This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - JackBauersPowerHour
Want to know the field of medicine that has the hardest time attracting the best and the brightest?
By far, they take one the most lawsuits and have the most grief of any field of medicine. Why? Because if Mom was smoking for 9 months and Jr comes out all screwed up, do you think she is going to blame herself? If Dad was beating up Mom while she was pregnant and Jr comes out all screwed up, do you think he is going to blame himself?
I'm a little leery of anything the media has to say about "what's wrong with kids"
Yes, I believe fatherless homes thanks to the ease of divorce/$$ benefit to the woman for divorce has driven alot of positive male influence out of alot of homes.
But we all have to face facts -
Not all kid are good kids, many are wonderful lovely bright children and some are just budding scumbags.
There I said it. Some kids are just not good kids. You could give them the best controlled upbringing. You could expose them to the worst in humanity, and there is almost no rhyme or reason for anything that determines whether you will have a good kid or bad kid or not.
Some great kids come from shitty parents. Yes, its a harder road but some make it. Some get worse under those conditions.
Some shit kids come from great parents. Some have the easiest road in life and still fuck it al up. Some can't hold the Mendoza line, even under the best conditions.
It's a crap shoot. From all the kids I've seen from my friends, it's just a roll of the dice. Sometimes you get a great kid, sometimes you don't.
I think as adults, we idealize children and childhood because it represents an easier calmer time for us. When things were simple. When our futures were brighter. Before we had made bad mistakes or poor choices.
Are women more aggressive? Probably. Are people more aggressive? Definitely. It's a hard luck life out there for most of us. You fight to survive. When I was a kid, if you had a problem on the schoolyard, you fought, and it was over, that was that. Now kids blow each other away. Now schools are so terrified of being sued for anything that they won't actually teach children anything useful or show any kind of authority to them. Instead of popping a kid across the face for doing something stupid, we shove pills down their throat for HDAD (As if kids weren't restless period...) since it's easier to blame a "condition" than for parents and teachers to face themselves.
I have a great deal of fondness for SOME children. I also know SOME of them are future scumbags and there's nothing we can do about it.
If feminism has brought anything negative to American society, it's the idea that "blame" splattered all over the room will remove the simple idea that "Shit Happens" Sometimes shit happens. But Americans can't handle that anymore, they need a scapegoat, a person to blame, a condition to point their chubby fingers at.
I like children. I think kids are great. But I'll be the first to say they are far far too overrated in our society. Sometimes a kid is a bad kid because the kid has no good in themselves whatsoever.
Women will always benefit from a double standard. They will demand "equal rights" but still want roses on Valentines Day.
Men will always be expected to suck it up and not complain about anything, regarding women or anything else for that matter.
This is how the world works, it will stay that way, it will happen that way long after we are all dead.
The answer is simple.
Don't get married. Don't have children. Don't buy candy on Valentines Day. Don't spend your money in places owned and run by women. If you own a small business, don't hire women. If you see a woman on the side of the road with a broken down car, don't help her.
No vote is louder than voting with your feet and with your wallet. How do you think the feminists angled so much for themselves? They leveraged the fact that they could make votes disappear and make consumers disappear.
If you live a good life and just avoid women where you can, then you are doing your part to "send a message" The Great Wall Of China was built ONE BRICK AT A TIME. You win the fight by making informed decisions, one choice at a time.
If all the men in America said 'Fuck getting married, this is some backwards ass bullshit', then I assure, the sound of silence along those church aisles says more than 1 million signs or protests. The divorce industry, geared for profit, can't do anything to you if you don't get married. Single mothers can't trap you with child support for kids that aren't yours if you don't date them.
