I attended a couple of father’s rights meetings once, just to see. The ones I attended consisted mainly of men complaining – with, I should add, amazing bitterness – that they ought to be able to, you know, get a to-the-penny accounting of how child support money was spent. And maybe a line-item veto option. Not that they were interested in trying to control their ex’s lives or anything.
I was reminded of that reading Trish Wilson’s blog; Trish has been doing a lot of top-notch blogging on father’s rights misogyny lately (just go to her September 2004 archives and scroll). My favorite was this Guardian article on “Father4Justice,” a sort of support group for British divorced dads who like dressing up as Batman and hanging out on ledges. Here’s a sample:
Since children are not, as Lord Falconer has pointed out, to be divided up like CD collections, it is not terribly surprising that when these cases go to court many more parents profess themselves unhappy with the outcome. They must have been pretty unhappy before they got there. Those of us who have never been through one of these ghastly battles like to point out, the more piously the better, that such parents really ought to put personal animosity aside. But if they can’t, the courts will have to do it for them; occasionally deciding that shared parenting, in this battleground, may no longer be the best outcome. Even so, where parents go to court for contact, only 0.8% are refused. But this sort of objection is unlikely to make much difference to the F4J men’s approval ratings, at least while mothers seem so reluctant to dress up as cartoon figures and throw purple condoms at people.
Just as impressive is an American group, Equal Rights for Divorced Fathers. Are they misogynistic? Well, their t-shirt (sold to raise funds) bears the motto “Trust No Bitch.” Their founder likes to tell jokes like “What do you tell a wife who has two black eyes? Nothing, you told her twice already.” And that’s just for starters. What’s frightening is, at least until recently courts routinely referred fathers to this group. Trish has more.
Well, yes, Zuzu. In fact, I’m willing to be that if there was “excess” CS money to be invested in a college fund, the NCP could scream bloody murder that they shouldn’t have to pay it. And that’s fine–some people can’t afford to pay the excess. However, this line-by-line accounting thing opens up a can of worms. Who decides what is wasteful? Who decides what is reasonable? Speaking strictly for myself, I wouldn’t mind if there was some money left over and it went into a college fund for my kids. But I also know of people who think they shouldn’t have to pay for that, and would make noise about it. They’d call it a waste.
This “solution” is ultimately unworkable. It’s ironic, since for all of their complaints about the divorce industry, these guys come up with more red tape to throw into the mix, at a greater cost to themselves, their exes, and their kids.
“…As long as we’re pulling solutions out of the air, I’d start with parents fully sharing childcare duties. The husband who had to take a four-year-old clothes shopping will not be shocked to learn that a winter coat costs $20. The wife who figured out that she is not a bad mommy if Daddy knows how to pack the lunches will be less concerned about sharing custody…
mythago in 2008.
I’ll have to check with Mr. Mythago on how he feels about the whole ‘first lady’ thing ;)
Well, if I have my way, he won’t have to stay home and bake cookies, or wear those dull little Channel suits and pillbox hats on the campaign trail… unless he really wants to. :D
Oh, you two. A recent poll showed that it would be fine for a First Gentleman to work–it’s just the First Ladies who aren’t supposed to do that.
Still, Mythago, if I lose my bid for President-for-Life, I might vote for you. Just promise to have lots of juicy scandals. We must keep our tabloid reporters employed, yaknow.
I don’t think my skeleton has room for any more closets, but I’ll do my very best.
Mr. Mythago makes an interesting litmus test for people’s ideas about joint parenting, since he’s the at-home parent. Women adore this; most men seem vaguely skittish about it.
I think the first major scandal not involving nannies should involve the First Gentleman baking cookies that came from one of those frozen slice-and-bake cylinders at the supermarket. Or, for the more upwardly mobile, from those tubs of frozen gourmet cookie dough that you can order from Yuppie catalogues.
Hell, it couldn’t be any dumber than Lynn Cheney’s tantrum about Kerry. I don’t even like Kerry and even I know it’s stoopid.
Man, I should run for President. The Man of Mouse expresses a desire to quit working and keep house at least once a week. I tell him if I could afford it, I would love to let him. Think I could swing it on a President’s salary?
Sure. And if you need to save a few mil here and there, just solarize the White House instead of throwing a costly Inauguration Parade and Ball.
The White House used to be solarized, under Jimmy Carter. Ronald Reagan changed it for political reasons.
Mr. Mouse might want a better handle on the distinction between “quit working” and “keeping house.” The latter may actually be MORE work. :)
*shush* We want him to want the job. Anyway, Mouse and her man are not married so he has not taken her name yet and it’s unlikely he ever will. So he is simply the Man of Mouse, which sounds grand but pretty much means just Mouse’s man.
Can’t he just hyphenate? Then nobody would ask him if he is a man, rather than a Mouse.
