huffington Post engages in censorship and hatred of women yet again

Warshack recently published a false article on PA/PAS/PAD/HAP/MMS and the protective parents movement tried to comment to show a balance and give information from the viewpoint of the abused mother and child. Sadly Warshack and/or Huff Post felt these comments did not need to be published.

We now have another writer who is engaging in the same censorship. On Huff Post we have "Parental Alienation: It's About More Than "A Uterus, Divorce Papers and Bruises" by Cathy Meyer. Another "expert" as you can see by her bio:

Cathy Meyer is a Certified Divorce Coach, Marriage Educator and Legal Investigator. She works with people who expected to be married forever but are now facing divorce. Through her writing and individual coaching, Cathy provides clients with strategies and resources that empower them and equip
them with the skills needed to grow through a time of adversity.

Cathy is the Guide to Divorce Support@About.com, a resource writer for First Wives World and the co-founder of Divorced Women Online. An online magazine written by divorced women, for divorced women.

Certified Divorce Coach? What the hell is that? Oh I know - someone else to make money off the heartache people invariably suffer when going through a divorce. And someone else who OBVIOUSLY has NO CLUE what abuse in a marriage is about. Have you ever sat and watched your parents or your child or even yourself get shot at? How about stabbed Cathy? Or wait here is even one better. How about having your abuser kill himself and have that forever weighing on your conscious? Or read the hundreds of stories daily where a FATHER who is supposed to LOVE his children, supposed to honor and protect and CHERISH his wife, belittles and beats them daily? No? Didn't think so. Then you need to shut your trap about abuse in a marriage and the aftermath of a divorce afterward. What type of domestic violence and abuse training have you had? Didn't think so.

Now what has spurred Petunia into this rant. A reader took a screenshot of a post she made as well as a post made in response to a well known protective parent blogger. It seems Ms Meyers feels that a parents right to have their child trumps a mother's (and many times child's) right to be free from abuse. Yep there you have it. Women are crap in Cathy's mind. Don't believe me just look below for the actual text and a screenshot of the comment:

I am more interested in protecting a child from the harm parental alienation does than protecting a few women who have suffered abuse.

So there you have it folks. We are finally getting to the bottom of this. The FReaks and FRags could give two shits less about abused women. Just make sure those daddies (all of them even the nasties) are allowed to continue to control and manipulate the children.

Parental Alienation and Malicious Mom Syndrome get CBS “Flashpoint” Attention by domestic violence RO violator mkg4583 aka Mark Godbey

Well apparently mkg4583 aka Mark Godbey/multiple restraining order violator (on probation even) has seen the show Flashpoint this past weekend. I watched it also and let me tell you, he is so off base it is not even funny.

First he says the mom conspired with her boyfriend to kidnap her children. It was not just the boyfriend markie poo. Oh and it was not the cops who used the PAS and Malicious Mom, it was Mom's lawyer and Mom. And if you had watched the show - actually watched it rather than revel in your fake hypothesis being pushed forward by the clueless network ABC, you would have seen that. But you are too much into trying to show how bad all mothers are rather than accept your shortcomings - those being you are so controlling and intimidating and WHATEVER ELSE YOU ARE, that your ex had to get MULTIPLE RO's against you - AND THEN YOU VIOLATE THOSE TO THE POINT OF BEING ON PROBATION. Now we protective mothers know that for a man to get placed on probation for a violation it must be pretty severe.

Anyways missing the whole point here (see what abusers do to Petunia's brain?)... The point is not only are you deluded and misinformed, so is ABC. Of course dear ol' dad stories, especially those where dad is denied his rights will sell in the anti-mother climate that exists in the world today. And you and the other woman and mother haters will be right there to push it along.

Judge Lemkau, Glenn Sacks and other FReaks

Again I must say that we are making strides fellow protective parents. Even as the FReaks scramble and run, attempt to hide from the truth, it is still trickling out there.

So now I must play semantics yet again. What is the war cry for the most vocal of the FReaks out there? Say it with me - all at one time now:

WE WANT WHAT IS BEST FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES!!!!

Ummmmm okay then. Now to get on with this. Was Wyatt's death best for him? For his mom? How about the big brother left behind? Or the future siblings he might have had? What about the woman he might have eventually met and married? What about his children? Or his grandchildren? What about all those people whose lives he would have touched in some way? What about his extended family? What would he have grown up to be or do? Could he have had the secret to the cure for cancer or one of many debilitating diseases locked in his tiny mind waiting for him to grow up to be released? Would he have won a Nobel peace prize? Been POTUS?

