|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm 49 years now and I've never been married and I never lived together with a woman and I can assure you that living without a nagging golddigger bitch is great. I own a small business and a nice home in a middle class neighbourhood. Every once in a while I fuck a nice hooker, that's cheaper than a golddigging bitch.
So my advice, don't get married and don't live together.
Oh, and in case some feminazis reading this, those who have visited my site know that I'm not the stereotypical ugly, short, fat and bald guy.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 06:24 PM June 2nd, 2006 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, your embittered post suggests that you could well use a good, steady relationship. Women have so far been very helpful in my life.
It's sad to see some here have become the complement of radical feminists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey n.j. moron, it's because pussy woosies like you that feminazism rules the western world. There is only one way to put those bitches back in place, kick their asses and the asses of cowardly manginas like you as well.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 11:01 AM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
LOL!
What Bert said....
only less "embittered" and more righteously angry next time, OK?
That "embittered" remark is the same old same old tired tired tired shame-and-blame feminist emasculation technique.
Easily recognized and now, thanks to MRA voices, even more easily dismissed.
Yes Bert, IN ORDER TO BE A MAN, YOU NEED A WOMAN!
And don't even think about living on your own, independently, comfortably, without a vagina in your life 24 x 7! (You silly, delusional boy!)
BTW.... I thought it was "wussie poopies" coined by the famous Thundercloud; but I can go with "pussy woosies."
Or even pus-e-who-pees.... they're the worst breed of elected manginas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roy wrote: I thought it was "wussie poopies" coined by the famous Thundercloud; but I can go with "pussy woosies."
Dammit, I'm always confused with these two, whether it's "pussy woosies" or it's "wussie poopies". I would say let Thundercloud be the judge which one is right.
pussy woosies...wussie poopies...dammit.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 02:05 PM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
I knew perfectly well you would throw some stupid insults in my face, that's how predictable you are.
You know what? Feminism needs people like you, who validate their stereotype of the impudent, nasty male who hates women.
When Germany's leading feminist magazine Emma started decades ago, editors who had a relationship with a man were told exactly the same thing (women don't ever need men) and taunted at work ("leaving the office so early? Do you need to get back to your walking dick at home?").
I maintain my opinion because the parallels are so clear you have to be much more blind than a moron to manage not to see them. You are the *exact* counterpart not of feminists, but of the most radical feminists. And I highly doubt that copying their behaviour will lead men anywhere.
And BTW, if you don't see any value in having someone around, whether it be a woman or a man, who really goes through thick and thin with you (not even to talk about love), you're living in a different reality than most humans. Fact is, a good partnership helps you in many ways, or evolution would made have a very stupid mistake.
And it might protect you from losing touch with reality and becoming someone who's bitter enough to immediately attack others who fight for the same cause but they don't share one's radical views.
People like you are responsible for the fact that MRAs are mostly seen as queer folk. Your kind of character does not know gender, it is common in fringe groups.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 10:15 PM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
(NJ) -- "People like you are responsible for the fact that MRAs are mostly seen as queer folk. Your kind of character does not know gender, it is common in fringe groups."
I am appealing to my bruthas here to respect this voice.
It is an honest expression that we need to listen to and it's obviously a person who can write well.
So, N.J. (woman or man or trans....) ---
What is your prescription to end the gender wars?
And please list all the other facets of reality that you "know perfectly well..."
This is an invitation to tell your tale, speak your philosophy, and propose your strategy to eliminate "the impudent, nasty male who hates women."
Come on girl! Give it up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 12:43 AM June 5th, 2006 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
Give up what? Feeding the trolls? ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 02:00 PM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, your embittered post suggests that you could well use a good, steady relationship. Women have so far been very helpful in my life.
It's sad to see some here have become the complement of radical feminists.
Women have been a very positive force in my life too, n.j., but it doesn't change the fact that they have a number of high-powered "guns" pointed at my head at all times whether they know it or not, and it's perfectly reasonable to expect many men to reject living "under the gun" to marry or cohabitate with a woman. The fact that we now have to assess how likely a woman is to pull one of the myriad triggers available to her is a sad fact of living in the era of radical, patricidal feminism, not a male "equivalent" of feminism. We're entitled to assess risks and defend ourselves from harm.
