|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The guy who wrote the letter was extremely lucky, as was pointed out in the response. I know several men who've been screwed over horribly in their divorces.
Legalize prostitution!
BTW: I do get tired of seeing the guy who writes these columns using them as opportunities to sales-pitch his "system."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
System? We don't need no sinking system.
Just follow the basic rules.
1) No love without the glove.
2) All assets separate.
3) If she can't wait five years for a ring, she isn't worthy.
4) Manditory Paternity test and prenup.
5) Separate accounts for everything, she pays half of all expenses, if she can't afford it, out she goes.
6) Stay at home moms must sign a waiver stating they will not divorce until the children are raised.
Dan Curry
DanCurry.Com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 08, @02:13PM EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
Better yet, screw stay at home moms. Daycare is available.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not a stay-at-home mom myself, but that is absurd. Day-care or stay-at-home is a choice that the family has to make. If one income of a two-income family is going to pretty much be used to pay for daycare, then it makes more sense for one parent - mom, dad, Uncle Fester - to stay home.
Personally I'd have loved to stay home with my baby, but I couldn't afford it. Some can. More power to them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 08, @03:08PM EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
"Separate accounts for everything, she pays half of all expenses, if she can't afford it, out she goes."
What happens if the guy gets offered a promotion doubling his salary, then wants to start living the lifestyle that salary affords him? Should he give the woman 30 days to get up to speed moneywise or out she goes? What happens if it's the woman who gets the promotion? Should she divorce her husband because he's no longer making enough money to pay his half of the lifestyle she wants? What happens if one spouse becomes ill or disabled and can no longer work? Should they be told, either shoot yourself in the head or I'm divorcing you, because I'm not supporting some crip? You'd better go up to Oregon and start supporting the assisted suicide law, and demanding that it's enacted in other states, and demanding that it will apply to disabled people who aren't terminal, but whose spouses just don't want them around because they can't work.
"Stay at home moms must sign a waiver stating they will not divorce until the children are raised."
This completely contradicts what you said above. A stay at home mom cannot pay half of the expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I couldn't agree more. I don't like being sold items, especially things as dubious as a 'system' to get a partner.
Systems like that prey on people who are vulnerable and charge inflated prices etc etc. I used to read the AskMen.com website regularly, until it lost all credibility when the guy who owns the 'system' openly criticised women who were overweight. If his opinion on that topic was so close minded, chances are his 'system' would be flawed also.
But enough on that guy...that's betting off-topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systems like that prey on people who are vulnerable and charge inflated prices etc etc.
I don't think he's actually charging people for his "System." His "system" is in a column he wrote a long while back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, if you click on the link he creates whenever he mentions his 'System', it takes you to the page where you can order it.
For international customers it is US$120, or for North American customers it is US$99.
That is a very expensive 'system' in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The article reads quite well until the following statement is encountered:
It is time for men to take control of their relationships. It is time for men to get mad, not at women, but at their own lack of good judgment.
This is an absurd statement and simply places false blame on the males of the relationship. If we could identify a female of bad character, psychologist would be able to jail child molesters before the crime. We cannot tell who is going to be a heinous criminal until the act is known. That is a fact of life. The same applies with men in relationships.
No matter how hard we try, men are not going to be able to predict if a good marriage will go sour. When the marriage goes sour, the laws encourage fraudulent claims by the female. Since, there is no penalty, it is logical for females to make the false allegations and destroy the man. That is how the system is set-up. That is how the feminist changed the system to favor women who make these false allegations. This article simply proves that feminist have declared open season on men, and that they intend to subjugate them to the point of slavery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
feminist have declared open season on men, and that they intend to subjugate them to the point of slavery.
There doesn't seem to be any question about this, with the usual disclaimer about IFeminists and egalitarian feminists (the latter, perhaps, to a lesser extent than the former).
Women who murder men often get away with it by claiming that they are the victims. There's an international movement to release women from prison, no matter how serious their crimes are, such as murdering men. (It's becoming flat-out legal for women to murder men.)
The government is establishing debtors prisons for men -- read "fathers". (It's becoming flat-out illegal to be a father.)
When women sexually abuse boys, the press declares that it's really okay because "the boys loved it" and then declares that men, who are brought to trial for sexually abusing girls, are championed by the press. (It's becoming flat-out legal for women to sexually abuse boys.)
The US may soon establish a national ID system that will be used largely to track men, and governments (such as the German and Scottish) are starting to use DNA records to track men and boys.