It concerns me that the Father is made out to be the bad guy in the majority of the above comments. Would it not be fair to say that there are excellent Fathers and excellent Mothers who are navigating the hostile waters of divorce? I know numerous divorced Fathers (I being one of them) who adore their children and would do ANYTHING for them. Perhaps coincidently, all of the divorced Fathers I know were asked to leave or left BY their ex people. A situation was forced upon them that will haunt them for the rest of mortality. It is not my assertion that all of these men were perfect spouses or that they contributed in no way to the demise of the marriage–it IS my assertion, however, that they didn’t want divorce accompanied by all of it’s unattractive accessories. Is it too much to want to know where–in my case–$1400.00 a month is going? I have no interest in knowing what my ex does with her spare time. Since she has earned my distrust by buying $50,000.00 SUVs and million dollar homes while claiming the kids are going without, am I not entitled to know where the money with which I am entrusting her goes?
How is a man seen as a “stalker” because we wants a degree of accountability?
I know for a fact that my children eat out several times a week with their Mother. She doesn’t work. The kids are all in school. Is there not time for a more economical approach to meals? It’s this kind of fiscal irresponsibility that creates in me a desire for accountability.
Be advised, those of you who subscribe to the Amanda Doctrine that there are many good men out there who are bitter, many dedicated Fathers who are robbed, and many children who pay the greatest price.
Fu2
*yawn* Baiting us by implying that we have something against fatherhood in and of itself just won’t work. I’m afraid that if you have an anti-feminist argument, you need to be more direct in your attacks on women.
I’m not IMPLYING anything. I’m pointing out that your suggestion that men who desire accountability are “stalkers” is somewhat dramatic. Your assertion that I am “attacking” women supports the self-victimization of SOME feminists and MANY divorced women. I am not ANTI-feminist, nor am I ANTI-female. I am concerned about the rights of the Father. I am concerned about unjust legislation from the bench that negatively impacts Fathers AND Mothers as well as their children.
I respect the female species. Hell, my Mother is a female… for that matter so is my wife. As a matter of fact…so are 4 of my 5 children.
You clearly FEEL attacked. Your self-induced oppression is a common sentiment among todays wannabe feminists. While I don’t know you, I respect your feminism. I respect your independence. I respect your desire for identity.
Please try an approach that DOESN’T employ words like “attack” and “stalker” as this projects weakness and fear…
The women I know are generally citadels of strength and power.
~Fu
Females are not a separate species. We are actually both homo sapiens. Instead of respecting us with the birds and trees, it might be wise to reconsider that we may not be separate creatures at all.
You’ve clearly taken my comments about the female “species” literally. So you must also have applauded my statement of the obvious when I informed you that my Mother, Wife, and Daughters are all female.
It’s relatively clear you’re not at all impressed with the male species. I wouldn’t be either. Your comments over the last couple of months paint men as a bunch of “stupid” men who are not worthy of your trust and who possess a general proclivity to cheat on the female species.
While I am a man, I recognize that when we are at our best we are still not worth our salt. I value the women who have been great examples to me. The beauty of our position in mortality is our ability to form our own belief structure. My belief is that while men and women are indeed homo sapiens, we couldn’t be more different.
This can be the only explanation as to why you denigrate us and we deify you.
~Fu2
Why would you deify women? The problem with pedestals is that they’re narrow and confining and the fall is pretty far.
You don’t sound like you have a realistic view of male and female relationships or their roles in divorce. Divorce isn’t a weapon that women wield against men, prying them out of safe, comfortable situations against their will; it’s a dissolution of a relationship that likely has a number of problems. That one partner doesn’t want to leave doesn’t obligate the other to stay.
Also, if you’re paying only $1400 a month to your ex for five children, it doesn’t sound like you’re getting hit all that hard — that’s not even $300 per child.
Another point you seem to be missing when you talk about the lifestyle your ex is leading is that, even if she has other means of support, you still have an obligation to support the children you’ve created and say you love. They’re your children, after all, and presumably, you provided for them while they were living under your roof. Why should that change after the divorce, if you want to be part of their lives?
I also presume you’re not paying her alimony, so why should her lifestyle matter to you if the kids aren’t being neglected? How do you know how much her house costs or her car? Why does it matter if they go out to eat if their nutritional needs are being met? How do you know she’s using “your” money to do that?
Moreover, how would you like it if she questioned every purchase you made?
Fathers, Husbands, and Sons are all male. Doesn’t that sound grossly condescending? Mull that over and reconsider that women, while not only being representatives of eternal poetic states, are also human beings with boring, normal feelings. Your problems might be a bit easier to manage with that attitude.
Well, as a matter of fact she does question my purchases as she feels $1400 a month isn’t enough.
While I appreciate your math skills I have children with my current wife. That number is for 3 children and there are numerous other financial caveats that I’d enjoy divulging but would probably bore you.
The whole pedestal analogy was only slightly trite. My comment related to deification…
I am certain my ex wife did not use divorce as a “weapon”. My limited male intellect provides me with pretty accurate reasoning skills. I know why she divorced me. It’s because I was less interesting and less attractive than her orthodontist. Not to mention he was financially attractive.
I don’t fault her for not wanting to stay with me. I fault her for leaving what seemed to be a good relationship and becoming greedy in the process.
