!

wolfboy69 Says:

January 6th, 2009 at 12:39 am
Jeana - And you make the same argument that lots of conservatives/libertarians make—you are loathe to have the government pay for anything for the poor and instead insist that wealthy people (and charitable organizations) take care of it. The major problem with this, of course, is that this would never, ever happen. (Why don’t they do it now????)


Because, for some reason, Democrats/liberals only seem to want to give away other people's money, while conservatives/libertarians are the ones who give more to charitable causes. PK is on the right track with this.


I know, I know....your taxes go to those programs.....so do mine... which means that conservatives/libertarians are giving twice...once by the gun (Taxes) and again on their own.

It would be interesting to note that I myself am a recipient of only one of the above mentioned programs. I make "too much" to receive anything but one item from the 'government'. Yet as some of the above posters believe, I should not be allowed to be a primary residential parent because I have to rely on a program to care for my child. PUHLEASE!!!! I was a SAHM for 6 years at my husband's request. Since having no choice but to gain employment due to his continued and escalating abuse of me by him, I have managed to work for a little under 3 years now. In the course of that 3 years I have managed to raise my income from 4 digit to 5 digit earnings. The first year I was employed I was in 4 digit earnings (which is poverty even for one person). I am now in 5 digit earnings and in one year I doubled my income. Yes you heard that right - DOUBLED!!!! I hope to double it again in two years after I finish my education. Should not be difficult if I can focus on my studies and if my abuser will calm down and quit his games!!!! Oh yeah I know ask for the impossible. At least it is down to a predictable dull roar with the attempts at control and abuse being fairly.....well you know.....predictable.....

The whole point behind this is that without being a recipient of some sort of assistance I might very well stay 'stuck' in poverty forever. Now should the child and I have to live a life in poverty simply because I finally grew a set as so many are fond of saying and said no more abuse? And while I am on THAT topic - why is it always considered manly when a person of feminine persuasion actually stands up for herself and this is construed as growing a set? Why are females always perceived as 'less than'? That a woman cannot possibly be 'strong' and 'feminine'?

That is the content for another post so I will close with this statement:

federal and state level assistance programs are there for a reason. Are we to do as one poster insinuated and remove all children from poor parents (ie - mothers) and give them to rich parents (or fathers)?