If this doesn't remind you of Nazi Germany and that government's and society's dealings with Jews, then you know nothing about history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday February 07, @10:33PM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adapted from the TV sitcom: "Married ... with Children".
Okey-dokey guys, gather 'round the computer.
Once upon a time, there was a young man.
He was full of hope.
He was single, and thus, happy.
Then, one night, much like tonight, something rose from the swamp.
He heard a noise behind him:
"thump thump,
thump thump".
He walked a little faster:
" thump-thump, thump-thump ".
Then he saw it, and there, in the light of a bar, stood the evil,
high-heeled, spandex monster! It was old. It was fat. It wouldn't cook. It
wouldn't clean.
He ran from it. He stood it up. He dated others. But nothing could stop it!
He could hear it's wild call [in a high voice] "Oh, Honey!
HONEY!"
It was horrible!
Finally, it trapped him. It opened
it's hideous mouth, bared its fangs and said... [in a high pitched voice]
"Marry meeee".
Did he marry it?
Yes, I'm afraid he did. And he was never heard from again!
But the worst of it is, there's still some of them out there. There might be one BEHIND YOU NOW! Then again, there might not be.
But beware; wherever a man is free and has change in his pockets, they'll come a-creepin and they can't be stopped.
The Madcap Misogynist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 08, @12:24AM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Ahhhhhhhhhh
Like some cool water, another Married With Children classic.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think he has a point. People don't approach relationships, marriage etc as a partnership. How many people would put more energy and effort into finding out about a person they are about to go into a business partnership with? Business partnerships fail as well, generally when one or both partners have unrealistic expectations. But I believe many people take more care in getting involved with someone in that context than in marriage.
Warning Anecdoctodal Evidence: I know a man who has maried 3 times (and is about to go into his forth). This same man has had numerous business partnerships fall apart. I've known him for 20 years and he keeps getting "ripped off" (his perception) by both his wives and his business partners. Some of his business partners have ended up in jail. Others have just disappeared and left him holding the bag.
Its not nice to blame the "victim' but after a certain point, you have to take a more critical look at yourself and how you inter-relate to others, how you judge others, etc. At some point, you have to take responsibility for being in certain situations over and over.
Re: his wives past and future, all of them are chosen on the basis of how much economic leverage he has over them IMO. This man is fairly well off, yet he continues to pursue women of a certain socio-economic level (considerably lower than his), less educated than he, significanntly less occupation skills than he, and typically at least 20 years younger (nowadays 30 years younger). Three times now he has gone through horrendous divorces and lost about half his net worth each time. The thing is, he could get the women to sign pre-nupts, but if he did, they probably wouldn't marry him. Which should give him a clue, but it doesn't. As near as I can tell he views women as a commodity that he can buy. That's fine I guess but then he is always so surprised when they see him as a commodity too. It goes both ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: his wives past and future, all of them are chosen on the basis of how much economic leverage he has over them IMO. This man is fairly well off, yet he continues to pursue women of a certain socio-economic level (considerably lower than his), less educated than he, significanntly less occupation skills than he, and typically at least 20 years younger (nowadays 30 years younger). Three times now he has gone through horrendous divorces and lost about half his net worth each time.
Hypergamy is a well established female trait: there's nothing unusual about a man being richer or better educated than his wife. Mostly this is driven by female preferences. If a male engages in active hypogamy he may just be applying his knowledge of the market to apply his efforts where they are most likely to be successful.
sd
Those who like this sort of thing
will find this the sort of thing they like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 08, @04:22AM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
There's no proof that the man mentioned in this article really exists and if he does, where's his proof that he was "falsely charged"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's as much proof that you really exist, pal - i.e. some words on a web page. It's bad enough when dolts like you apply your peanut brains to gender issues, let alone metaphysics. I demand a reality test!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's no proof that the man mentioned in this article really exists and if he does, where's his proof that he was "falsely charged"?
The guy wrote in to an advice columnist. Why do you need proof?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh right...of course. There was no proof that a male on the Dennis Prager show (yesterday) was telling the truth either. Never mind the law suits against LA County. It’s just the males using the justice system to abuse and batter women.
Therefore, he must have been lying about having his daughter seized by the police and CPS for changing her diaper in a public park. Remember, if a male changes the messy diaper of their daughter, they are now at risk to be reported as touching the vagina of their daughter. It does not matter that good hygiene required this practice. But really, the whole thing never happened. It's just more male lies.