I have a problem with her taking the kids to expensive restaurants on a regular basis, living like she’s living, and claiming she’s struggling…all the while suggesting that I could do more for her and our children. I do everything I can for my children and they are indeed my responsibility. It’s one of the most satisfying parts of Fatherhood–providing for my kids. I just feel incredibly bitter about having no input over how the money I am earning is spent.
Does that make any sense?
~Fu2
Let me guess Amanda…you’re not married…
“My limited male intellect provides me with pretty accurate reasoning skills.”
Has anyone here – other than you – suggested that there is such a thing as a “limited male intellect”?
“our assertion that I am “attacking” women supports the self-victimization of SOME feminists and MANY divorced women.”
Since you say that you’re not an anti-feminist, could you please stop recycling all these anti-feminist cliches?
Seriously, Fuz, you’re welcome to post here so long as you remain polite and keep in mind that this IS a feminist-friendly forum. But tone it down a bit. No one here thinks you’re an idiot because you’re a guy, so please stop harping on your assumption that people here are all anti-male.
Finally, not all marriages are the same, so don’t assume that everyone’s who is married must agree with your view of either human nature or gender relations. That someone disagrees with you doesn’t tell you they’re not married; it tells you that they disagree with you.
Well said Ampersand…
I apologize for having offended.
~Fu2
The whole pedestal analogy was only slightly trite. My comment related to deification…
What’s the difference, really? And why would you deify women?
Even for three children, $1400 isn’t a huge amount of money for all the expenses that go into raising them.
I don’t fault her for not wanting to stay with me. I fault her for leaving what seemed to be a good relationship and becoming greedy in the process.
In other words, you fault her for leaving you. What I’m seeing in your comments is someone who’s angry over what happened with his marriage (and it does suck, being left), who’s attaching a lot of importance to the one tie left with the ex to work out his feelings.
If you didn’t have kids with her, you wouldn’t have any reason to carp about her lifestyle or her “greed.”
I’m going to just start telling the anti-feminist trolls that I’m married. Same difference.
We should start by de-emotionalizing the debate
While this should be a discussion about “misogyny going on in the father’s right movement” the discussion has quickly turned into an “everyone’s two cents” and fires arguments for its own sake, both sides should be more constructive in their argumentation otherwise this will only turn into reactionary complaining. Although this is a very emotive and crucial debate, it’s important to take other people’s experience like hard-rock facts but as a piece of the puzzle. This debate ranges in those crucial involving the natural division of humanity that is the 2 sexes. First, let’s agree that those extreme examples of misogyny by frustrated fathers and the responses from claimants are both useless in such a debate.
As a man I will naturally rally with men but not necessarily. I would never defend a man that has mistreated his family or failed at taking its responsibilities nor to a women that abuses, with the system, her ex-husband to rob him guard of the kids and a child support so that he pays “till his last penny” because “he should pay for this”.
A first step is to take distance from what is our personal experience and deepen argumentation in order to have a claim that is fair. Which whining will not lead to.
We should begin by agreeing that it can be very frustrating for a responsible and caring man-husband-dad to fulfill this responsibility by giving partial access to his bank account/ pay check to his ex-wife while she has full liberty with the amount available and has nothing to render regarding the kids. While on the other hand there is irresponsible men that have to be reminded about what they should value first and this is not anything else than the well being of its family. That’s the beginning of a constructive man point of view. A lady would surely come up with something different and that is where we should start debating.
No, sorry, I don’t agree that we “should” begin by allowing you to frame the terms of the debate, especially with not-so-constructive little digs like referring to an ex wife who “has nothing to render regarding the kids”. (Nothing? Shouldn’t social services be called in, then?)
Where we really should start debating is with the welfare of the children, not with men vs. “ladies.”
I fault her for leaving what seemed to be a good relationship
Seemed to be to whom? How can you fault somebody for leaving a terrible relationship for them because you were happy? Whether it was appropriate for the kids, or fixable, is a separate argument. But the old hey, I was happy, the bitch had no right to mess that up, attitude is ludicrous.
Anybody who uses “whining” and “ladies” in the same paragraph is already coming from a biased viewpoint (and sexist). Is this what is considered a level playing field?
I’ve got to say this looking over this whole thread, that most people where are just reinforcing what they want to hear. I give WARNING to any Man/Woman who supports non-custodial parent rights (and has seen some of the problems that have arise from viscious castodial parents) to not respond in this forum because you will not be heard and no one here will beleave the truth. These people only know what they want to beleave and are not listening to reason or truth.
And again with the broken irony detector!
Wouldn’t that be “ironie”?
I am the Executive Director of the men’s support group in question, EQUAL RIGHTS FOR DIVORCED FATHERS. I am flattered by all the publicity my organization has received. You should know some facts behind the story aired on Las Vegas, channel 8 News; for one, it was driven to the public’s attention by a politically motivated Family Court Judge whom was seeking re-election. This particular Judge, in part due to our member’s activism, failed in his re-elction bid. I have helped over 80,000 men navigate the court system; saved thousands of abducted children reunite with their fathers whom they have been torn away from; changed the laws of Nevada to better represent the needs of both parents. Perhaps if you had delt with this type of woman, and the biased systems in place to support them, you would have a more sympathetic viewpoint!