The overriding theme of feminism is "We Don't Need Men" Fine, I say give it to them. Give them what they want. Then the energy we save from the mindless dating ritual can be used to be Big Brothers or joining a mentoring program for young kids or coaching sports or finding ways to help kids in cancer wards or working in soup kitchens. That's how you win. You vote with your feet and wallet and you show the world that you will live a good life despite what anyone else says or does. And when some raging out of control aging feminist is alone and bitter and has no one since her ideology says she's "strong and independent", the rest of us are just living good lives. And that's how you win. You win one person at at time. You win for every person you help to be a better person despite what society does to the contrary. Think about it, there is a whole generation of young men/young boys out there who didn't have their fathers. Divorce, death, circumstances, a difficult time in the world - and they need our guidance and our support to be better men. We aren't just beholden to live good lives ourselves, we are beholden to improve the lives of young men out there who will carry on a better legacy for us.
Lots of women want to fight the fights they think they can win for no reason at all, men have to be smarter and fight the fights that need fighting.
Let the feminists live with their hate. Let them drown in it. What can we do to them that they aren't already doing to themselves?
I think MRA's in general have poor tactics. Conventional approaches will not make more people aware of the issues at hand. Signs, pickets, letters to congressmen - none of that works. I wish it did, but it's a slow burn and frankly we are all getting older by the day here.
If MRAs want to make a real impact. Make a movie. Not a documentary, but a simple story of a guy or several guys who got hosed. Bring the issue up through the medium of mass entertainment, it will get people talking. People see signs, but they don't see the context. A feature film would do that.
Think about it this way, how many doctors do you know out there getting laid like crazy? Not many in my eyes. Why? TV has done a good job showing what a crappy bureaucratic tedious relatively low paying job it is. I mean nearly 15 years of ER plus Scrubs plus Greys Anatomy plus whatever else shows what shit the life of a doctor can be. There are too many lawyers now. Why? Law school admissions took a massive spike up once LA Law was on the air. Then David E Kelley hammered everyone over and over with Picket Fences, The Practice, Ally McBeal and Boston Legal.
I don't know if MRAs are playing "victims" but there is a dangerous slippery slope where guys can just criticize anything and everything women do simply because they are women. I don't agree with that. I think folks have to temper common sense with their passion for real justice.
Whether you like Michael Moore or not, you have to admit, he makes a movie about gun control or lack of it and people talk about it. The guy who chewed on McDonalds for 30 days got people talking about the fast food industry and obesity in America. If a MRA made a good movie about the issue, that would be worth 1 billion signs, 1 billion letters to Congressmen, 1 billion of anything really.
Feminists are whiners. But give them credit, they have the logistics of being whiners into an artform. MRAs need better tactics, need better marketing, need a better approach to this problem.
I have to disagree.
CGM's status as an African American completely drove this case.
If she was Asian, no one would care. Why would they not care? Because Asians don't bitch and whine about their lot in life.
Consider the evidence. Many Asians break out of poverty and welfare within one generation. They come over, the parents are poor,
the kids go to school and get good grades and work hard and get good jobs. They support their siblings to go through school when
they get out of college themselves. It's implied that the younger Asian generation will take care of their parents. I know many many Asian families, the
young men in those families don't care if they live or die, all they care about is paving a future and financial security for their families.
How political a case in America becomes is directly related to how much whining your culture or ethnicity does about how life treats them.
If the Duke Three were Asian, no one would care, not to this degree. In fact, if the Duke Three were Asian, no one would believe CGM. Because
the prevailing stereotype for Asian males is that they are non masculine and non threatening.
Case in point to prove my point, it is just as dangerous for your career to have an African American lie about a racial issue with your job at stake as
it is for a woman to say you grabbed her breasts as a lie. Rape and sexual harassment are what the accuser says they are in this country. The truth doesn't matter unfortunately. Racism is what African Americans decide it's going to be, no matter how ludicrous. Think about it, they forced Ebonics into
the school system. They actually found a way to legitimize the use of improper English. As if Ebonics would ever help anyone get a job in the real world.
Kid yourself not, when people say "Hey just say Hi and Bye to women and keep it about the work only in the workplace", in realistic terms, if you are a white male, that also applies to African Americans.
