"Get out of the Spiderman suits and start paying...&quo

Started by cootewards, Nov 18, 2005, 04:57 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

devia

Quote
What is this, post-divorce child support in advance, while they're still married and presumably still in love


I believe that means for people who are not in love and have never been married.

The tone of the article isn't good but 15% sounds like a good idea for me as someone who pays child support. If child support was a percentage of actual wage instead of an abutrary figure the courts make up it would have saved me a lot of headaches in my time, and anyone else whose ever had an income change while paying.

Kyo

Devia, I think that a fixed 15% of income as child support (which would be a decent $125 in the US even for a minimum-wage teenager) is a great idea and is much fairer than "imputed income".  But it's only fair if the divorce is mutual and the father doesn't want custody.

whome112

Quote from: "devia"
The tone of the article isn't good but 15% sounds like a good idea for me as someone who pays child support. If child support was a percentage of actual wage instead of an abutrary figure the courts make up it would have saved me a lot of headaches in my time, and anyone else whose ever had an income change while paying.


Generally speaking you're probably right. Maybe the states/provinces should appoint the IRS/CRC as collection agent and use a flat percentage of income as child support. It would stop some of the horror stories.

Mind you, it may well kick in the Georgia Complex: That's where a jurisdiction officially opposes using all of the available tools to collect from a woman because she would win in a judicial complaint and that would stop them from being able to use some of the nastier tools agaisnt men. Putting a man too sick to work into jail to try to get money from his relatives is OK to the public: Doing the same thing to a woman is abuse of women and NOT OK at all. Gerogia 2001.

whome
ay what you mean: Mean what you say.
http://jwwells.blogspot.com

Mr Benn

[email protected]

Ms Toynbee,

While I realise that the Guardian generally features the best in hysterical man-bashing your latest article really does take the biscuit.

In fact, it is one of the most hateful erruptions of feminazi bile I've seen this year.

Regards

Darren Blacksmith
ww.CoolTools4Men.com

powder-monkey

Quote:
Sadly, divorce is a suicide risk, but if men really kill themselves over paying for their children, that's their funeral.

Right, suicide is merely the surest way of evading one's debts and says nothing about what the system has done to these men.  
...not that she cares - acceptable wastage.

Quote:
If he has paid nothing when they eventually catch up with him, he should get the sort of walloping fine that means he may lose his car or home, even if he has a second family.

...so much for her concern about the welfare of his dependents.

Quote:
On becoming a single parent, a third of women have to give up work, most of them very unwillingly; they are still out of work two years later.

Use of the passive bvoice makes it sound as if motherhood were something that just "happened" to them, like puberty.  
It should read: On choosing to become a single mother...

Quote:
Alas, it's not realistic politics ... but it's a neat way of considering what is still needed to redistribute from wallet to handbag and redress the injustice of the gross undervaluing both of the jobs women do and of their unpaid time rearing the nation's children.

"From each according to his ability..."
I also like the double-think that treats parenthood as just another job when it suits the purpose.  

Quote:
But just how many young women are swatting away good men who are begging them to settle into domesticity in their early 30s? It is the everlasting boy syndrome to blame.

I want what I want when I want it.  
...and any refusal to accommodate reveals male pathology.  

...simply vile.

Sir Percy

Dear Ms Toynbee.

When will we hear you ranting for a Jew Tax? Bit too much like Nazism for your readers?

Or a Muslim Tax? Some of them blow up things. How about a Gay tax? All those services they get.  Black face tax? Well, black faces are really scary to some, especially women on a dark night. Oh, the Nazis had all of those too.

But no. You propose just men. Not a bit Nazi is it. That's OK then.

Men are fair game for your bias. Even thinking of taxing someone on any other personal feature basis is offensive and could possibly land you in court if you expressed it. But men. Here you are publishing your hatred, your misandry in a national newspaper.

Call yourself a Journalist. You bring the profession into disrepute.

You are a Femonazi.
vil, like misery, is Protean, and never greater than when committed in the name of 'right'. To commit evil when they are convinced they are doing 'good', is one of the greatest of pleasures known to a feminist.

woof

Quote
Dear Polly,

There are no good men anymore.
Men are sexual predators, rapist, incompetent bubbling dads, drunken lazy husbands, violent, child molesting, controlling fathers and husbands, and deadbeat ex-husbands.

On the other hand, more and more men are beginning to see feminist women as, spoiled. pampered, selfish, pompous, lying, gold-digging sexist pigs.

Feminism is a hate movement that has made women look like a 3 year old child, that throws a fit, and whines to the local government every time they don't get what they want, when they want it.
Since your article wasn't really about child support, and who isn't paying it, it was a fearful feminist propaganda piece.

I will give you some statistics to ponder in case you do decide to pen an article on child support, who is paying it, and the effect that the feminist movement has had on our children. Just kidding about that last part about the feminist movement, I know that you would never do that.

These statistics are of the USA, you will have to do your own research for the UK version.

