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 - poiuyt
Pages: 1 ... 43 44  46
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/26/nlawyer126.xmlFather jailed by CSA despite ex-wife's pleas
By Bonnie Malkin
Last Updated: 2:03am BST 27/06/2007
A lawyer was jailed yesterday for refusing to pay child support to his former wife, despite her pleas not to give him a custodial sentence.
Michael Cox, 43, has failed to pay child support for the past 12 years because he says his three children spend half their lives with him.
Mr Cox said that despite looking after his sons he is still expected to pay child support for the time they spend with their mother.
This open invitation to parasites and dependancy pigs by officious and bigotted chauvenists is a matter of grave social significance across western society. Polite society and the morality of a civilisation are being dismantled.
State mongers may not know it, but by their every act of property transfere on account of a recipients gender, they add to the breakdown and disorder in their community. Why? How ?
Property transfers on account of gender, encourages other common criminals!. Crooks recognise that if legalised theft of other peoples property is acceptable in favour of women, then it should also be acceptable for others like themselves, ie. those who also wish to live well and for free on other peoples property.
People in the moraly decaying Western States should understand legalising theft for women is why their crime rate is soaring with their prisons overcrowding. Not only the so called "bitter old" and "sad mens movement" recognises the hypocracy of gifting women other poeples property. Theives, liars, career criminals and other desperados recognise the social hypocracy of gifting women other peoples property. And because of it, also feel entitled to live well for nothing on other peoples property and effort.
Study: 30% of mothers and 40% of fathers are abused during a pregnancy II Abstract:
Using data on a nationally representative cohort of pregnant women in US cities, this study examines the prevalence and correlates of interpersonal violence (IPV) -- physical, emotional, and coercion-control -- during pregnancy and 1 year after birth. Overall, 33% of mothers and 40% of fathers experience some form of IPV during or after pregnancy. ... Violence during pregnancy strongly predicted violence after pregnancy.
In todays rotting and decadent society, wether a woman is pregnant or not, she is entitled as of right to leave any relationship. It is precisely because males are denied this very right of leaving relationships that an incresing measure of violence is observed in all their associations with women. That is irrespective of how pregnant, lazy, disbled or whatever such a woman is.
[ Nowadays even 30 years after the end of a relationship a man can still be held responsible for the food, drink, clothing and shelter of a depandant pig mascurading as an adult. But the bigger shame is on those other men in office who permit such an outrage on another fellow ]
Every-body understands the vigour and determination with which living things naturally seek to repel parasites, pathogens, leeches, bloodsukers and other unsybiotic hangers-on. Why is it that such understanding is witheld in the case of males who wish to remove themselves from worthless relationships.
[ Glenn Sacks pretended not to understand Darren Macks actions. But the man was only ridding himself, like other threatened living things, of a harmful pathogen, who on divorce, in turn owed him no responsibilities at all ] http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/Clics2007A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/91BC854F552ACB8A87257251007B8843?Open&file=136_ren.pdf
We got in line for checkout. The little girl's mother was waiting in the checkout line next to us. She asked her mother if she could have some jelly beans too. Her mother said no. The girl replied, "Please, Mommy? Please can I have some jelly beans?" Again, the mother refused, saying, "I'm not going to buy you that garbage. You already eat those pop-tarts, and you don't need any sugar." The girl kept begging. "Mom, can't we put the pop-tarts away? Maybe I could get some jelly beans instead." Mom finally grabbed the girl, and whispered "Shut up! Shut your damn mouth. Now!"
The little girl started crying and moved away. Mom moved toward her to grab her again. The girl shook in fear, and hid behind another woman who was with the mom. She looked to me like she was expecting a beating. Mom was looking bitter and quite angry.
Alternatively this womans example is one of solid, no-nonsense parenting. A parenting that is as firm in public as in private. More grease to her elbows in her handling of her daughter who that day learnt a valuable lesson no one else will likely teach her in this society. And if all youngsters are brought up to know their boundaries and that of others, this society will definately be the better for it.
Distrustful of da victim
Controlling da victim
Possessive of da victim
Wat Duluth gat say here ?
Da Duluth model say she be ah potential murderer at worst but a definite and ongoing abuser at best !
Half school 'failures' are white working-class boys, says report... obvious consequences of a shamelessly chauvenist culture. One that pretends to be better friends of females, irrespective of what this means for its males...
Most of the persistent low achievers in England's schools are poor and white, and far more are boys than girls, a Joseph Rowntree Foundation study says.