Further, there was no proof that my wife was abusing drugs when she put me under false arrest. That is because the police never conducted a drug test on her. They didn't care that she was shaking, stumbling, confused, agitated, and aggressive. All that mattered was that she was a woman, and she looked "battered." That was sufficient proof to have me arrested and charged. However, since there is no proof of the drug abuse, she wasn't really on drugs at all! Therefore, there were no false charges and lies told to the police. Nope. There is no suppression of evidence at all! The whole this is a fabrication to vilify those evil feminist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore, he must have been lying about having his daughter seized by the police and CPS for changing her diaper in a public park.
WHAT?!? Warble, you've got to provide us with a link to that story. That's one I, at least, haven't heard, and it sounds DEFINITELY column-worthy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I heard it last night on Dennis Prager's show...I believe. I will look for published news reports. Unfortunately, this stuff is being actively suppressed.
What was worse was when the worker from the LA CPS called in and justified the seizure of the child. Then she admitted that the filing of charges is basically a crapshoot! Further, she admitted that %50 (!) of all child seizures are based on false allegations.
This is the outcome of the pro-left feminist agenda. It should not be surprising. But then I am preaching to the choir.
I'll do some looking around for further info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll do some looking around for further info.
See if you can find a link to the show, too. I'm not familiar with Dennis Prager.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I called the 800 number and asked for some form of documentation. They requested that I send an email directly to Dennis and site the Feb. 7th, 2002 show. Apparently they are getting alot of calls. I would suggest that everybody flood Dennis with emails requesting more documentation on the child seizures that were being cited.
Web address:
http://www.dennisprager.com
Email:
dennisprager@dennisprager.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 08, @06:32PM EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
You guys are attempting to decide for me how my wife and I should arrange for the care of our children. My preference would be for mom to stay home and care for them full time. And with the current state of public schools, I would now opt for her to home-school them instead of leaving them to the BS that's going on under the careful watch of the feminists, the AFT, and the NJEA. Of course, that was a decision my wife and I made together, and of course, I didn't get my way completely. But putting your partner in the position where she MUST make as much as you do is doing nothing more than pay-equity would do. You'd be playing right into the hands of the feminists, who WANT women to work full-time just so they can establish "independence." Don't think for a minute that they will let go of child support just because they are working. And take a look at what real estate and automobile prices have done since two-income families have become the norm. It's almost to the point where where you cannot afford for mom to stay at home. I understand what Dan (Post #2) is saying, and walking into a marriage eyes-wide-open is the right thing to do. But not everyone chooses to take that extreme in a marriage, and it may not be the best course in every case.
I plan to advise my son to:
1) ALWAYS keep a few thousand dollars hidden from everyone so that you have something to start with should you find yourself alone.
2) NEVER allow your wife to be in a position where she can take your joint savings without your signature.
3) NEVER be afraid to get a DNA paternity test, preferrably in secret, so that you have the option to decide how to proceed; you may WANT to stay with her.
4) If you become a victim of abuse, report it immediately and every time it happens, even if you just go to the police station and ask to file a report.
5) If the system becomes oppressive, leave the country. You will have my blessing.
6) Be EXTREMELY selective and careful about who you have sex with and under what circumstances. Regardless of how assuring your partner is, ALWAYS use your own birth control method. NEVER assume that she is being monogamous.
Frank H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the system becomes oppressive, leave the country. You will have my blessing.
And what country can we go to where these same oppressive tactics can be avoided? Last I checked, all of the rest of the free world is following the U.S. exported feminist ideal of complete government control and regulation of human thought and feelings.
Sorry, there is no where to run. The feminist form of liberalism is everywhere, it is popular, and it is spreading fast. It is like a cancer that cannot be stopped.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday February 09, @12:57AM EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
There are places to run to warble, although your life will not be as it is here in this country. But will it be worse? Probably not. Just different. Even in places where there is extradition, it's an expensive process, and as Ira Einhorn has learned, you can hide for a long time, and even once you've been found, there's no guarantee that your host country will cooperate in extradition.
FH
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is a pretty drastic solution. If a person chooses to hide from the relentless persecution of fathers, they give up their home, their right to social security, and their contacts with their parents, brothers, and sisters.
However, if a fathers making 3K per month (take home) is left with $800 to live on, they don't really have much of a choice anymore. That just simply is not sufficient to take care of their needs as humans.
The alternative is facing years of State sponsored terrorism aimed at divorced fathers, extreme stress and the resulting medical illnesses that will follow, little if any access to their children, and probable false accusations from their x-wife that are motivated by hate.