"Bill, we need to talk about your performance, you come in late all the time, the work isn't getting done, you are getting into arguments with your team"
"Bob, you don't like me because I'm black, you don't know what it's like to be black in America"
"Bill, this is strictly about work and work merit"
"Bob, I'm calling a lawyer, you fucking racist"
Bob's company settles out of court, despite the ridiculous lawsuit that has no merit because it's cheaper to settle than to fight it. And if Bob's company ever
wants a government contract again, they will have to hire X number of minorities ( read it Black, because blacks don't give a shit about Asians or Latinos or gays or any other disenfranchised group) anyway.
If Mike Nifong was black, he might not have done what he did. He'd secure the black vote anyway, because the few blacks that do vote do so for blacks. it's that simple.
Race has everything to do with what happened in Chapel Hill.
Hello, yes I was mistaken about the event.
But my point is the same. This is just as much about CGM being black as it is about her being a woman. Yes, women have alot of slack cut for them compared to males in the legal system. But the being black issue is a whole different animal. No one wants to press charges on CGM because dealing with blacks in American society is a pure lose/lose situation. Not too much different than, say, dealing with many women in the US workplace. If you don't agree with them, you're a racist. Doesn't matter what it's about. If you do agree with them, they'll say you wish you were black deep down inside and ridicule you for "trying to be black"
Jerry Jones, owner of the Dallas Cowboys, interviewed four black candidates for his open head coaching position. That's four times the league requirement, despite the fact that there are only 30 jobs like it in the world and selection will always be inherently unfair, to avoid a 200K fine. So what was the response that he got? He was told by black leaders and activists that the interviews were a sham, that they were window dressing and he didn't interview "quality candidates", this despite the fact that this was widely considered a weak year for coaching candidates period all across the NFL. It's a lose/lose situation. If he doesn't do it, he's a racist and he needs to pay a 200K fine because he didn't want to be forced to interview anyone to work for him. If he does do it, but still doesn't hire an African American anyway, it's just not good enough. Why don't they just shove a gun in his mouth and tell him who to hire? Wouldn't that be simpler?
CGM is a lose/lose situation. Did Sharpton apologize? No. Did Jackson apologize? No. I assure you, if CGM goes to trial, it will be a political firestorm. Sharpton will twist this to say this is another act of persecution for blacks. Feminists will say this is an attack on women. Everyone will mug for the camera. They will incite people. Someone will throw a brick and suddenly people will start smashing windows and starting fires. Look at Katrina. Folks there didn't need much of an excuse to rob, rape, murder and destroy everything in sight when it was clear the authorities lost all control.
CGM isn't getting immunity solely for being a woman. She's getting a pass because she's also black and they are simply not held to the same legal standards in many ways in America. Some say it's worse, some say it's better. Either way, we all lose in the end.
Why do you think the Duke Three aren't pressing the issue? Because for one reason or another, its a lose/lose to go for her scalp.
There is a hierarchy of entitlement in this country. Yes feminism and disparity of how men and women are treated is there. But it's more than that. Isiah Washington, a black actor, said something negative about a homosexual on his show. He ignited a near career killing event. He's black. Not even pulling the race card would have helped him. Whats the message being sent? Blacks get away with alot in the US, but gays can get away with alot more. That's it. I suspect both groups can get away with more than women. And us white guys are at the lowest lowest lowest run on that ladder. If you have a feminist going up against a gay man in a dispute, you'd be surprised that feminism doesn't always win out in a battle of who can whine the most.
If the Duke Three were bisexual (hey there are bisexual rapists out there too) , you'd have a whole different view and spin on how the media and everyone else handled this case. The powerful gay lobby would have come to their defense. This case would have ended much sooner.
Do you think I'm kidding? Ok try it. Next time you go into work and some female decides to lie and say you grabbed her breasts, say you are gay and you didnt' tell anyone because your boss grabbed your crotch one day and you were afraid to say anything ever. Say he told you that you had to be "nice" to him or he'd find a way to fire you. I assure you, thats a far better defense for a BS sexual harassment claim than the simple truth. Thats the sad reality of our world.
