|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One has to consider how frequently a satire site bashes men before getting bent out of shape. If The Onion did something like this every week or every month, I would be concerned.
We need to be focused on the evil people who are screwing us over, not the jesters of our society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Onion seems to have something derogatory about men just about every week. Typically they have some satirical "op ed" about a man, who is stereotypically sex crazed and irresponsible. The Onion may be amusing and creative on non-gender issues, but there is this tiresome theme about men as boorish louts looking for their next sexual conquest.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Have you forgotten how many times the Onion has made fun of feminism? Geez, some people have short memories, or just prefer to focus on the bad stuff. Indeed, the dads dipicted in this satire were so horribly bad and selfish I couldn't help but laugh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All I recall is one article where some young woman "wrote" an op-ed piece along the lines of "What has feminism done for me?" And in a sense that wasn't even critical of feminism in general, but of the young woman's selfish attitude as she was using feminism for her personal gain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:12 AM August 7th, 2004 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
"but of the young woman's selfish attitude as she was using feminism for her personal gain. "
which seems to be the case 'with' feminism..a tool for personal gain...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Have you forgotten how many times the Onion has made fun of feminism? Geez, some people have short memories, or just prefer to focus on the bad stuff. Indeed, the dads dipicted in this satire were so horribly bad and selfish I couldn't help but laugh.
The first feminist parody article I was reminded of was: "Women Now Empowered By Everything A Woman Does"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:38 PM August 8th, 2004 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Dangerous for whom,Mabe this; will humiliate men to the point that thay finally realize this is a true civil rights issue and will find its way to the supream court as a issue of equal rights.I Personally was denied visitation/custody, for a period of over 17 years,but the child support payments I make still roll in.IN shortI was court orderd out of state [banished over a mistermenor custody issue]only to return to kansas to find my child in and out of fostercare,state facilitys,and mental hospitals,but a gratious worker at S.R.S.allowed me one hour of supervised visitation after 17 years.My first born son is now 26 and will not have a thing to do with me or even his brother 18.to ad to this travisty of justice,My first born son's mother was a career employee for the state of kansas,had moved,changed address,and an unlisted phone no.But The court system washed its hands of the situation,except for the child support issue forcibly taking money out of my paycheck every week. Denied justice,due process,and civil rights. Bill R. Nicholson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Damn man, I am so sorry you had to endure that.
I didn't see my dad for 2 decades. Well, ok, I SAW him less then 1/2 a dozen times, but that's not a relationship.
I will always love my mom, but part of me will NEVER forgive her for denying me a relationship with my dad.
I think it's f*cked that your EX took the money but institutionalized the kids. She did THAT rather than realize she was a bad mom and letting you have a chance to raise the kids.
"best interests of the child" were second to her ego, her spite, or the growth of her children.
Vomit
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:27 PM August 6th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
The common bonds of shoddy parenting and alcoholism quickly integrated the negligent fathers, both those who arrived alone and those who belonged to larger groups.....
The deadbeat dads shared a laissez-faire attitude toward many of the health, education, and welfare issues facing parents today. Among the topics ignored by the group were fiscal responsibility, employment, and, of course, getting tough on deadbeat dads.
Well dugh! We all KNOW that men are nothing but a bunch of alcoholics, drug addicts, criminals, couch potatoes, gamblers of child support, and incapable of caring for their own children.
Hell! There isn't a damn woman on the planet that represents these admirable qualities.
COUNT ME IN! This is a great group! Gees. Next time they march I want to go!
The only complication is that I'll have to victimize some woman by getting her pregnant, and we all know that according to MacKinnon that all sex is rape!
Then she can pump out the kid and stick me with child support. That way I can gample away all my earnings also and further victimize the mother and child also.
KEWL!!!
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd like to weigh in on this if possible. Let me explain my situation so you can understand why I feel the way I do.
Many years ago, I fathered a child with a woman I thought I loved. We had a lot of problems, but when I found out I was going to be a dad, I started to straighten out my life. I quit a 10 year addiction to drugs (still clean), got a job, and developed a relationship with God that continues today. I'm not bragging or patting myself on the back, but I was raised that a man stood up and took responsibility for his actions. When Shannon decided that a dad was optional, she allowed me to watch my son 3 days a week while she worked (I worked nights, she days, and I would keep him and then go to bed after she picked him up). This worked well until I went to court to officially establish paternity and set up child support for them and visitation for myself. Shannon took Sage and left for parts unknown. Sage (my son) was 3 months old then and I have not seen them since. I do hear from her when she wants something, like when she re-married and needed to move to Germany. Had to sign papers for that. Did I get to see him finally? No. She opted not to come and visit or be available for a visit before she left as it was a last minute army transfer. That was almost 3 years ago and still no visit. The Email they promised to maintian so I could know about him was terminated 1 month after the papers were signed.
The point is that I am remarried and have a son with my current wife. I have reentered school to better take care of my family, but have to continue paying child support even though we have to suffer and go without. I have written the President and suggested the following to help out all parties in child support cases.
How about making our child support payments at least partially tax deductable? Is this too much to ask? If 2 parents are supporting the child the shouldn't both get the deduction? At least when you are paying child support you have a definate way of knowing exactly how much was spent so its not like it would be easy to cheat there. The state can tell you exactly how much I have paid. Can you imagine the incintive that it would give to millions of "dead-beat-dads" to pay up? Some guys owe upwards of 10,000. If that was even partially deductible were talking about a huge savings for them in taxes, a good payment to the mothers, and children who are taken care of. Wouldn't that serve all the parties involved instead of just the custodial parent?