By the way, if you wish to purchase one of our “Trust No Bitch” shirts, you may purchase one for a mere $12.00 + shipping, since you all seem so interested in such a simple gag gift.
Right, Ernest. There’s nothing like proving what a caring dad (and a rational person) you are by selling and wearing “Trust No Bitch” t-shirts. What a great message to send to your daughters–you’re nothing but a bitch and deserved to be treated like garbage.
Don’t go pushing this crap and then wonder why sane people recoil from you.
Speaking about the “Bitch”, it seems the the over 80,000 men whom have been helped are equally insane whom have had success with the one-sided Court system…thanks to my assistance. So it is obvious that you are one of either the neo-nazi femanist, or misguided male-femanist whom buys into their agenda! Thanks for showing everyone what a “bitch” you really are! Perhaps, those daughters you mention -for which I have raised a daughter to maturity, whom has had a child in wedlock, served in the military, who doesn’t do drug, smoke, or curse, and now has a sucessful profession and who has given me two wonderful grandsons…doesn’t sound like a custodial father like myself is all that bad! Wonder what would have happened if I was an unwed mother living of child support in a welfare trailer -which was her other option; with a mother who used drugs, smoked, drank, and to date, has had fifteen men in-and-out of her trailer from 1980 to present! And of the fifteen years I had primary custody, I received one year of child support at only one-hundres dollars a month for one year which took me three years to collect!
Crap. I would’ve run off to join the military, the circus, or the Moonies at first opportunity had I been forced to spend childhood with this specimen of humanity. [shakes head]
Dear Ernest,
Explain to me how your story justifies a t-shirt with “Trust no Bitch” written on it. Is your successful adult daughter a bitch? Would you want her to marry a man who wore a t-shirt stating that she was?
Two grandchildren and only one born in wedlock?
Your daughter is in the military and doesn’t curse?
ugh, how come ‘manly men’ are deathly afraid of homosexuals, but at the same time they aren’t allowed to actually like women?
Your daughter is in the military but never curses?
Ugh. Why must ‘manly men’ be deathly afraid of catching teh gay, yet also be unable to actually like women?
Didn’t mean to double post, weird net lag issue *blushes profusely*
If we’re all “bitches” shouldn’t the finger of blame be pointed at the men who are stoooopid enough to marry us? It’s not like this bitch is going around with a gun pointed at men’s head’s screaming “Marry me, Fool!”
Duh.
C’mon, Q Grrl, these poor men were trapped!
was that before or after the first pregnancy? I can never keep up with all of this!
Yes, Ernest, I’m a feminist. I’m a feminist who doesn’t wear or T-shirts that say “Trust no Prick,” (which would send you and your cohorts in to a squealing hissy-fit over male hatred) mainly because it’s hateful, it is the mark of a whinging loon, and it sends a pretty clear message to the men and boys in my life exactly how human I think they are. The men in my life wouldn’t be interested in a “Trust No Bitch” T-shirt–mainly because they have class.
Your histrionics aren’t helping your case. People who disagree with you aren’t Nazis, but people who fling the term around are rightly pegged as hysterics. And people who joke about battering are seen as wingnuts–for good reason.
When your daugher sees the “Trust No Bitch” T-shirt, does she “know” that it “doesn’t really” mean her? As long as she behaves, that is?
How about if her husband wore it? Called her a bitch when she didn’t toe the line? You seem fond of making jokes about beating up women who get out of line. Maybe you’d think it was a scream if your daughter had the crap kicked out of her by her husband.
You got a miniscule portion of the votes in your bid to serve on the Clark County school committee. That TV video–which you didn’t apologize for–probably had quite a lot to do with it. You can whine all you want that it was politically motivated, but let’s face it, you said some reprehensible things and then refused to see why people had a problem with them. You couldn’t be be surprised if the backlash was swift and fierce–well, maybe you could. There’s always us evil feminists to blame.
The thing is, most parents recoil at having someone who thinks battery is funny on school committees. You know, many parents have daughters, and your own daughter’s well-being aside, they look at a guy who pushes “Trust No Bitch” t-shirts and a guy who jokes about beating up women who get out of line as a wingnut. Sane parents do not want someone like that associated with their daughters’ school system.
To Batgirl…Since when did your ilk; the hyper-sensitive, politcally correct fanatics, become the nation’s speach police. Obviousl, you are not aware of the First Amendment, or the meaning of “private Organization!” I have the right to put anything I want on a T-shirt; be that politicaly correct or not! Especially, in the areana of my private property.
But she didn’t suggest censoring you. She just criticized your speech. Which she has a first amendment right to do.
I agree that you have a free speech right to say things that make it clear that you’re a misogynistic jackass moron. But, by the same rule, I and other feminists have the right to point out that you’re being a misogynistic jackass moron. That’s what free speech is all about.