I live under the constant threat of a judicial system that rewards false accusations, of "shout at your spouse, lose your house" laws. What exactly is the equivalent that "radical feminists" have to deal with? There is no equivalence between men who choose NOT to live under the feminist gun (although we already do, just for having testicles), and a radical feminist who seeks with everything in her or his being to destroy, marginalize and objectify men.
Personally, my regret here is only that Bert is as angry as he is about this (with good cause): I'm concerned that feminism is causing him to suffer even though he's avoiding the worst of its threats and hazards by choosing not to live with a woman. I see no parallel whatsover between his admittedly strong stance against feminism and the misandry, bias and objectification practiced by radical feminists. I also assume that his "ass kicking" is a metaphor for a non-violent struggle against feminism, unless he's actually defending himself from violence at the time. Am I right, Bert?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RandomMan wrote: "I also assume that his "ass kicking" is a metaphor for a non-violent struggle against feminism, unless he's actually defending himself from violence at the time. Am I right, Bert?"
You're absolutely right RandomMan, except for the part where you say that I'm suffering, believe me, I don't suffer not even a minute,on the contrary, I have a great time every single minute of my life.
You are the second person who understands what I'm saying but I think it's too complicated for a German fruitcake to understand. In one thing the mangina loony is right, I'm one hell of a misogynist but the good news is, no bitch is taking away half of my income and my property, I don't pay alimony, I don't pay for some kids who probably are not mine, there is no bitch in MY house nagging about my farting and nosepicking.. You see, being a misogynist has a lot of benefits, but again, that's too much for a German fag to understand.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 03:18 PM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
RandomMan:
You don't need to have to deal with something to become radical, other than yourself.
Of course, the injustice of the judical system (which is much less pronounced than in the US here, BTW) is very clear and very bad.
But when radical feminists started, they did have to deal with a system that was stacked against them much like it is against men now. That shouldn't be forgotten.
Also, I explained in the other reply here why I do see clear parallels.
BTW, I don't know if you have the saying "with such friends, you don't need enemies" in English, but I guess it applies here if I read that nonsense from Bert who calls me a fag, pussy and whatever.
One question Bert, do you realize this is exactly what helps to depict men in the way feminists do?
Stupid pussy, you want to live with a woman?
Stupid pussy, you've been abused? Deal with it like a man.
Stupid pussy, you don't want to go to war? Fag!
And so on.. and you call *that* activism *for* men? You've got some nerve there. I thought we were trying to tell people that males are not thugs who beat the crap out of each other and any woman nearby, but thinking humans with a
personality.
Greetings from the German fruitcake, dämlicher Kaaskopp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 03:27 PM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, before I forget: the vast majority of women actually does not abuse the judical system, just like the vast majority of men did make the lives of their wifes miserable though they clearly could.
Also, knowing about today's inequality helps a lot with avoiding bad consequences. Just keep an open eye on who are you dealing with. There are actually women who support what we do. I know some of them. It all depends on if you shout "oppressor!!" in their faces or try to think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 03:28 PM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Darn, of course that first line should read, "did NOT make the lives..".
Posts should really be editable..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need 3 posts to make your point? Holy shit, calling you a fruitcake is an understatement, you are a complete freakshow.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by TomP on 11:21 PM June 3rd, 2006 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
Bert -
I agree with nj that there are women (quite a large number of them) that are supportive of men's issues and are all-around decent people. There are a lot of women who fall to the feminist tempations to be misanderous slugs, too.
If your way of dealing with women works for you, I am all for it, Bert. If nj's way of dealing with women works for him, I'm all for that too. In the Gender Wars, the only believers in a One, True and Only way should be the Feminists who helped us into this mess. They're the True Believers who want to shape the world to match their prejudices. The rest of us don't have to follow them down that road.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TomP,
If you want to agree with a pussy whipped wimp, that's fine with me. If you want to believe that there are bitches in this world who support men's right's, I'd say keep dreaming boy. But don't you fucking call yourself an MRA. You, the German fruitcake and a few others here (who, surprise, also are members of the board of that cuntlicking fag Dr. Evil) are nothing but a bunch of cowards, you assholes don't have the balls to beat the living shit out of those feminazi bitches and that's why they can do what ever they want to you.
