napnip writes "LINK HERE.

I can't wait to see the feminist spin that'll be put on this. Somehow it won't be the girl's fault. She's the real victim, right?"

This one is even more important. Get writing or Ms. Boxer and Ms. Feinstein will get this legislation passed.

LINK Here.

Here is what I wrote:

Regarding SB127/HB262:

I am totally opposed to the idea of allowing the IRS to double tax non-custodial parents who get behind in their child support payments:

1) The money was not "earned" and therefore cannot be taxed; how can the government "create" earnings where there are none?

2) Most non-custodial parents are already giving more than half of their income to the custodial parent (in real dollars meaning before taxes are taken out);

3) Non-custodial parents are already being penalized by not being allowed to see their children or participate in the parenting of their children;

4) These bills fly in the face of the President's Fatherhood Initiative by making it even MORE difficult for fathers (75% of the time the non-custodial parent) to stay close to and involved with raising their children;

5) This proposed legislation is another "bright" idea of the feminist movement -- NOW -- the most destructive organization on the face of the earth when it comes to personal liberties and keeping families in tact; they won't be happy until they have half the population in jail;

6) Feminism has taken a bad turn (gone sour) and most of us (the original feminists of the sixties and seventies) disown the radicals we see these days -- these women don't want equality -- they want dominance;

7) Any legislator that votes for these absurd bills will be written off as viable candidates in the future by those of us who are watching; our numbers are legion; we are in contact across the nation;

9) The women's movement (as it was intended)is over; women like myself are alligning ourselves with our husbands, fathers, sons, brothers and male friends because we have sympathy for their plight;

10)If you don't believe that the public is sick of the feminists, take a look at New Hampshire, where the three most powerful women in the state were all defeated last election -- Governor Shaheen being one of them.

I'm a woman, a career woman, a mother, a grandmother, one of the first women to break through the ranks in the automotive industry back in the sixties. I called myself a feminist then -- but shun the title now. It's embarrassing. When I saw Ms. Shaheen (as she is now called) aligning herself with the feminists, I did everything in my power to get the word out and help defeat her in the last election.

While they disgust me, I can at least understand why women might be angry and vindictive toward men -- enough so to try to get this legislation passed.

What I don't understand is why men are turning on men.

In this essay, Dr. Stephen Baskerville briefly describes the war against fathers being waged by governments that increasingly encroach on our private lives. It's a good essay, with a lot of facts, but I have to say: I'm afraid he falls apart at the end. He recommends that fathers restore fatherhood with nonpolitical politics and a non-ideology "by re-creating the ordinary business of ‘civil society’ and private life," but he gives no details on how this might be done. With so much machinery stacked against fathers and husbands, their protests may have a mitigating effect, but they won't turn things around.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Young men can protect themselves by refusing to marry and by doing whatever they can (within reason) to avoid becoming fathers. Save your money. If things turn around by the time you're 55-years-old or so, you still want children, and you have a decent home and income, there will be plenty of women of child-bearing age in the US and elsewhere, who will be happy to marry you.

Good luck, gentlemen. The government is at war against you.

Here are a few humorous tidbits that relate, somewhat, to men's issues. Take a look at STATshot for "Why did we propose?" and "Father's Day Gift Way Shittier Than Mother's Day Gift" on the same page. I also enjoyed Hillary's Bestseller and the essay "You are a beautiful woman..." by a properly deconstructed, post-modern man.

If you can laugh, while the world around you is engaged in a gender war, ___ (I'll let you fill in the blank.)

Chas writes "Following yesterday's article about Australian plans to consider equal custody of children, predictable responses are now reported from women's organisations. American readers might like to respond online to these statements in the news report, and to set the record straight: "Sole Parents Union president Kathleen Swinbourne said overseas evidence showed the move was terrible for children, treating them like equally divisible pieces of property. "The research from America shows that it rarely works and kids are the ones that lose," she said.
Another comment: "Elspeth McInnes, convener of the National Council of Single Mothers and their Children, said California had been forced to amend its shared custody laws to prioritise child safety after "horrendous" problems with violence." Read the article here.

In this essay, which first appeared in the Daily Mail, Melanie Phillips lays into Britain's Home Office for selling out to feminists in their war against men. I think there are a few weaknesses in her logic, but on the whole it's a great essay. And I'm glad she's holding feminists accountable and not just blaming women and letting men off the hook.