Okay I think you get the point now. So where are Robert Franklin, Glenn Sacks, Ned Holstein, LK (Legally Kidnapped my ever present stalker), Terri Stoddard queen B of the purple vomit, Jen aka Biscuit Queen, Jeremy Swanson, Mark Godbey, dr e, Galt, Captain Courageous (Coward?), outdoors, Robert Gartner, DADZRITES, Monica of the Menstrual PAD fame, Trudy, Amy, Tara, Baskerville, Sue, Barbara, Bettina and all of the others?

Why don't you go to your blogs and websites, to National Examiner for the queen of the purple vomit and write about Wyatt? Why do you avoid him?

CHALLENGE you dimwits!!!!!

Write about the real victims.....

The children!!!!

This is your brain on PAS/PA/PAD

Remember those scare tactic videos about your brain on drugs? Don't know about you but they worked for me. Now lets take this on a new spin. What is someone who believes PA/PAS/PAD doing to their brains? Why are women the only ones ever accused of alienation or gatekeeping? We have a case here which to my eye appears to have the ever present gatekeeping and alienation tactics happening.

So quick run down on this story. Mom "allegedly" kidnaps child and returns to her native country amid accusations by her of violence in the marriage. Mother remarries after divorce has another child and dies in childbirth. Father to older child goes on rampage in order to secure custody of older child - even amid allegations of violence by mother's family in foreign country and mother's widowed current spouse. Father eventually uses American politicians and television news stations in order to carry child out of mother's native country. Now grandparents want to see child, want child to have a relationship with half sibling and father refuses.

What do you mean - father refuses? I thought all family should be allowed a relationship with children? Even with mother deceased shouldn't siblings and extended family of mother's be allowed continuing contact with child?

Apparently not and apparently the well known father's rights blogger, Glenn Sacks, REFUSES to run any stories on this "gatekeeping" of the child by FATHER. Even Ken Walker (kc9bdr@yahoo.com) agrees that Father should be allowed to keep child from maternal family - in fact he even quotes: "The maternal grandparents take the grandson to Brazil for 5 years, (mother dies) then complain when they don't get placement. Give it time!". Mother does this and it is automatically a given that mother is gatekeeping and engaging in PA/PAS/PAD. So why is this not true for FATHER? Is FATHER not gatekeeping and possibly engaging in PA/PAS/PAD? The child in question has been around the maternal relatives for years now. Are we punishing another innocent young child by denying that child the RIGHT to have a relationship with the older sibling?

Well, let me explain this so you get it really good, okay? Just as in this commercial about heroin use, PA/PAS/PAD has some rules too.

Women are the only ones who can gatekeep a child. Ladies, ladies. Here's how it works. It's only PAS/PA when we accuse you of doing it. When WE do the exact thing we just accused you of doing ("gatekeeping," obstructing visitation, etc.) it doesn't count. WE are the ONLY ones who can protect our children. These children are not your children, they are only our children. Just like that nice new car we fought for in the divorce, just like the house. Oh and forget about any equitable split, that is all ours too. Any questions?

So go back and watch the video again.

Frying pan is PAS/PA/PAD.

Egg is your brain.

And the violence you see portrayed is what COULD happen if PA/PAS/PAD is bought hook, line, and sinker. Our children, our future will be destroyed if abusers are allowed to continue to use JUNK SCIENCE in order to remove protective parents from a child's life and place children with an alleged abuser. Do we want to place these children with potential alleged abusers? Don't know about you but I do not. And now a young child is being denied a relationship with a sibling by a father and Glenn Sacks, Ken Walker, and who knows who else in the FATHER'S RIGHT MOVEMENT think this father is completely justified. Ken by his own words, and Sacks by his lack of words. Or is it just that as long as it is a father who is being allegedly denied this is a travesty that must (MUST!!!) be rectified, but when it is a mother or maternal relatives - ahhh who cares? One need only look at the case of Jean Paul Lacombe Diaz in Texas to see this is true. Where are the Ken Walker's, the Glenn Sacks for this mom who has proof of abuse, has court orders granting her custody of this child? The courts were TRICKED into turning the boy over to father. He did this ILLEGALLY yet we see nobody in the Father's Rights Movement speaking to the tragedy of this court's actions.

Oh gee I keep forgetting. That is because the parent who is being denied the child is MOM. Who cares about moms right? After all, the only thing moms are good for is carrying the child, giving birth to the child, feeding the child life supporting breast milk. When the child can walk and talk, the mother should be gone. Fathers are the only important ones now.

ANY QUESTIONS?