You wimps have no fucking right to complain about feminazism because fags like you made it possible for feminazism to destroy western cultures. I'd say take it like a man what they do to you, but you morons are no men, that's the problem.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 01:11 PM June 4th, 2006 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
NJ wrote -- "Oh, before I forget: the vast majority of women actually does not abuse the judical system, just like the vast majority of men did make the lives of their wifes miserable though they clearly could."
Also, knowing about today's inequality helps a lot with avoiding bad consequences. Just keep an open eye on who are you dealing with. There are actually women who support what we do. I know some of them. It all depends on if you shout "oppressor!!" in their faces or try to think."
This poster is so obviously a female.
Re-read her language.
"There are actually women who support what we do."
Yes dear, we are!
Funny!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by TomP on 02:09 PM June 4th, 2006 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
Bert -
Sorry for you. I had hoped that MRAs would be able to avoid the fanaticism that produced the likes of Dworkin & McKinnon. Guess not. That's unfortunate, and will make it that much harder for men to regain their rights before the law and impose sensible laws, as opposed to the crap legislators are spewing at the moment.
I can live without the label "MRA", since you seem to be claiming to be the only arbiter of who should be allowed the designation. But I will continue to work for mens rights and fathers rights. Guess you're stuck with that, unless you can do a FeminNazi manuver and try to get control of what people are allowed to do, think and believe.
Be careful, Bert. I'd sure hate to see "MRA" become the mirror image of "Feminist". It should mean something a lot more than that.
TomP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 11:38 PM June 4th, 2006 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm obviously not female, do you want to talk to me on Skype? ;)
Yes, I know women who are supportive, but this is certain: if the first thing they read about men's activism was from people like you, they'd surely have a different opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by HombreVIII on 10:09 AM June 4th, 2006 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, before I forget: the vast majority of women actually does not abuse the judical system
Sure they do. You ever known a woman to refund even a dime of "child support"? Where is this vast majority of women who don't take advantage of divorce laws given the opportunity? How many women do you think dutifully and strictly conform to the "visitation" rights of fathers even when they're mad at them and on holidays? About 30% of rape cases are demonstrably false. Not just "unprovable", but demonstrably false.
If we expand our examination to include more than just the judicial aspects of the system, but the whole government and social system as well, women fair no better. The vast majority of women love female favoring sexism. Hang a figurative "women only" sign on any product and women flock to it like mad. Companies have found out they make far more money by excluding and denigrating men than they would by selling to them. Curves already makes more in revenues just from selling to women who want that "women only" sign than every other fitness club in spite of not having any men as members. Women in general fully support "women only" signs on any program that purports to help people as well, both in government, (eg VAWA, special programs for women owned businesses), and the private sector (the Dove foundation's efforts to help the self esteem of all girls). It's the new segregation. Whereas in the old version you had one item for group A and a seperate but equal, (of course, not really equal), item for group B, now you have one item exclusively for group A and another for both groups, or just one for group A and that's it. We see it again and again everywhere throughout our culture. Everything from business awards to clothing to online gamer's forums, it's hard to find anything which has been in existance for more than 5 years that people could organize around that fails to fit this pattern.
Any attempts by any men to break out of this pattern are met with strong hostility by a vast majority of women. Try going to a "Women's Expo" sometime. I did it once, and trust me the hundreds of women I walked past glared and let me know I was not welcomed there. I wasn't even campaiging for men's rights at the time, just walking around and seeing what was there. A cliched response to men who try to get out of our roles is to attack their sexuality. Sometimes overtly by calling them gay or metrosexual, (does anyone actually have sex with busses?), or subtley by choosing pink as the color of ribbons used to show support for the fight on breast cancer, (a means of shaming those men who had the audacity to get breast cancer themselves away from trying to get medical help that was intended for women).