Yes, Ernest, you do have the right to put anything you want on a t-shirt. Nobody disputes that. What everybody here thinks is that that is a disturbing thing to put on t-shirt and that it represents a repulsive mindset. They view you as a repulsive person who they want to keep far, far away from children. Do you get the difference?
To Zuzu,
I must make a clarifacation to the posting I typed for my boss, Ernest del Casal; I was a little vague -both of his grandchildren were born in wedlock, and surprise-surprise, by the same father unlike today’s status-quo.
By the way, if you think that this man’s message is mere bantering, you should log-on to KRIGHTSRADIO.com to hear the truth!
To all concerned,
At least I do not shy from the tough issues; I have nothing to apologize for, since all I have said is the truth – no apology is necessary! And I don’t hide behind silly screen names or carrying spy-camaras illigally into private organizations. In regards to my school board trustee bid, I only entered because of the requests of mothers, fathers, and grandparents within my district.
You entered the school committee race? Or your “boss”?
You can’t even get the rudiments of the First Amendment, let alone your identity. Who are you? Ernest del Casal, or his employee? Or do you switch when you get trounced online?
To Sheelzabub:
Obviously, the subtle art or reading comprehension eludes you! If you had actually understood the gist of what I had said, you would have known that I am Ernest del Casal’s secretary. And I have been typing these comments on his hehalf. He has identified himself, unlike you spineless cowards, who hide behind your alias’ because you only show the simplest form of intestinal fortitude when it suites you. Also it shows your lack of true conviction for your misguided beliefs.
So, is Ernest dictating this to you now? Has he now started to refer to himself in the third person? Did he actually tell you to write:
…I am Ernest del Casal’s secretary.
Or are you writing this yourself and hiding behind an assumed name?
Is it quicker for Ernest to write this out longhand or dictate it than it would be to type the responses himself? Geeze, you are a parody.
Hey, secretary, please let Ernest know that he could probably find one who could spell (or at least have fewer typos) if he looked.
Ernest is busy helping 30-40 men a day get themselves “un-screwed” in Family Court and he cannot always give me hours each day to proof-read these postings. I sincerely apologize for any mis-spelled words, however, I am compelled to ask the question, is this the best retort you could offer me!
To Whom It May Concern:
You people have had two days of fun debating and hiding behind your screen names; dispaying your obvious ignorance of the truth of Family Court, and attacked a person who volenteers his time to help others, you all have suddenly refused to come out of your collective “closets”. So it would seem that you have shown everyone what spineless bitches you really are, or is it that you are all too busy cleaning your trailers right now!
Typed by DB; not proof-read!
Obviously, the subtle art or [sic] reading comprehension eludes you!
Um, if you’re going to make comments like this, don’t get pissy when someone points out your godawful grammar and spelling.
If you had actually understood the gist of what I had said, you would have known that I am Ernest del Casal’s secretary. And I have been typing these comments on his hehalf [sic].
Oh, which is why you had said in an earlier post:
Speaking about the “Bitch”, it seems the the over 80,000 men whom have been helped are equally insane whom have had success with the one-sided Court system…thanks to my assistance. [sic–I cut and paste this; this syntax is all yours, kiddo.]
Or when you said:
Perhaps, those daughters you mention -for which I have raised a daughter to maturity, whom has had a child in wedlock, served in the military, who doesn’t do drug, smoke, or curse, and now has a sucessful profession and who has given me two wonderful grandsons…doesn’t sound like a custodial father like myself is all that bad!
Now, you can’t go around saying that you are Ernest del Casal when it suits you, then say you aren’t, then get pissy when you get called on it.
He has identified himself, unlike you spineless cowards,
No he hasn’t. You have posted under his name. Or maybe you are Ernest but now deciding to pose as his “secretary”. Or maybe you’re neither person and you’re just some shit-stirring troll. Either way, you’re providing an entertaining train wreck for people to watch.
. . . who hide behind your alias’ [sic] because you only show the simplest form of intestinal fortitude when it suites [sic] you.
Actually, the majority of posters here use handles that link to their blogs and/or their personal (read: real) email addresses. Yours doesn’t–it merely links to the general email for ERDF. Big deal. You could be anybody, so I suggest you stop whinging about how we’re “hiding” and hold yourself to the same standard, kiddo.
Also it shows your lack of true conviction for your misguided beliefs.
Actually, the red herrings you’re throwing about show you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
I sincerely apologize for any mis-spelled words, however, I am compelled to ask the question, is this the best retort you could offer me!
Gosh, that’s exactly what I was wondering when you called me a “femanist” Nazi.
If your “boss” (or you, Ernie, or you nameless troll trying to stir shit) truly believes that this is the proper use of your time, then the people he’s “helping” are getting screwed, since they are getting help from a lunatic. He’s wasting their time and money. Not surprising, that.
If calling people “bitches” and “Nazis” in cyberspace is your debating tactic, you’ve failed miserably at being taken seriously. If you and Ernie (or you, Ernie) have so much valuable work to do, why on earth are you trolling blogs and posting diatribes? Where, exactly, are the cogent posts, the facts and figures, the logic and reason? (Don’t answer that. It’s a rhetorical question.)