And, according to a study published today by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, nearly half of all pupils who leave school without any or with few qualifications are white British males.
White working-class boys perform worse than any other ethnic or gender group at school, according to a study published today.
They suffer because their parents fail to talk to them at home and they have a culture in their communities that it is "uncool" to learn, says the report commissioned by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
White boys are being turned into an unemployable underclass - as they fall behind children from other racial groups at school, new research shows.
Almost half of all children leaving school without any good GCSEs are white British males, according to figures published today.
They outnumber white girls by two to one and have vastly inferior reading and writing skills at the age of 11.
The Suffering Of Males Is Necessary !
The notion that women are a political minority is a nescessary political myth mandated by the form of social order that we momentarily live by i.e Liberal Democracy. And it goes some way to answering the question posed, if considered as a cornerstone of our political structure, upon which so much relative progress is built. Relative that is, to third and second world political, economic and technological results.
Another necessary political myth, now defunct, was the divine right of kings to rule. This was a political myth mandated by the momentary feudal order of the middle ages.
A further example is the necessary political myth of the Popes infallibility. This myth is mandated by the religious order under which Roman Catholicism survives and thrives.
In simpler terms ...
And for big heads calcified with sheer ignorance ...
The foolish woman sees in the end consequence to men of the different womens-group activities, an independent but common motive of conspiracy to subjugate males. It is incomprehensible to her that the motive is chauvenist-teuton-hegemony and the justification, politicaly agreed by all sides of the hydra, male and female, as teuton dominance of this world.
The foolish man on the other hand sees in the different institutions the two groups employ, an indication of hope for individualy usurped males by the side using traditional institutions. It is beyond his culturaly inherited perspective, to clearly appreciate even the modern institutions employed by social-liberal-radical women. These new institutions operate not in disfavour of males as a motive, but in enforcement of an agreed hegemony and dominance that far more benefits him than violates him relative to others at home and abroad.
... Storm in a teacup
That many-headed womens-group hydra arguing with itself is truly only but half of a bigger political sybiotic relationship. A symbiotic relationship for which the gain to the collective whole exponentially outstrips the loss to the individual.
The conservative christian women and social liberal womanists may appear in agreement to one MRA on account of the end consequencs to individual men of their advocacy forms. But the same two groups may appear to differ hugely to another MRA on account of their means employed with respect to use of traditional institutions versus modern ones.
But a closer examination of these two womens groups in the context of our gynocentric [chauvenist] society will reveal them working alongside and within a principal. A principal politico-cultural majority, which itself alternately adopts liberal means or conservative methods to acheive hegemonic ends via the ballot.
Note the hegemonic ends of the politico cultural majority goes well beyond national boundaries and in this case makes no distinction between the sexes it impacts !.
And it is this principal politico-cultural majority whom more than either group gains the most at home and abroad from this apparent subjugation of males. Collectively gains that is, alternately justified by the means of one and depending on its purpose, the ends of the other so called womens groups.
Its odd how much equality of outcome they want to legaly impose after the mariage but care not much for legaly imposing an equality of input before and during the marriage.
So many thousands of billions worth in wealth and privilege transfered to this assumed victim group of history whom have for all modern time lived not oppresed, but in Royal dependancy. On the other hand over-burden and unlimited responsibility flows the other way to the so called oppressor class as an involuntary act of collective chivalry some would rightly determine to be a species of national chauvenism.
... no blue, green, yellow or polkadot men and women on this bus flyers were passed to ?
If so imagine how different they may have reacted to a womans obnoxiousness on the one hand or an MRA on the other ?
Some difference !
Well the dichotomy of sex behaviors is far more politically complex than the above premises implies from the point of view of feminists. One must also bear in mind the influence of other bigots who themselves are first-culprits over and above feminists in the question of abuse of science.
Feminism will agree with scientific proofs of sex differences in behaviour where the advantages of acknowledging such differences flows into public policies favouring women. For example they will agree with scientific proofs of differences in gender behaviours with respect to nurturing children, because such acknowleged difference leads to the default policy position of mother custody of children is better on divorce. There are many other examples...
Feminism will disagree with scientific proofs of sex diferences in behaviour where there are potential public policy risks to the status and privileges of women flowing from such differences. For example feminists will disagree with scientific proofs of differences in gender behaviour with respect to abstract thingking if it means acknowleging that males are predisposed to taking harder subjects leading to better paid professions. There are many other examples here too...