You might find the views I'm expressing here to be sexist, but think about this. How would men fair under this system if for our entire lives we were raised with only the accountability required of women, (as in, you can do pretty much anything without consequence but if you kill your kids you might go to a mental hospital for a few months)? If we were taught from the time we were young that we deserve a gentlewoman who knows how to treat a lord? Saw every criticism of any individual man no matter how warranted loudly condemned as misandry and evil which attacks all of us? Told over and over again that women had oppressed us and taught not to empathize with them? I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. If you agree that as a gender, the vast majority of us would not treat women fairly were we raised in that environment, then continuing tou claim that the vast majority of women, (who are raised in that environment), don't take advantage of or support anti-male sexism is being sexist yourself, not to mention ignoring reality.
There are actually women who support what we do.
Yes there are, and they tend to be perfectly willing to admit that the vast majority of women take advantage of sexism.
I know some of them.
I know some too. I also know some who give lip service to the cause, while taking full advantage of sexism.
It all depends on if you shout "oppressor!!" in their faces or try to think.
Nonsense. Whether they choose to support or oppose sexism is their own decision, their own responsibility, and what they should either be held accountable or given credit for. It is not the fault of some guy who may have shouted oppressor one time in their face. Any woman who uses this as an excuse to justify being an anti-male bigot would be an anti-male bigot anyway. Yelling "oppressor" in someone's face can be a useful tactic. If enough people do it, the person is likely to change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by HombreVIII on 10:13 AM June 4th, 2006 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
"Oh, before I forget: the vast majority of women actually does not abuse the judical system"
Sure they do. You ever known a woman to refund even a dime of "child support"? Where is this vast majority of women who don't take advantage of divorce laws given the opportunity? How many women do you think dutifully and strictly conform to the "visitation" rights of fathers even when they're mad at them and on holidays? About 30% of rape cases are demonstrably false. Not just "unprovable", but demonstrably false.
If we expand our examination to include more than just the judicial aspects of the system, but the whole government and social system as well, women fair no better. The vast majority of women love female favoring sexism. Hang a figurative "women only" sign on any product and women flock to it like mad. Companies have found out they make far more money by excluding and denigrating men than they would by selling to them. Curves already makes more in revenues just from selling to women who want that "women only" sign than every other fitness club in spite of not having any men as members. Women in general fully support "women only" signs on any program that purports to help people as well, both in government, (eg VAWA, special programs for women owned businesses), and the private sector (the Dove foundation's efforts to help the self esteem of all girls). It's the new segregation. Whereas in the old version you had one item for group A and a seperate but equal, (of course, not really equal), item for group B, now you have one item exclusively for group A and another for both groups, or just one for group A and that's it. We see it again and again everywhere throughout our culture. Everything from business awards to clothing to online gamer's forums, it's hard to find anything which has been in existance for more than 5 years that people could organize around that fails to fit this pattern.
Any attempts by any men to break out of this pattern are met with strong hostility by a vast majority of women. Try going to a "Women's Expo" sometime. I did it once, and trust me the hundreds of women I walked past glared and let me know I was not welcomed there. I wasn't even campaiging for men's rights at the time, just walking around and seeing what was there. A cliched response to men who try to get out of our roles is to attack their sexuality. Sometimes overtly by calling them gay or metrosexual, (does anyone actually have sex with busses?), or subtley by choosing pink as the color of ribbons used to show support for the fight on breast cancer, (a means of shaming those men who had the audacity to get breast cancer themselves away from trying to get medical help that was intended for women).
You might find the views I'm expressing here to be sexist, but think about this. How would men fair under this system if for our entire lives we were raised with only the accountability required of women, (as in, you can do pretty much anything without consequence but if you kill your kids you might go to a mental hospital for a few months)? If we were taught from the time we were young that we deserve a gentlewoman who knows how to treat a lord? Saw every criticism of any individual man no matter how warranted loudly condemned as misandry and evil which attacks all of us? Told over and over again that women had oppressed us and taught not to empathize with them? I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. If you agree that as a gender, the vast majority of us would not treat women fairly were we raised in that environment, then continuing tou claim that the vast majority of women, (who are raised in that environment), don't take advantage of or support anti-male sexism is being sexist yourself, not to mention ignoring reality.
"There are actually women who support what we do."
Yes there are, and they tend to be perfectly willing to admit that the vast majority of women take advantage of sexism.
