GG I believe I may have the answer to your question

GG Says:

August 21st, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Remember the Colleen Stan kidnapping? Her abductor turned her into a sex slave for 7 years. Why, Franklin, do you avoid the slave industry? After all, it's an international problem. Is that not violent enough for you, or do you just have a hankering to convince people that women are the root of all evil.

GG you ask why Franklin would ignor things like the Stan kidnapping? You might also ask, why he would ignore the pleas of a GROWN woman (Holly Collins) as well. Or why he would ignore Fatima Loeliger's statement that she is NOW happy, when she lived with her father and his wife, she was extremely UNHAPPY? Or how about the hundreds and thousands of protective moms who allege DV and abuse of themselves and the children. Why would he ignore these cries and pleas?

Petunia thinks (OPINION OF PETUNIA) Franklin wants to marginalize women and place us back into the 1940's mentality. Back to when women were seen and not heard. Women have no rights. Just look at any of the commenter on his site and you will find an original signatory to the Father's Manifesto. You know that mysogynistic little piece whereby MEN want women to stay home, never be able to vote, never be able to speak their minds. Yeah that's right - THEY DON'T THINK WE HAVE MINDS.

So there you have it GG. "Those" men will never admit that a woman can actually digest a subject, think about it and form an opinion and even be able to articulate that opinion. We are second class. This IS the issue.

FatherTime Says:

August 17th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
I understand that he should be held accountable for his actions. However, this is highly suspicious and where there is smoke there is usually fire.

I have had several interactions with police. The police seem to assume mother custody, and male dv batterers. I don't trust the police, and carry a snout in my glove box for emergencies. Maybe I should carry donuts too.

I have friends who are police officers. But I don't even trust them.

Your best friend is a camera.

He carries a SNOUT?!?!?!?!?!?! And we wonder WHY he had issues with custody?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? I am also sure his "police friends" would love to hear this one.

Welcome to the "group" Lisa

20
NE Says:

May 28th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Lisa Says:
May 28th, 2009 at 3:40 pm

Hi Lisa, welcome to the group!
I HIGHLY, HIGHLY recommend you read the book Legalizing Misandry, it really is a must read.

Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men

http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628

I welcome you, gentle readers, to click the link above leading to amazon. Read the description of this book.

Product Description
Lurid and sensationalized events such as the public response to Lorena Bobbitt after she cut off her abusive husband's penis, prurient fascination provoked by Anita Hill's allegations about Clarence Thomas, and the exploitation of the mass murder of fourteen women in Montreal have been processed through popular culture since the 1990s to produce pervasive misandry - contempt for men, the counterpart of misogyny. Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young believe that this reveals a shift in the United States and Canada to a worldview based on ideological feminism, which presents all issues from the point of view of women and, in the process, explicitly or implicitly attacks men as a class. They argue that ideological feminism is silently reshaping law, pubic policy, education, and journalism. "Legalizing Misandry" offers lively and compelling evidence to demonstrate the pervasiveness of this new thinking - from the courts, classrooms, government committees, and corporate bureaucracies to laws and policies affecting employment, marriage, divorce, custody, sexual harassment, violence, and human rights.

Now scroll down to see what other "books" are "recommended" reading for someone looking at this particular book?

The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men
That BITCH: Protect Yourself Against Women With Malicious Intent
The Rantings of a Single Male
Taken Into Custody
The Myth of Male Power

So in these 5 books here we have at least 3 mainstream "men's rights" authors. We have one which degrades women (THAT BITCH?!?!?!). Two of the authors have less than stellar motives (one has actively tried to advocate for pedophile rights and the other hates child support). Need I say any more?

Gee whiz - can they make up their minds now?

First the MRA/FR groups say that women are evil and try to tear up and destroy families. Then they condemn them because they want to keep a family together. Click Petunia to check out the latest ramblings on the CULT, and click here to get the full story. Unbelievably there are even some on that news site that are condemning this mother as well.....for keeping her family together....