But do thanks for playing. Feel free to come back and make a bigger ass of yourself. I know I shouldn’t feed trolls, but it’s so much fun to poke you all with sticks. You do things like foam at the mouth on command.
Damn, Sheelzebub, that was good. The train wreck line still has me giggling. I try to avoid the trolls, but this one was so funny I couldn’t help myself.
I still like the image of ol’ Ernest switching from first to third person in his copious dictation time. I’m also very fond of the idea that Ernest has time to read the comments, but not to type in his own.
I may just add this page to my favorites. Everybody needs a good laugh from time to time.
Wonder what kind of help Ernest or his boss or whoever can offer anymore now that the family courts are no longer making referrals to his organization.
Phil: “Ugh. Why must ‘manly men’ be deathly afraid of catching teh gay, yet also be unable to actually like women?”
The solution, if I understand correctly, is for women to stop insisting they are human beings. That way they are fuckable AND you don’t have to like them.
Men’s rights people are just big bundles of projection tied together loosely with tendons and skin. This is like the gazillionth time I’ve seen one who uses a pseudonymn and constantly changes his story turn around and accuse people who use their real names and identities of “hiding”. Not to mention the long lists of how feminists feel about men that tend to describe word for word how men’s rights activists actually feel about women.
Just to finally make it clear to all of you closet-cases out there, that the only cases that have ever been referred by Family Court, are the completely destitute indigents whom cannot afford a pencil, let alone the enormous legal fees demanded from most attorney’s. The vast majority our members are sent by word-of-mouth. I would get only 1-3% of our clients from Family Court. However, you should know, that i have been responsible for the election and/or removal of several Family Court Judges here in Clark County. Judge Robert Lueck is a prime example!
Also, I find it hard to state that “bitch” is uneceptable language, when you freely use “f**k” in your postings. It would seem as…dare I say…the pot calling the kettle black -oops! that could be considered a “racist” statement by you or the liberal pablum you endorse! So it has been fun playing with you girls, I’m like real busy -so write what you like, and use proper puncuation and spelling (please spell my name right) Thanks to your feed back and twisted perception of things, i will gladly continue my work whether you like it or not! The only opinion I am concerned about are those of the men and families I have helped over the past 22 years. Just what have done for society, however, i will continue to read your crap, ’cause it only reinforces my beliefs. And once agian, I believe you are spinelss bitches, that refuse to put a name or face to your mindless dribble, but at least what I stand for, I put my name to.
Unless you’re using your boss’s name again.
I suppose it’s just banging my head against the wall to point out that “bitch” refers to a person and “fuck” refers to an act?
It seems that I must continue to bang my head against a wall of ignorance, and inform you that you need to get a Webster’s Dictionary to look up the term “bitch”. The term has nothing to do with a “person”, but a female dog in heat. But I guess I should not expect much from some one named zuzu anyway!
Db apologizes to all of you anal-retentive perfectionests out there in advance for any mistakes he makes! -signed: DB (not Ernest trying to hide like you bitches)
Typed by DB; not proof-read by Ernest.
You do realise that ad hominem attacks are just a poor man’s (not The Poor Man’s) penis extension?
Language is defined by it’s use, you are using bitch in reference to women, women who men chose to marry and then deceided to hold up as examples of the entire female gender, which I think is kind of sweet, For those women to mean so much to these men.
It shows they care, and for such emotionally scarred people, that is truly sweet.
also, most dictionaries tend to note that bitch is also a derogatory term for women, so not only are you unable to re-read your previous posts to ensure something similar to continuity is included with the lame hypocritical ad hominem attacks but you are actually also factually incorrect. (isn’t DB an alias btw? and if you actually aren’t someone, then using their name for your posts is also an alias, unless you’re dictating, in which case you shouldn’t be talking in the first person about yourself, or in the third person about your boss. But then, why is he wasting time at work posting comments on a blog? do you have no work? surely there are guys being treated unfairly by the latent sexism of the courts? never mind who the sexism is actually aimed at of course, white man’s burden and all that…)
And one more thing… don’t pretty much all civilised nations (and america) give some kind of constitutional right to everybody (men included) to have legal aid of some kind? (this might not hold true for cases of divorce of course, so if I’m wrong…I’m wrong i guess)
Come on you weak sucks… I am still waiting to hear from you! If you are so right about what you believe in, why have you all gone silent?; if your convictions are so strong, why not let us know who you are. Make a stand like you have a pair. You cowards disgust me! At least the homo emailed me back!
the truth hurts, but at least I remeber Voltaire and his famous quote,” I may not believe in what you say, but i will defend your right to say it to the death!” I only ask that you respect the same of me.
Identify yourselves..you cowards. Don’t follow Paul [of the Bible} and do not deny your true nature. Also to all you N.O.W. femanists out there who want to be equal to men everywhere but the Court room. We missed your your equality during the last 200 years. We missed you in Vietnam, WWII,WWI, Korea, Spanish American war, so all of you women whom still want to be equal, start signing up now for the selective services…this is your big chance to be equal. stand-up at the plate or shut-up!