"I know some of them."
I know some too. I also know some who give lip service to the cause, while taking full advantage of sexism.
"It all depends on if you shout "oppressor!!" in their faces or try to think."
Nonsense. Whether they choose to support or oppose sexism is their own decision, their own responsibility, and what they should either be held accountable or given credit for. It is not the fault of some guy who may have shouted oppressor one time in their face. Any woman who uses this as an excuse to justify being an anti-male bigot would be an anti-male bigot anyway. Yelling "oppressor" in someone's face can be a useful tactic. If enough people do it, the person is likely to change.
***Sorry for the double post, The quotes weren't clear in the last one***
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 12:37 AM June 5th, 2006 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
Sure they do. You ever known a woman to refund even a dime of "child support"?
I know one that doesn't take any though she could get it. I know another one who never got a cent because the (unwed) father left her and founded a new family with several children. I don't know any woman who gave the father problems about visitation rights, but I do know the situation is bad.
By the way, why should someone who raises a child pay back child support? Children cost money, it's only fair if both parents contribute.
What's unfair is the ridiculously high sums that are really "ex-wife support". Fortunately, we have quite a bit more fair laws here than in the US; additionally, new regulations have been put into place that further reduce this "wife support" and also put her behind the new family of the supporter.
I would have to investigate to see how fair the rules are now, but I have heard from German MRAs they were a big step forward.
Personally I think ex-partners without children should not get anything, and now check this out, this was basically what it was like in communist East Germany! I know it still is that way in Russia.
Whereas in the old version you had one item for group A and a seperate but equal, (of course, not really equal), item for group B, now you have one item exclusively for group A and another for both groups, or just one for group A and that's it.
That's very true. Some weeks ago, I sent the owner of one of these women's only fitness centers, who had publically complained about male TV/radio fees inspectors invading her business, a photo, telling her that this is what I compare the background of her establishment to. It was a photo of a sign in apartheid South Africa that said the beach was reserved for white people ;-).
I'm usually trying to have a moderate stance but that crap does it every time... btw I didn't get a reply, but I know the picture was accessed *g*.
Anyway, I investigated this a bit and there is apparently not enough demand among men for men's establishments or men's days in the sauna and swimming pools. Not surprising, given the facts that 1. men don't want to be "hiding from women", and 2. when somebody taunts you in a gym or swimming pool for being fat or whatever, it's usually other men so the benefit isn't that high.
About how we are raised.. I certainly wasn't raised in an environment that gave me the feeling I was an oppressor, and the girls at my schools were not taught anti-male behaviour either. We were all very indifferent on gender issues and my (conservative) "high school" (year 5-13) hardly touched the subject.
Though, frankly said, I'm not sure I want to know what is being taught on schools today. But so far, the only change in youth I have observed is that often males walk on my nerves by talking bs in the subway that is so low, offensive and plain stupid, it almost physically hurts me. I'm sure this is not the old "oh what has become of the youth" lament.. this is something else. I'm convinced it's real this time. What's worst, these men are nourishing feminist stereotypes.
Yes there are, and they tend to be perfectly willing to admit that the vast majority of women take advantage of sexism.
I don't think vast majority actively takes advantage, but they are also not opposing or criticizing it. This, though, is a general, very well known human problem and not specific to women.
What these women do say is that they have had fierce opposition from feminists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There must be a better word than embittered. Bert dislikes women, evidently. But without further evidence, the suggestion of disillusionment, severe grief or disappointment seems mistaken. It's not obvious where this apparent animus towards women comes from.
One thing, however: I would NEVER put pictures of naked women, demeaning or otherwise, on my website, especially if I were to insist that I could live without them in such vehement terms. I find it most curious that a person who proclaims his lack of respect for and absolute independence from women would have ANY pictures of them on his site at all, instead of cultivating other interests having nothing to do with them, since having nothing to do with them is the impression he wishes to convey. So rather than use the term embittered, I would say deeply ambivalent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mr. chicken on 02:13 PM June 4th, 2006 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
Bert, I think you need to calm down and look back at what you have said. Not just a little, either.