The Million Dad March on DC was a success. It felt good to be standing in front of the Capitol on Father's Day and make a public statement about Men, Fathers, and Father's Rights. The highlight of the day was Dr. Stephen Baskerville's address which you can now see on the web at http://www.standyourground.com/sb2.php. Just click the link and it will take you to a page that has some pictures and a link to open a windows media file of his brief and powerful talk.

Bigg John writes "The Article here tells of how the Michigan Child Support System is being considered for an overhaul, basing support on the amount of parenting time granted to the non-custodial parent.

And here is a story on how a Father is asking to have the rules clarified, since they are so confusing."

The Gonzo Kid writes "At this link , it appears that Australia has a proposal to make shared custody the default in divorce cases. Predictably, we have the femboy naysayers like Patrick Parkinson, a family law professor at the University of Sydney, who says, "It only really works when the parents can get along with each other." Hey, Pat! Ever consider that in that case the parent who refuses to get along - FOR THE SAKE OF THE CHILD - shouldn't get custody? Oh, but that would usually be the woman, wouldn't it? And that would go against your collosal suck-up to the Pheminists, wouldn't it?"

Miletus Prime writes "Here is a site listing studies done by competent people and institutions on Domestic Violence. Notice the breakdown is essentially 50/50. Maybe the news media's requirement to report statistics is that they must be from incompetent people and institutions? http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm"

Luek writes "

Seems there was a little 'dustup' in family court in England this past week. Over 500 demonstrators for justice protested the way the family court system over there, seems they are just as corrupt as ours, treat men in divorce and child custody.

I think we can learn from the FATHERS 4 JUSTICE that staged this demostration for human rights.

Also, their leader, Matt O'Connor will be interviewed by Glenn Sacks this Sunday night on HIS SIDE radio. Don't miss it."

Trudy W Schuett writes "Yes, I've done the deal and made myself a blog. Check it out at
http://dljblog.homestead.com/index.html

This should be easier for me and more widely-read than ever!

Yes, I'll still be publishing commentary and etecteras, as before. They'll be more immediate, since I'll be able to get things onto the website and announced in the blog whenever they show up rather than working by a strict deadline.

Today the big news is the Heritage Foundation report on feminism and marriage --check the blog for where to find it!"

abourret writes "Hi everyone,
I don't really know where to post this...but,
I'm new to this site but not new to the ideas. Everything that is on here I have thought about at one time or another and I cannot help but to be filled with rage by the injustices men are faced with today. Everytime I hear one of my female friends brag that she has been pulled over 15 times for speeding and never gotten more then a verbal warning, everytime I hear just one more dictating, power-hungry feminist speak about the gender gaps, everytime I hear another court decision unfairly ruled in favor of a woman, I become angry and inspired to make change all in an instant. I look forward to being apart of this movement."

For years we've heard gleeful titters from feminists about how defects in the Y chromosome can't be repaired. Every other chromosome is paired and can take information from its partner to correct faults. The Y chromosome, having no match, has been cast as inferior, unable to correct its damaged genes. It has even been stated that the chromosome and, therefore, men would disappear in about a million years.

Well knock me over with a feather. Guess what? That clever bit of genetic information that makes a man a man seems to have a way of solving the dilemma. It just works things out on its own! Problem solving on one's own can be difficult, of course, and in this case causes trouble in one out of every several thousand boys, but "'Y chromosomes really have a big trick up their sleeves,' said David Page of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass."

Take a look and have yourselves a good laugh of satisfaction. The Y chromosome is not the decaying piece of trash that feminists would have us believe. It just solves problems in its own way.

Chas writes "Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, is favourably considering proposals for changing child custody laws in favour of equal parenting provisions. Much of the impetus for change has come from within his own coalition government. "The Australian" newspaper reports that "Mr Howard told Coalition MPs yesterday he was "interested in the broad concept" of rebuttable joint custody – where the court presumes a child should spend equal time living with each parent unless there are strong reasons against it.

His spokeswoman said later that the Prime Minister was "mindful of the need for male role-models for children, and the desire for both parents to have continuing responsibility for their upbringing"." Read the full report here http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_ page/0,5744,6615066%255E2702,00.html and note there is an online feedback link to the newspaper.

Watch this space!"