|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 17, @11:09AM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I just finished reading an article you wrote for the Courier Mail covering the The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Community Services. I think that you have made a a mistake on which side is biased and unreasonable. According to you, a 50/50 start is unreasonable because the standard ruling is 80/20 in favor of women and that is reasonable because men abuse their wives and would most likely abuse their children also.
The facts are that women are more likely to commit child abuse (60%) and also more likely to initiate domestic violence; both are less likely to be reported when committed by a woman, hence the skewed public perceptions. Only in independant or government funded studies do these facts come out.
If this is so, then the 80/20 rate is a crime, and so is the 50/50. Men should be getting custody more often than women. I think it stands as a testament to men that they are not asking for more, given the facts, but equal.
There is no magic that makes women better or more capable parents. The amount of people, men or women, who abuse their spouse or children is a small fraction of the total population. Laws should be based on the norm, then allowances made for the exceptions (such as abuse), not the other way around. To assume all men are abusers is to implicate all women as accomplices, in which case both parties are incapable of caring for their children.
Please re-read your article, and tell me how a 50/50 split, ie. equality, can be wrong.
Sincerely, Jen Kuhn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 17, @01:15PM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
I was sent this today and it really hit home.
Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend by the name of Common Sense who has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.
He will be remembered as having cultivated such value lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm and that life isn't always fair.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not kids, are in charge).
His health began to rapidly deteriorate when well intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate, teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch, and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student only worsened his condition.
It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.
Finally, Common sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband, churches became businesses and criminals received better treatment than their victims.
Common Sense finally gave up the ghost after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot, she spilled a bit in her lap, and was awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust, his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He is survived by two stepbrothers, My Rights and Ima Whiner.
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.
If you still know him pass this on, if not you can give him a second death
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 17, @04:32PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"and tell me how a 50/50 split, ie. equality, can be wrong"
You obviously don't understand. Our studies have shown that that 37% of women in child custody cases are from ethnic minorities. 69% live in cities whereas 31% are from rural areas . If you factor in the 63% who are Caucsian , this brings the total up to 200%. Now, 50% of this is 100%. Therefore , in a true 50/50 split, women get custody in 100% of cases.
from:
Centre of Womens Studies.
Sorry, Jen, for this clumsy attempt at being humerous but sometimes all you can do is laugh at that obscene entity known as the "family court".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday September 17, @06:18PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
What a riot...you actually had me there for a moment-thought I was being flamed!
Jen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday September 18, @09:49AM EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I received a reply from the author of the article. I was very polite and respectful in my original letter and she wrote to tell me how abusive the other letters she recieved were. A note***abusive letters do not help!***they simply proove the person's view on men. She is very open to dialog so I am approaching this carefully. I am really impressed that she is willing to follow this through and talk about it further. Perhaps it will come to nothing, but at least the door is open.
Jen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"A note***abusive letters do not help!***they simply prove the person's view on men."
My Dad was the chief negotiator for his union for many, many years. He once told me that one of his tricks if things got sticky was to threaten to resign: "If I bail, you'll have to deal with hotheads like Smith and Jones!" That scared the hell out of the administration (of a community college).
The visible presence of "hotheads" gave them high motivation to deal with the "moderate", "reasonable" one.
Larry
Proud member of the Sperm Cartel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday September 18, @11:52AM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Jen,
Your letter was excellent. I am grateful for your effort and concern. However, I'm not impressed that the author told you that she has received a lot of abusive letters. That seems to me an inappropriate and manipulative way to compliment you. Sadly, a typical tactic for attempting to silence persons concerned about men's issues is to point to despicable actions of some persons concerned about men's issues, as if to threaten all with dishonor-by-association.
I assure you that there are many honorable men and women who are disgusted with the treatment of men. Many are rightly angry; some express their anger in inappropriate ways. This is a general feature of social life. I am glad that you have confidence in yourself, and are not deterred by implicit threats of stereotyping.
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday September 19, @10:48AM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
"Many are rightly angry; some express their anger in inappropriate ways."
I have read and indeed it is a fact, that men are so little listened to that they are "vituperative," when they finally do get a chance to express themselves (be heard).
At our rally in front of "Deadbeat Dad Court," one sign read,
ENFORCE
VISITATION
AS STRICTLY AS
CHILD SUPPORT
another
STOP
ROBBING
FATHERS
OF THEIR
CHILDREN
We have a bullhorn, but it seems that I often come back from these rallies hoarse or speechless. I grieve that so much pain continues to be heaped on men at the will of the evil feminist agenda, and by the political toadies who enforce it.
Let freedom ring. Let all voices join in unison. Let the truth be told about those evil black robed pimps disseminating the un-american tyranny and injustice they dispense. Let freedom ring out so that all can see those scabs on the cancer that plagues american society. Let no one forget the commission of hate crimes against men called family court judgments.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