• 79.6% of custodial mothers receive a support award
• 29.9% of custodial fathers receive a support award.
• 46.9% of non-custodial mothers totally default on support.
• 26.9% of non-custodial fathers totally default on support.
• 20.0% of non-custodial mothers pay support at some level
• 61.0% of non-custodial fathers pay support at some level
• 66.2% of single custodial mothers work less than full time.
• 10.2% of single custodial fathers work less than full time.
• 7.0% of single custodial mothers work more than 44 hours weekly.
• 24.5% of single custodial fathers work more that 44 hours weekly.
• 46.2% of single custodial mothers receive public assistance.
• 20.8% of single custodial fathers receive public assistance.
[Technical Analysis Paper No. 42 - U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services - Office of Income Security Policy]
• 40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the fathers visitation to punish their ex-spouse. ["Frequency of Visitation" by Sanford Braver, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry]
• 50% of mothers see no value in the fathers continued contact with his children. ["Surviving the Breakup" by Joan Berlin Kelly]
• 90.2% of fathers with joint custody pay the support due.
• 79.1% of fathers with visitation privileges pay the support due.
• 44.5% of fathers with no visitation pay the support due.
• 37.9% of fathers are denied any visitation.
• 66% of all support not paid by non-custodial fathers is due to the inability to pay. [1988 Census "Child Support and Alimony: 1989 Series" P-60, No. 173 p.6-7, and "U.S. General Accounting Office Report" GAO/HRD-92-39FS January 1992]
• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [U. S. D.H.H.S. Bureau of the Census]
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
• 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
• 80% of rapist motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 14 p. 403-26]
• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
• 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions come from fatherless homes [U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept., 1988]
• 85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia Jail Populations and Texas Dept. of Corrections, 1992]
• Nearly 2 of every 5 children in America do not live with their fathers. [US News and World Report, February 27, 1995, p.39]

There are:
• 11,268,000 total custodial mothers
• 2,907,000 total custodial fathers
[Current Populations Reports, US Bureau of the Census, Series P-20, No. 458, 1991]
What does this mean? Children from fatherless homes are:
• 4.6 times more likely to commit suicide,
• 6.6 times to become teen aged mothers (if they are girls),
• 24.3 times more likely to run away,
• 15.3 times more likely to have behavioral disorders,
• 6.3 times more likely to be in a state-operated institutions,
• 10.8 times more likely to commit rape,
• 6.6 times more likely to drop out of school,
• 15.3 times more likely to end up in prison while a teenager.
(The calculation of the relative risks shown in the preceding list is based on 27% of children being in the care of single mothers.)

AND -- compared to children who are in the care of two biological, married parents -- children who are in the care of single mothers are:
• 33 times more likely to be seriously abused (so that they will require medical attention), and
• 73 times more likely to be killed.["Marriage: The Safest Place for Women and Children", by Patrick F. Fagan and Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D. Backgrounder #1535.]

Ahh well.......backlash........nah, not really. The truth won't go away, it's like gravity, so you will have to keep pushing it away..........good luck!

Sincerely,


Even a whole village can't replace dad, children need both parents.

Quentin0352

Quote
Actually I think you had an excellent idea and wish you would import it to the USA. A `5% tax would be much cheaper than what we pay now, it would free up money so we could try and have the other court orders for things like visitation and the return of premarital property while also setting a nice precedence. We could then push a 35% tax on women for their receiving retirement benefits for longer than men due to a longer life span, more payment of welfare benefits since women make up the vast majority of the recipients of it and also for medical care since women use it much more than men./ Please to keep this idea flowing and help us get the legal precedence through!

Thank you,

Quentin Xxxxxxxxx
Ohio USA

antimisandry

ihope you don't mind folks, but i shall be emailing sweet little miss Polly pocket Toynbee regarding this issue, and stealing a few of the quotes (as they're damn valid points) from this thread.

I'll be adding this URL for her to have a look at too in my reply. When i've done my email, as ever, i'll post it up for your inspection.
ny man living in this feminized world has got to be tough to tolerate it.

>> http://antimisandry.com <<

Sir Percy

Karl, be careful ref Polly Toynbee. Posting  this URL of SYG will enable her or anyone else at the Guardian to link personal emails and addresses of people who send protest emails (such as mine) to Board names. This will ruin anonymosity of posters.
vil, like misery, is Protean, and never greater than when committed in the name of 'right'. To commit evil when they are convinced they are doing 'good', is one of the greatest of pleasures known to a feminist.

antimisandry

Thanks for the heads-up, Sir Percy, it's appreciated and i shall heed your warning well.
ny man living in this feminized world has got to be tough to tolerate it.

>> http://antimisandry.com <<

antimisandry

This image may take a moment or ten to appear...

ny man living in this feminized world has got to be tough to tolerate it.

>> http://antimisandry.com <<

Quasimodo

From my point of view there's two mainline problems with this article:

1) Every article of this type assumes that mothers get custody, consider it only natural, and still deny this basic sexist bias in the system. Mothers, mothers, mothers, poor, put-upon mothers...WHO GOT THE KIDS!!! Poor dears.

2) Why this fuckin' article, in all its glorious length, got printed in the first place. There's no rebut. There's no space for the "luxury" of losing one's children. There's only "You lost. We won. Why ain't you paying?"

I've posed before What Would Most Mothers Choose? to be raped or lose their children. What's worse? Are men even human?
axine Waters on the 2004 March for Women:
"I have to march because my mother could not have an abortion." ! ! !

Gerard Velthuis

Very insulting article, very!
t is time men start behaving like men again and stand up for their rights, instead of behaving like conformist push-overs.

SIAM

karlmathews, an excellent rebuttal on behalf of all men (and women) who are on the side of common sense.  You left no stone unturned, and frankly, if she does bother to read your e-mail all the way through, she will know her hatred has been identified.

It's made me think too :  we should spend more time responding directly to authors rather than preaching the choir here.  I'll be posting less here and spending that time saved on directly contact authors such as this Polly Toynbee.

Go Up