Sole rantings of DB, Et Al; not proofed or read by Ernest!
Wow, that’s really a good argument you presented there, DB Et Al posting as Ernest.
You’ve convinced me; you’re right and I was wrong. I’m sorry I ever disagreed with you, and thank you ever so much for setting me straight (pun intended!). I was foolish, but now I know better.
In fact, you’ve changed everyone’s mind here. We’re all convinced because your posts here have been so totally persuasive.
Well, guess you’re all done here. You can go away now.
But it’s a troll with some kind of MPD! we can’t just toss it into the night! we should nurture it and douse it in gamma rays to produce an atomic super troll With The Force of a Thousand Suns!!
then you could charge admission to special DB Et Al threads, in the unlikely event you don’t get enough new subscribers to hereville that is.
To Phil,
You seem to be the only intelligent person on this board. The first part of your posting was simply your opinion, but it is refreshing that you admits that they may be wrong about Family Court. I can respect a person for that attitude!
Becasue what I do abd say might be wrong, however, only time will tell! I have dedicated 22 years of my life to this cause…thanks for your comments!
Ernest!
I sat here for a good 30 minutes trying to figure out how “fuck” is in the same league as “bitch”. For one thing, one is a verb and the other a noun.
Of course, by using those fancy words, I’m probably being a P.C. elitist.
It isn’t just the fancy words, Amanda. It is also the proper spelling and grammar. I think not being a committee of folks and keeping that whole pesky first person/third person thing straight also condemns you.
Remember, “faggot” isn’t an anti-gay slur, it is a bundle of sticks. Webster’s Dictionary says so.
Was that you Ernest? Or was that the pseudonymous DB? Or was it the mysterious folks known only as Et Al(not the national airline of Israel)?
Come on you weak sucks… I am still waiting to hear from you!
Awwww. . .he’s lonely. Or is it “they are” lonely? So hard to keep track. . .
I guess I’d reply to your points if you made any. I mean, besides the fact that I’m a bitch and a Nazi and a “femanist” and that I’m a coward because I use only one personality online (I’m not blessed with spares like you).
If you are so right about what you believe in, why have you all gone silent?;
Gosh, I dunno. Most folks indulge in all sorts of stuff in the course of a day and an evening. We’ve got other things to do. I thought you did too. You know, helping the oppressed men who are trampled by the evil feminist system? You sure do have a lot of time on your hands for such a crusader. You are so kind to come by and make an ass of yourself here. It’s quite entertaining.
if your convictions are so strong, why not let us know who you are.
Us? Okay, so how many personalities are stuffed in your head? First it’s one person, and you can’t decide which one you are. Now it’s a bunch of ’em. I bet they’ve got meds for this. What’s next–will they find Jimmy Hoffa’s body in your mind? Will you channel L. Ron Hubbard? Oh, I know–maybe you’re just possessed! We can fix that–get you some holy water and you’ll be right as rain. Do you levitate?
Make a stand like you have a pair.
A pair of what? Legs? Manolos? Tighty-whities? Chopsticks?
You cowards disgust me! At least the homo emailed me back!
He’s very charitable, isn’t he? It is the holiday season.
the truth hurts, but at least I remeber Voltaire and his famous quote,” I may not believe in what you say, but i will defend your right to say it to the death!” I only ask that you respect the same of me.
Er, you weren’t censored, just criticized. That whole freedom of speech thing applies even to people who don’t agree with you. Untie yourself from the martyr’s stake, cupcake. You look ridiculous there, and you’ll look even more stupid and forlorn when you learn that no one is coming with torches to burn you out in a blaze of glory. Run along, now, and weave a basket or something.
[Okay, look, kiddo. The gig is up. I get it–it’s a really funny spoof–I’ve doubled over cracking up at your inane rantings–but enough’s enough. It’s obvious that you’re just doing a spoof. No one is that stupid. No one.}
Does anyone remember doodlebugs from when you were in elementary school (or is this only a Southern thing)? Our playgrounds would become packed dirt by the mid-spring and there would be all these 1/4 inch to 1/2 inch holeso in the ground which you would dip a looooong piece of grass into. The doodle bug (i.e, ant lion) would grab the grass and you could therefore remove it from the safety of its home and torment it on end. Ah, those were the days.
Ernest: how come you get to call me “bitch” but I can’t call myself “Q Grrl”. **pout** That’s soooooooo unfair.
Mmmm… cupcakes… :p
*yum*
Ampersand doesn’t have trolls, he has performance artists.
It’s a shame that some fathers’ rights groups have let misogyny permeate their outlook, as this only dilutes their important message. As a woman who has been through it, I can attest that there is indeed a dark injustice behind the doors of family court. The judges just don’t care — they want to do what’s easy. My heart goes out to all of the men and women who have lost their children to this archaic system.