Glad I only had one child and that he child is grown. Now if I can just keep my current wife from making further false allegations for the next few months I am home free. I can divorce her and live the rest of my life as a single man, unless the of course the laws change and make marriage less of a risk for a criminal conviction as a result of false allegations.
Currently, I have struggled too hard not to fight back and get my name cleared via a jury trial. I almost hope and pray that charges are filed so I can clear my name. Otherwise, I will be stigmatized the rest of my life as a result of a drug abusing wife's false allegations and false police report.
Damn her for lying about her drug abuse! Damn the police for refusing to get her tested for drugs when I told them of the problem! Damn them for suppressing evidence on multiple issues! What liars!
What is really odd is that I can only think of the welfare of all those other innocent men who are poor and cannot get bail. The system really screws and discriminates against them. If it was not for the fact that I dug myself out of the slums, I would not appreciate their plight. It is them that I will be thinking of as I launch my legal defense and sue the State of CA for millions. This cannot be allowed to stand!
No I am not leaving the country. Though at times it certainly sounds appealing. Running just is not the solution to the problem. If the DA ever gets around to charging me I will play hardball with that male-hating bitch. However, I am beginning to suspect that she knows the arrest was illegal or at least full of legal problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ira Einhorn, now there is a real gem. Next thing you'll be decrying the wrongful persecution of poor OJ Simpson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To support your idea about father's changing their daughter's diaper I had an experience that relates to the idea that men are preceived as abusers and not parents. I was changing my daughter's diaper at a female friends house and her 5 year old daughter was watching me. My friend's comment? "Daddies sometimes have to touch their little girls there when they change their diapers." I do not think I can express the longterm doubt this has given me. I feel like people are constantly judging me now when I have to change my daughter's diaper. I know that it is illogical but her comment shows that the perception of men and fathers is still that they are abusers and second best caretakers. I stopped counting the number of times women give me unsolicited advice on how my daughter needs to be dressed more warmly or similar advice. Strangely enough (sarcasm) no such advice is offered when my wife is around.
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 08, @04:45PM EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Golddigging is not an established female trait. Women can dig for gold because men let them do it. Men don't look at a woman's occupation or income when he considers her for a date or for marriage. He should. No man should date or marry a waitress or a supermarket clerk. No man should date women who talk about being full-time mothers. If men demanded en masse that their wives work, and not believe the feminist bullshit about children needing a parent at home, then women would have to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If men demanded en masse that their wives work, and not believe the feminist bullshit about children needing a parent at home, then women would have to work.
It's not the feminists who are arguing that children need a parent at home. Gender feminists want more women in the workplace, not at home, generally preferring that women stay away from motherhood and family.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday February 08, @06:14PM EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
If that is true, feminists and anti-feminists agree on a core issue. Anti-feminists want more women in the workplace so that men don't have to die early from overwork.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm tempted to repeat an advice column letter from a guy specifically wanting his to-be wifey to not even contemplate NOT being full-time mother/wife. And what if the guy is a store-clerk too? I can understand looking at how someone handles life as a pre-req to marriage, but banning specific people?
And for the most part, feminists make a pretty fair attack against the idea of a parent needing to stay at home, dismissing it as a ploy to trap mothers into dependence to their husbands. [fathers are never targeted by said studies, note]
I'm glad fiance and I don't want kids, makes that issue pretty simple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He is just buying in to the traditional family structure where the man was "loved" because he was a good provider. Due to feminism the maority of women are very aware of the economic changes that have occurred in the recent decade obviously he hasn't caught on yet. These women are using his ignorance about the social changes that have occured and letting him buy into the traditional attitudes until they get bored then they shift to the new age attitudes and take everything that they can.
Tony H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think I can resist..
What maniacal person digs themselves into three different lives just to emerge with more money? Just repulsive.
But, I don't think it's an illustration of marriage... I'm looking forward to the event and not because of his vast fortune (or student debt, pick one).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL! Good one luna!
Mind you, there are women who use men as biological cash machines just as assuredly as there are men who use women as punching bags. It is a problem which needs correction.
We can speak of pendulums swinging too far and really we only have words. We have a society which has some major problems and thise problems are in need of solutions. We cannot find or use solutions while we have a "only women are hurt" philosophy, so that is one of the things that must change.
Also, under the current system (which must change) men really do have more to loose and so must be much more careful than women. So, when you hear a woman complaining about men not wanting to commit, tell her "If you had as much to loose as the men, you'd be afraid of committing too!"
Greg
the Volksgaren Project: Intelligent Abuse Recovery, http://clix.to/support/, jaxom@amtelecom.net, 519-773-9644
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
