More kids means more chances to be "cared for" in your old age....

8
AnonymousPamphleteer Says:

May 29th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Hatchett seems to have figured out the only sensible strategy for a male in this country.

Give up on any chance of custody,
Give up on any chance of retaining any savings so as to live responsibly,
Give your seed to all takers, and
Hope/guess that some of your children or grandchildren will take care of you in your old age so that you won't be living in poverty like the typical man who has one or two kids and is then looted in court, sold into slavery, and alienated from his kids to they want nothing to do with him.

I say the man is a genius.

He has 21 shots at having someone actually care about him 20+ years from now.

The government is inherently corrupt in its war on families, so much so that responsible people are being restricted from reproducing by the punitive economic brutalities perpetrated against them by the state.

This man has found a way to outflank the states criminality against fathers, and not have his rights to reproduce stolen from him by the state.

A genius.

Now one must wonder why you MRA/FR types do not tell this man to go out and get a better job? Or why you blame the moms more than you blame him? One only needs to read this post to see where your true "motive" lies. It IS all about the man, men are GODS and as such MUST be catered to.

Petunia sits and shakes her head in amazement that men such as you exist in today's world. AP why don't you go out and impregnate as many women as possible so you can have that one child who will "take care of" you when you are no longer able to work. That child will always have the evil woman who should get off her duff and work to care for the chidl, many time working two or three jobs to take up your lazy slack. (shakes head some more).....

I just cannot believe lil ol me has the power to make many men shake and quiver....

They are so scared that they must delete a total of 5 or 6 posts from me and poof just like that, the posts are gone. I must wonder if Glenn really banned me because I would not post my email, or if he realized that myself and many of the other women who were posting on his site were close to exposing his little cult for what it truly is. Now for the newbies, you must be wondering - what in the world is she talking about? A cult? A cult of personality? Blue Oyster Cult? The Family (Charles Manson)? Heaven's Gate? Branch Davidians? Or perhaps one of the most famous of all, Jim Jones of the People's Temple?

No I am not speaking of any of those. I am talking of a group of (in my OPINION) misguided, possibly criminal minded men (and their subsequent spouses or mothers) who feel that a woman should not have the right to say she feels she has been abused by her husband, she is afraid for her safety, and as such afraid for her children's safety as well.

These men (and teh women who help them) have a few Gods they worship in their midst. One of these Gods is a pudge (again only in my opinion) of a man by the name of Glenn Sacks. He has a gift for words, but sadly he uses it to defame, defile, and denigrate any victims of rape or domestic violence who may be near.

He is joined by many of the lesser Gods who run blogs, coordinate the movements of one the biggest groups known for abuse - the F4J (read about the sexual abuse charges levied against one such F4J memeber here) and many others who use Facebook, Myspace, Blogger, Wordpress and many other such avenues in order to spread their message of hate and misogyny to all spots of the world. No one with a computer is safe from their message of hate.

In fact here is just one of the many messages of hate spread by the devoted followers of GS:

41
AnonymousPamphleteer Says:

February 23rd, 2009 at 8:06 pm
I assume that 60% does not include the vast numbers of American women who use children as a cash crop to cash in through the mechanism of American family courts.

Isn't having a child to as to access a man's money a form of trafficking? The child is used for his money-getting potential, and is not necessarily cared about as a human being, just a resource to be used to extract money from a male.

Think about it.

These men in fact are so nasty to women and to those who desire a more modern sort of life (you know - one in which we are not drug around by our hair while the man beats on his chest me man, you woman blah blah blah) that GS has had to make "rules" about what sorts of words the men can and cannot use to describe feminists. These "followers" were fond of using the term femi-nazi. While I am not directly related to anyone who suffered during the Holocaust, I can read, I can look at pictures. What I saw of the Holocaust disgusted me beyond belief. And for any man (and speaking of men - wasn't it MEN who primarily carried out the orders of Hitler, who was himself another MAN), to compare a woman who wants to be free from abuse, free to make choices about her own body, free to have a VOICE compare these women to HITLER who took freedoms away, in fact took many many LIVES away is despicable.

The fact that there even needs to be a "rule page" taht says you cannot call feminists feminazis, leads me to question to very credibility of any of these men.

Click Petunia to go directly to the "RULE PAGE".



UPDATE:

It should be noted that by clicking here you can see as I did that in the the little over 2 years that Glenn Sacks has been posting his blog, the word FEMINAZI has been used over 550 times. It has 38 pages on a Google search. Form your own opinion on this man and his followers, gentle readers.

'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?