To Q Grrl:
I think you have missed one very important point of Ernest’s message. We are not saying that ALL woman are “bitches”; just those who use false claims of Domestic Violence, the Court’s pre-supposed superiority in parentage skills, Court and community resources that are gender biased, and fema-nazi’s who use the quest for “equality” to legally and socially manipulate our social morality for their purposes only. Ernest just the other day, purchased a t-shirt off a woman’s back which read as follows:
Babe, in, Total, Control, of, Herself, or B.I.T.C.H. Lets be fair now, I do not believe he was directing at you personally.
DB{or Dancing Bear)
So then shouldn’t that shirt say:
“Trust Some of the Bitches All of the Time,
All of the Bitches Some of the Time,
But Not All of the Bitches All of the Time” ??
You’re gonna need either bigger shirts or smaller typefaces. Well, freedom doesn’t come cheap, Mr. Bear. :p
Sorry, Qgrrl. :o I couldn’t resist…
DB? Or is it now Ernest? You said that the prior posts were you writing for Ernest. Are you now saying that he did indeed write them? So hard to keep track. . .
Seriously, dude, do you levitate? I’ve always wanted to know what possessed people look like. I’ve tried possessing people myself, but I’m kind of a free spirit.
So, DB/Ernest/whoever. If Lucifer also happens to be crashing in that bod with you, tell him I said “Hi” and that he owes me $500 from last night’s card game.
Hmmm…I’m reminded of another men’s rights troll from the Ms. Boards a few years back whose initials were also DB…. ;-) The rhetoric was similar too.
Did the T-shirt have the commas? Maybe Ernest should have traded it to her for a copy of Eats, Shoots and Leaves.
Bamboo?
When I was a kid, my dad used to get kind of upset with my mom over child support. Not to the point of demanding an accounting, but because he paid her quite a bit more than the court would have mandated a month and then he was also expected to buy us pretty much all our clothes and shoes, etc because my mom didn’t have the money for it. (also, he was a very involved father, just to note because there’s all this discussion about the NPC not doing as much of the parenting, talking with us at least every other night on the phone, often every night, and we were at his apartment every weekend until we got old enough to want to do other stuff with our weekends. To this day I am very very close with my dad. This doesn’t mean that my mom wasn’t involved in more day-to-day ‘don’t hit your sister’ type stuff, but he was certainly far from ‘absent’). My mom had a hard time finding a job, and so sometimes he felt like he was supporting her with the child support payments and then supporting us above and beyond that. He never demanded an accounting from her, but I caught hints of them arguing about it (they were good at not actually arguing in front of us) that were confirmed as I got older. One of their big divorce-catalyzing issues was my mother’s poor handling of money, so I’m sure the suspicion that she was mishandling the support payments was already ingrained. Anyway, point being, there’s situations in which a father might feel he’s being unduly burdened and I think my dad was in one of them. This doesn’t mean that an NCP should exercize total control of the CP’s life, but when he’s putting out extra money on top of the child support, then the question ‘where did the rest of it go’ is a valid question.
Also, about the CP having leeway to move where they want, I think its a little more subjective than some people make it out to be. My uncle had full custody of his son for 4 or 5 years, and then his ex-wife decided she wanted custody, and so they were sharing it jointly. Then she decided she wanted to move to San Fransisco from LA and take their son with her. Since it was an in-state move, from what he said, the courts couldn’t say much about it in an absolute manner, and he was kind of a wimp and didn’t contest it agressively. She did eventually move back to LA, but the details as to why are kind of fuzzy. The point of me telling this story, though, is that it was totally out of bounds for her to move their kid, that he had been accustomed to having even arguably more contact with than she, a plane-ride away without him having a say in it. That’s just cruel to an incredibly involved father. And just saying that she should be able to live where she wants is not a good enough argument when it’s going to significantly affect current custody arrangements, especially when they’re supposed to have joint custoday.
Anyway, said my piece, sometimes angry fathers aren’t crazy. (sometimes they are, though…I could talk for hours about my sister’s idiot ex-husband who demands visitation at awkward times and then leaves the baby with his mom the whole time and doesn’t pay support at all because he can’t hold down a job.)
Oh, oops. I didn’t know that this had moved into troll-discussion world.
It seems that I must continue to bang my head against a wall of ignorance, and inform you that you need to get a Webster’s Dictionary to look up the term “bitch”.
Not to feed the troll, but it’s very important when utilizing a dictionary to prove your point that you don’t use Webster’s. It worked in high school, but in order to define the etymology of a word, you need to look it up in the OED, which tracks all definitions and not just the most recent ones.
Also, I noticed that in the above italicized remarks, he placed the period outside of the quotes. That’s standard European usage, not American grammar. Is Ernesto/his secretary/etc. from Europe? Just curious.
Oh, God, deja pseu, I just ran into our old buddy. He read my LJ and called me a ‘hired killer’ or something, then whined pathetically about what had I done to merit attention. It was….I have no words. How awfully pathetic are these guys in real life that offending women online is the only way they get any attention at all?
Pingback: Trish Wilson's Blog