Posting the home address was crossing the line.
There are things you don't do. Would any of you here want your home address plastered all over the Net?
Imagine the slippery slope if they let this go. Imagine someone taking Polaroids of your kids. Then imagine someone took that and added a drawing of the route your kid walks home from elementary school in crayon and listing out your childs name, favorite ice cream, home address, date of birth,etc - a complete target package and made sure it was posted where every registered sex offender within a 100 mile radius of your home could see it.
The best revenge is living a good life. If someone was screwed you over in life, eventually karma will catch them. I know it's hard to believe in karma but it works. Why does it work? Because stupid people eventually do themselves in over time. And the people who hurt you are likely to be idiots.
If I'm not going to kill someone over it, I have learned to stop worrying about it, whatever "it" may end up being.
I think folks have to take the long view from the CGM legal situation in terms of her being prosecuted.
I personally wished she was tossed in jail but that's not looking at the complete spectrum of how things are probably going to shake down.
1) Why put her on trial if she's never going to get convicted? I don't care how damning the evidence is, the fact of the matter is she's black, the trial would probably take place somewhere in Durham, which has a decent sized black population and any black member on that jury would probably vote Not Guilty. Fair? Not fair? It's just the way life works. She's also a single mother. Can the prosecution disbar any single mothers from the jury? I doubt it. And single mothers, regardless of race, are probably going to sympathize with her.
2) Look at what happened to OJ. He was shown as Not Guilty by a court in a matter that HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE. It was about infidelity, it was about a broken marriage, it was about rage, it was about fame - but nothing to do with race. And yet many blacks lost their shit and rioted and people got killed and millions in damage occurred. And since it would create a political firestorm for Guardsmen to open fire on a bunch of African Americans, they were allowed to go crazy and destroy everything in site in LA. Think about that. There were lots of store owners down there who were isolated and no cops were coming to help them. There are still videos out there of the Korean store owners, by themselves armed with CAR15s, firing into the crowd to keep them back away from overrunning them and get to their families. You put CGM on trial, and its just another excuse to riot and political correctness means they will be allowed to riot unchecked. I feel sorry for the Duke Three, but face it, CGM going on trial, where she has no chance of seeing jail time ever, will only mean people out there will have to die. It's that simple. Blacks will riot if she's not guilty. They will riot harder if by some miracle she is found guilty. Either way it's millions in property damage and someone gets killed. CGM is not just a "woman", she is a "black woman", that makes a huge difference here.
3) Like it or not, real rape victims, also those who will suffer from this whole incident (there are real rape victims out there, and despite my general views that most women suck, I don't believe anyone should have to endure the indignity of being raped), and some may not come forward if they equate Saying Something = Risking Jail. I know that's illogical. But what's all that logical about the way women think? (no offense to the women in here but it's kind of true...) Yes, false accusations are bad. They are horrible acts against not just men but to our sense of humanity. But having victims of any gender remain silent is also horrible. If CGM goes free, but in exchange that 100 women who were really raped can come forward and find their own measure of justice, then I'm ok with that. No it's not fair. It's not perfect. But sometimes thats all there is.
If there is a lesson for us here, it's that certain factors can work as a force multiplier with women. Dealing with a woman who will lie about what you did is hard enough. Make her black and it's 100 times the complications. Make her a lesbian and it's 100 times the complications. Make her a single mother and it's 100 times the complications. So when guys here talk about avoiding women, well maybe it's helpful to consider the women who it might be better to TRULY DEEPLY COMPLETELY avoid at all costs.