Clive Boustred

Now I would be afraid if I was a court clerk and some strange man was coming in with numerous motions (or even just one) and acting in this fashion. You never know what is going to happen in a courtroom. Even with security people are able to sneak weapons into these offices, people can even be shot at while the perpetrator is not even in the courthouse (Darren Mack). So these clerks (IMO rightly so) had this man removed. Just watch the video and then we will dissect the "fan" (aka cultist) comments below the vid.

tenbarrels5

...To Clive, I can only say, America and its masses have betrayed you. Invest your resources into an escape, grab your children and go into hiding......

greenman92553

They day man is a evicted form his home, looses his right as a father and is trampled upon by the state is the day that man has the responsability to kill those who subjugate him

joe80dman

The cockroaches don't like being videoed, do they!?!? Did you see that dumb cop, using the stance that he was taught at the Academy, to intimidate this man from seeking justice? Is this JUSTICE in Communist California? Why does a father have to get permission from the State to see his own son? Where are the MEN in that state? They should storm that building with guns blazing! That's right, you all heard what I said. It's the only way to take back this country, brute force!

intrepidxxx

I trust patriots will deal with those criminals in due course. And I expect it to happen sooner than expected - although not soon enough for many.

Now folks what is wrong with these posts? They are all apparently men, they are all threatening acts of violence or illegal acts. And I will say it again - THESE ARE THE MEN WHO WANT TO RAISE OUR NEXT GENERATION?!?!?!?!?!?

Angry young man? Indeed!!!!!

4.

Your face must be up there, but I am looking at your best asset you cock-teasing cunt.

Comment by Angry Young Man — February 27, 2009 @ 12:13 am

EDITOR NOTE: Scroll to comment number four - copied as posted

And we wonder why my site is out here? Click HERE to visit his site.

Info on his site below:

Registrant:
SynthaSite

4 Gordon Street
Cape Town, Western Cape 8001
South Africa

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: SYNTHASITE.COM
Created on: 10-Jun-04
Expires on: 01-Mar-17
Last Updated on: 17-Jan-08

Administrative Contact:
Lingham, Vinny brent@synthasite.com
SynthaSite
4 Gordon Street
Cape Town, Western Cape 8001
South Africa
833356815

Technical Contact:
Lingham, Vinny brent@synthasite.com
SynthaSite
4 Gordon Street
Cape Town, Western Cape 8001
South Africa
833356815

Well Vinny, I truly hope you get over your anger at women, because if you continue to speak in this manner to women, you will find yourself a very lonely angry OLD man.

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 :-)

UPDATE:

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?

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

19
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:

14
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:

8
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.

---

11
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.

60
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)

65
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.



UPDATE!!!!

103
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.......

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?

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
TF

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.

Attila

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?

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.

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.

UPDATE

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!!!!!!!

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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting

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

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."

Jeana,

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
PK,

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.

http://richiericher.wordpress.com/2008/02/01/arthur-brooks-who-really-cares-the-surprising-truth-about-compassionate-conservatism/

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)?

OMG!!!! "Is it a crazy idea or the way of the future?"

Click Petunia to read the post. This guy is the epitome of the anti-female, the woman hater of the year award. I want a child, but I cannot be bothered with the little technical issue of....oh you know - meeting different women, getting to know someone, falling in love, getting married, and then having a family. No this is what 'he' wants:

The advantages that I see are:
- very little risk of losing the children (although as some mentioned, the risk still exists)
- no insanely high child support payments to make
- no risk of being thrown in jail for failure to pay CS
- no need to close down my business (the CSA can't deal with individuals who have variable income like small business owners)
- no nagging wife ;)
- clean house
- home cooked meals :)
- over 80% savings over the cost of a western "wife"
- ability to keep dating women in my area without being accused of cheating on anyone!
- possibility to choose an "alpha-female" as egg-donor (basically a very beautiful and smart woman :)
- possibility to choose a relatively young surrogate mother, which lowers the risk of a lot of diseases for the children

Geesh can I gag myself right now? I can generally come up with a real zinger but for this one there are just no words. None at all!!!!!!!!!!

Post number 36

UPDATE: Glenn has changed how his blog displays (seperate post about this) so scroll down to posting made by TOM - I will be publishing post numbers from this point on.

Speaking of calendars.......

In my post here, I discuss porky's 'exposure' of the Boys Are Stupid calendars. I then make one last journey to "THE" site and lo and behold what do my wondering eyes reveal? Click Petunia to read on!!!! (No comments as of January 4th 1:00 AM CST) We WILL however be following this post :-)

Tomorrow look for updates on the Collins hatred saga, 'MRAs' on Beyonce and her new song and her beliefs, and a new honoree on "The Cult" - Mike from Canada. He is truly fun to read (SARCASM again!!!) and I will have some fun with him. I also have some more MRA emails to print (one is actually good news for moms) and the other is more attempts by men to minimize women. Until tomorrow good night and happy reading.