And another thing, how about making a law that says if a non-custodial parent goes to court to enforce visitation, the custodial parent cannot in same court hearing or for a specified period of time ask for increase in payments. Seems to be this is used far too often as a retalitory measure by custodial parents who wish to hold the reigns on when their ex's can see the children.
Thanks for giving me a chance to spout off about this. Its weighed on me and my family for some time. I truly wish that I could be involved in Sage's life but am scared that he wouldn't even know who I was now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:44 PM August 7th, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. I'm sorry that you've been treated so badly. I respect your concern to help your children and your spouse, but I think that the idea of the government enforcing child support obligations on unmarried men who don't even get to see their children is stupid and totally unjust. Piecemeal reform is not enough. The whole system must be radically changed. You don't even know if Shannon is benefiting from the "child support" that you are paying. Face it, you're just being punished for having sex, and for the fact that the woman you had sex with chose not to have an abortion, chose not to give the child up for adoption, chose not to raise it with you... as a result of her choices, the government is persecuting you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your kind words. They really do mean a lot to me.
Actually to clear the air a bit, I was really not advocating the goverment collecting at all, but rather the allowance of Fathers or non-custodial spouses to claim the money we pay on our income taxes. The break alone would make me a lot happier knowing I would get some releif at the end of the year if not month to month. I do agree, though, that the whole system needs to be fixed. Most of the payments I hear about would make us go bankrupt. If we were forced right now to pay anymore a month, <i>we would not eat <b>...period</b></i>.
Secondly, I do at least know that Shannon is getting the money because she has talked with someone in Texas about collecting the back support I owe (from another period I wasnt working but could not pay). These people tried to represent themselves as officers of child support enforcement until I caught that they were in Texas and I am in Tennessee where Sage was born. After the lady who called got a butt-chewing and I threatened to sue, they stopped calling. I was actually already paying on top of what was owed to make up the shortfall and it was deducted from my check! Anyway, sure would be nice if officials listened to us out here struggling. I can't really side with some of the moral issues of the democrats, and I wish someone would tell the Republicans that the reason they call it the "Trickle down therory" is because its a therory. It doesnt really work.
Thanks again. I appreciate the support here and prayers.
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:27 AM August 9th, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
I was really not advocating the goverment collecting at all, but rather the allowance of Fathers or non-custodial spouses to claim the money we pay on our income taxes. The break alone would make me a lot happier knowing I would get some releif at the end of the year if not month to month.
What follows is a harsh reply, and the comments are quite scathing. Please don't get too discouraged. Most everything that you list are issues that I've had to address in my personal life. In other words, been there done that.
Clearly, the real problem is that the Marxist-Feminists have succeeded in getting the government to seize excessive wages. The idea of seizing up to 33% per month for child support originated in the Soviet Union around 1915. It was the direct result of a mandate in the Communist Manifesto to destroy all families and marriages.
Today America has adopted the 33% wage seizure is the general guideline, with variances, for transferring a males wages as a consequence of his penis going into a woman, and the result being a child. This is the actual legal cost of sexual activity with a woman that has a child. You, as a man, intentionally surrender around 33% of your wages for the next 18-22 years to the woman. In other words, you intentionally and contractually surrender your wages to the woman who has a child and claims it is yours. No male can claim ignorance. They all know it, and had better be ready for the consequences.
The other problem is that you ignorantly failed to get a DNA test. What you describe is that you wanted to play the hero to the child. Using that twisted form of logic you cleaned up your act, and used the fact of a child being born as a crutch to get off drugs. Getting off drugs is good. Being a responsible parent is good. Not being married when the child was born is a major screw-up. Not getting a DNA test is irresponsible and outright stupid.
Further, you got attached to a child that you don't even know is yours. You even did a very stupid thing of holding the child out to be your own without a DNA test. You were selfish and thought only of yourself. You didn’t even consider that another man may be the natural father of the child. In so doing, you failed to consider the best interest of the child. All the signs of paternity fraud were there. You ignored them because of your own selfish inflated ego arising because you were playing the hero and you were going to be the child’s father no matter what. You knew the child may not be yours, but you ignored that fact and went ahead anyway.
Then you signed away your life and the life of your current family by permitting the mother to irresponsibly leave for Germany with a child that you are paying for. Now you whine that you want tax credits....AKA a reduction in child support. Dumb.
You made stupid move after stupid move. Now you are paying for it. By your own admission, you used drugs and that no doubt clouded your judgment. Now there are consequences that you will be paying for over 15 years to come. That’s how life works. Why should you be permitted a tax break at my expense because you did drugs, put your penis into a woman and got her pregnant, and you lack skills to support your family.
I suggest that you get your wife to go to school, that you work only minimally so that your wage seizures will not be increased, and that you make your wife the wage earner in the family. That is your only chance to have a responsible family life. You screwed up.
Now if your wife were to divorce you in the future, by becoming the primary care giver, you would be able to get spousal support, seize her social security, and get child support.
That means that you should become the primary care giver in your family. A good article to read on this trend is found in the May 12, 2003 issue of Newsweek. This talks about abandoning old cultural stereotypes and it is called "She Works, He Doesn't."
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:26 PM August 17th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
"Not being married when the child was born is a major screw-up."
Being married would have made the situation much worse. Never get married or live with a women. Marriage does nothing to protect you from losing your kids it justs opens up more avenues for a women to financially abuse you, if she chooses.
You lost your child and that hurts. I don't agree with your tax break idea, I think the person that takes the kids should have to pay support for the child.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