In short feminists are not enemies of science per se, but have in fact co-opted it as just another useful tool in their arsenal of weapons against males in their societies.
Womens-oppression and her need of protection from it and restitution because of it is the biggest cultural lie of teuton-chauvenist societies. It was historicaly a supremists lie, but has evolved to suit democratic conditions in todays western society. This is known by simple reference to its main implimenters, its main beneficiaries and its implications to others at home and abroad.
Is there any other group in the world today whom because of their "alleged" oppression is granted entitlement to moraly and materialy parasite off the rest of their society as a form of justified restituton ?
The answer is NO !
The reservation indian, the innuit and other indigens of america. They got nothing in restitution of the kind women nowadays get, for the brutal subjugations to their person, property and land endured under the imperious yankee. Was the red-indian and north american aboriginee not oppressed ? Where is their free pound of flesh ?
The Holocoust Jews were not even gifted back their own property, let alone the property of Germany after the world war, unlike women nowadays get for their troubles with males. Was the Jew not oppressed for centuries over and above todays woman? Where is their free pound of flesh ?
The emancipated negro on abolision of slavery got nothing for his five hundred years of burden and humiliation. At least nothing to the tune which women nowadays get for their travails with menfolk. Indeed not the slave but the slave owner was granted parasite rights over public monies for their loss of property in slavery. Was the slave-negro not oppressed so much more than women now? Where is their free pound of flesh ?
The poor white male was always thrown head first into wars of other peoples choosing, historicaly abducted into sea-fairing or merchant shipping never to see his parents again, primarily selected for nuclear-biological-chemical experimentation or made an eternal scapegoat of class by the laws of his society. That is over and above females of his station through time, was the poor white male not oppresed too ? Where is his free pound of flesh ?
Surprise--men do just as much work as women do.
By Joel Waldfogel
Posted Monday, April 16, 2007, at 12:54 PM ET
Everyone from economists and sociologists to Oprah knows that women work more than men. Their longer combined hours, at the home and at the office, stop men from taking afternoon naps on the couch and cause fights that end with men spending nights on the couch. And yet according to new study, those longer hours are a myth, because it's just not true that women carry a heavier load. [But chauvenist societies as ours need misandric myths and sperstitions to maintain its bigoted world. Then again, so much order depends on widely accepted official lies anyway]http://www.nber.org/papers/w13000
Throughout the world, men spend more time on market work, while women spend more time on homework [...No kidding ]. In the United States and other rich countries, men average 5.2 hours of market work a day and 2.7 hours of homework each day, while women average 3.4 hours of market work and 4.5 hours of homework per day. Adding these up, men work an average of 7.9 hours per day, while women work an average of--drum roll, please--7.9 hours per day. This is the first major finding of the new study. Whatever you may have heard on The View, when these economists accounted for market work and homework, men and women spent about the same amount of time each day working. The averages sound low because they include weekends and are based on a sample of adults that included stay-at-home parents as well as working ones, and other adults.
Total Work, Gender and Social Norms Michael Burda, Daniel S. Hamermesh, Philippe Weil
NBER Working Paper No. 13000
Issued in March 2007
NBER Program(s): EFG LS
---- Abstract -----
Using time-diary data from 25 countries, we demonstrate that there is a negative relationship between real GDP per capita and the female-male difference in total work time per day -- the sum of work for pay and work at home. In rich northern countries on four continents, including the United States, there is no difference -- men and women do the same amount of total work. This latter fact has been presented before by several sociologists for a few rich countries; but our survey results show that labor economists, macroeconomists, the general public and sociologists are unaware of it and instead believe that women perform more total work. [...Our propagander machine is just as efficient as our peoples are obstinately chauvenist?] The facts do not arise from gender differences in the price of time (as measured by market wages), as women's total work is further below men's where their relative wages are lower. Additional tests using U.S. and German data show that they do not arise from differences in marital bargaining, as gender equality is not associated with marital status; nor do they stem from family norms, since most of the variance in the gender total work difference is due to within-couple differences. We offer a theory of social norms to explain the facts. The social-norm explanation is better able to account for within-education group and within-region gender differences in total work being smaller than inter-group differences. It is consistent with evidence using the World Values Surveys that female total work is relatively greater than men's where both men and women believe that scarce jobs should be offered to men first.
... maybe the boy simply hated just about everything about everything. Should have taken time out. Or visited home...
Pages: 1 ... 43 44  46