We can't have it all guys. CGM is not going to jail. Wish it was different but the political and logistical realities tell us otherwise. But there is a national case in the public eye now that shows how brutal the legal system can be to men just for being men. That's a win guys. That's national exposure. It's not a complete win, but it's more in terms of making these issues topical to mainstream society than anyone here has seen before. We have to take our pound of flesh here and hope this will spur more discussion in the public eye and make people take some real pause about how men are treated in our society.
Anyone here a lawyer?
What's your view on the legal ramifications of this in terms of civil suits?
1) IIRC, two of the accused were suspended from school. I know universities make each student sign a waiver/contract as part of enrollment, but I wonder if Duke overstepped their bounds from an official standpoint.
2) Some Duke professors apparently went overboard too. I wonder how liable each of them might be depending on what they said and also Duke itself for allowing it to happen.
3) Duke police, I have my doubts they'll come out of this unscathed.
4) Nifong himself.
5) Various news publications and media outlets that might have crossed the line
6) Gail Magnum, who won't come out of this poor, she'll probably get a book deal out of this and whatever amount of cash from the eventual movie plus talk show appearances, etc. I have to imagine she'll get hit some civil suits as well.
I find that most of the time, when asked about certain issues by women, I just don't say anything. I don't think there is a point most of the time. But I do find that when I speak bluntly and honestly about how I see things, in terms of how men and women interact in America, that I get the same standard responses
"What's your problem with women?"
"You must be a woman hater!"
"Did you get get enough hugs as a kid?"
And on and on and on.
And it baffles me. Anytime you point out the problems that men tend to have with women in America, they never attack the points being made, they just attack you.
Alot of this happens when the issue of marriage comes up. People want to know why I'm not married yet. I think part of the reason is the wives of my friends always introduce me as "Hey this is X, he's got his own business you know, he's very stable" It always comes back to the freaking money. I'm tired of being asked what I do and how long I've done it for and what I have. And when I point out I'm not that interested in marriage, lots of women act like there is something wrong with me. "Why doesn't he want to get married?" Oh, I don't know, maybe because I can't have a conversation where money or inferences to money don't dominate every single sentence?
I learned its better to just say nothing. I'm not looking to change hearts and minds out there, I know marriage isn't for me, but I find it amusing that everyone acts like a failure to get married is, in fact, some kind of failure period.
Do I have a problem with women? Here's my answer to that question. I have maybe a handful of guy friends. A select few. I must have crossed paths with thousand and thousand of people in my lifetime. But only a few ended up being friends. On a sheer numbers level, the odds of finding 20 good true blue friends is probably real slim in average lifetime. So what makes me think finding the love of my life, just as pure odds, is going to be any easier? I think the answer is it's not. Odds are I will more likely met the wrong woman than the right woman. So do I have a problem? No, I just don't want to be a sperm donating walking wallet, that's all. I have a problem with being a sucker. I have a problem with people thinking it's ok to treat the entire male population like they are bunch of suckers.
Anyone else just a little damn tired of the shaming tactics out there?
I mean some women might just have a natural tendency to like women, I can see that happening.
But I have to admit, there are some women out there, some not all, who are really unattractive. So unattractive in fact that I think the lack of interest by men makes them think about hitting from the other side of the plate. That makes sense to me because when you are lonely, you are lonely. And being lonely all the time can suck.
I guess for some women, they don't really have much choice. They can be completely ignored by men or they can date other women (probably unattractive ones to be honest)
I do find that some lesbians are very frank and honest about dealing with women. ( I mean if you are talking to a butch side of the lesbian equation, they have to deal with a "female" counterpart as well) I've actually learned quite abit about female tendencies and general scams by talking to some lesbians about it.
Not sure if this applies or not, but I refuse to be alone with a child, particularly a female, while at work or pretty much anywhere.
Sometimes I'll be at a job and a mother or father will ask me if they can run to the store or the post office a minute and can I watch their kids for a second while I'm working.
I won't do it. I won't even give a kid a ride home in my car from like a Little League game unless there is another adult present. I hate to say it, but I'm very careful around children to the point where I almost ignore them completely. If a woman is at home alone when I'm working, I leave every door open, every shade open and keep my distance. You can be friendly while being detached at the same time.