First off: the word "fag" or "faggot" is used to describe a gay man. Do you know why, Bert? Fagot, also spelled faggot, describes a bundle of sticks to be burned.
Now, let's make the connection: Gays were burned at the stake for their sin, earning the name faggot.
Do you see why it is that this word is so disgusting? Do you see why you look like a dumbass for using it? This word you use is usually heard from high school and secondary school children, not from a 49 year old adult. That's pathetic.
Next is your attitude towards women in general: don't you realize that you are no better than those who have oppressed and slandered you for your gender by acting the same way on the other end of the scale?
Now, what about your bias against Germans? Can you give ONE reason why you dislike them that can not be refuted? I am part German myself, so bring it on. Why is it that you use German nationality as an insult if Germany is known around the world for excellent engineering? Why use it as an insult if your nationality only determines where you live, your ancestors, or where you used to live? I can't think of one reason.
You make us all look bad by posting your trash here. I have been reading this page for three or four years and I remember you being a good poster at first, but I don't know what's eating you now. Seriously: did something happen to make you so cynical?
I don't like seeing one of my favorite webpages fouled with the attitude you possess and the words you write. I also don't like seeing people being called names for expressing their perfectly reasonable opinion.
Go ahead and insult me all you like. I don't care. I have seen what you do to people who disagree, and I expect no less to happen to me.
Now, about the topic that is supposed to be discussed: what is the UK thinking? What if I have a female roommate who becomes attached to me, and then decides to "divorce" me? Given the UK's legal system from my perception, I would hardly have a say in this situation.
I doubt I am ever going to live in the UK. I'm not sure I would even want to visit. The place is so hostile. It's out of control.
This is one helluva first post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, what can I say mr. chicken, not much I guess, except that at least you got your name right.
Holy crap, mr. chicken, fags like you make me pee my pants from laughing. I bet the feminazis love you.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mr. chicken on 02:47 PM June 4th, 2006 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
No, the "mr. chicken" title was a random thing I made up as a teen, a login I made those 3-4 years ago.
You calling me names further shows your ignorance. You are part of the problem.
Please, don't feed the Troll.
Where's an administrator when you need one? I thought that verbal abuse wasn't allowed.
Your post sounds like you didn't even read what I had to say.
Go ahead and call me a fag again, you lose even more face in everyone else's mind around here.
Oh, hold it:Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
I guess I'll just change my threshold and muzzle you. You don't have anything to say that is worth hearing. You have nothing to contribute. You haven't made one point against me (calling names doesn't count).
You are worthless to this discussion.
Seriously, try debating. If you disagree with me, why don't you show me why you think I'm wrong?
Oh, by the way, not being a sexist doesn't make someone a feminist sympathizer or gay. It means they are unbiased. Chivalry, self defense against women being taboo, feminism, it all screwed up my childhood a little. A girl a few years older than me kicked me in the chest in 4th grade. When I wanted to defend myself, but realized that I couldn't, it would be wrong, was when I realized that things have gotten out of hand. I realized then that the world was biased against me just because of my gender.
I am done replying to your posts until you actually bring up a valid point. 49 years old, and still a child's mentality. What a loss...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 12:52 AM June 5th, 2006 EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
What if I have a female roommate who becomes attached to me, and then decides to "divorce" me?
That's what I was thinking too. There are many flat-sharing communities where I live, how do they distinguish these from actual relationships, especially if somebody decides to lie?
If people don't marry, they do it for a reason. What they're trying to do there in the UK is completely absurd. I'm sure you already have to pay child support for a child born out of wedlock in the UK, so what is this about anyway, other than installing "wife support" without marriage?
Unbeliavable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Divorce courts in the U.K. have already ben ruling that one spouse may collect a percentage of the other spouse's lifetime income, if it increased during even a brief childless marriage. As fewer people are getting married, it seems the divorce industry will attempt to justify gouging non-married couples. I suspect that palimony will become more prevalent here, in the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mr. chicken on 04:33 PM June 6th, 2006 EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
Does the percentage continue to be collected into the man's retirement? That would be even worse.
If this comes to the US, I am leaving for Canada.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Anonymous User writes "More British divorce silliness. As many of us suspected, they're now trying to