Once you get a false rape or pedophile charge against you, you are guilty until proven innocent. Even if you are innocent, you still get treated like you are guilty. So I decided as a rule, I avoid any kind of situation like that in every case.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who does this. I feel bad for kids actually, adults are probably very cautious around them now and it means less disciplined kids and more good adults not around to give kids guidance.
Actually the solution is to have legislators, politicians and the social elite have to go through the draconian divorce system.
Drunk driving is one of the dumbest things you can do in the current US of A. Why? Because the penalties are so extreme. Well it wasn't always like that. And it wasn't mothers who made the difference. It was when the kids of rich people and politicians got piled into and incinerated by some insane drunk driver did things start changing.
Or petition Michael Moore to make a movie about the subject. Whether you like his politics or not, people watch his movies, they have a broad sweeping effect. Look at Super Size Me ( not a Moore film), the largest fast food chain in the world changed some its policies and strategies because of the popularity of the film.
You guys want fast change, make the system punish the rich and powerful and then make a movie about it.
As a new guy here, gotta be honest and say there looks like there is alot of drama on this board.
If the real issue is promoting mens rights as husbands and fathers, then being divided amongst yourselves over petty bullshit only means you deserve to have your rights taken from you.
American Indians, for one reason or another, refused to unite. If they had solidarity, maybe they wouldn't have been massacred wholesale for some plots of land. Really take a look at them, they didn't stand together so they fell apart one tribe at a time.
Its not about money. That I could understand. Its not about your personal safety. That I could understand. Its just a couple of guys who cant agree to disagree. Divided, you are fucking yourselves. Divided is how men got to be fucked over so badly by the feminists in the first place.
Sorry but the worst indictment I can make is you two guys are acting like a couple of women. Because women are the ones who harbor on the petty bullshit. Seriously, don't play their game, it justifies them and removes focus from the important issues at hand.
Stand together or die alone. Your choice guys.
Life is short. If you are unhappy, there is no price on that. Theres no price on wasting years of your life waiting for your kids to grow up so you can get a divorce. At some level, its just money, you can always earn more money, you won't be able to get the time and years of your life back.
If money is the overriding issue for you in this situation (you seem to mention it more than your kids, not a judgement but an observation) then you'll have to play dirty to keep it/reduce your liability here. Thats pretty much the only way its gonna happen.
I was fortunate, I learned from watching others and their mistakes that playing dirty is sometimes the only way to level the playing field. Except your kids might remember man. They might remember what you had to inflict on your wife ( whether she deserves it or not) to get what you wanted. Gotta count the cost man. When you lose your major credibility with your children, you never get it back. Then again, you mention money more than your kids so maybe thats your real focus ( which is fine, not everyone is suited to have or raise kids)
I don't think faking homosexuality or making a drastic shift in your career is a great move at this point.
If you want a divorce but your wife does not/does not yet, then take the time to your advantage. Most guys have to prepare for divorce as a reaction, they often aren't the ones firing the first shots in the conflict. Take the time to read up on laws, consult lawyers and financial advisors and poll other men who have been recently divorced in Oz.
I think no matter what you do, unless your wife ends up passing away somehow, you can only minimize your losses financially, but there will be some significant losses no matter what.
If you wanted to change careers, I'd suggest something in demand, not subject to mass outsourcing, something you can do on the side and something you can get paid for in cash very quietly. I know guys who install garage doors, they make good coin. Alot of times they pick up additional side jobs and piece work on a cash basis on the side. I know handymen who are basically millionaires now. They get alot of their income in cash, they invest, they are careful.
Given your situation with your kids, if you change careers, then let it be something you can move around. I.E. you can't just pick up quickly and work for a bank anywhere if you are up in a high corporate level, you can but its probably complicated. But a pharmacist for example, can pretty much set up shop anywhere there is a drug store.