A "Female Problem"?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Just thought I'd tell you guys that I went to a female doctor today. I couldn't find any male doctors and it was either someone who didn't speak English or an American woman. I usually avoid females for counseling or healthcare but this woman was great. I never thought women were not as smart, but I know it's hard understand what is to be a man if you're not. I totally understand women who prefer female doctors. That makes sense as well.

Anyway I expected the worst, but was happy to find someone economically wise and practically minded.


Ajax,

This statement of yours speaks volumes, and to me, explains the rest of your rants.

by the way, how does a website about paternity fraud and generic fathers' rights answer my two questions. I'll repeat my questions:

ajax said:
Secondly every man I've met who doesn't pay child support goes to jail, which some elect to do as in the case of my friend at WalMart since his living situation was already so bad.


I asked:
How many men have you met that don't pay child support? Do any of them live in a different state than the state in which they owe support? I'm curious about this, because my sister's exhusband rarely paid child support, but since he lived in a different state, there was nothing she could do about it. The law didn't bother him at all, much less put him in jail.


ajax said:
And yes I've seen many cases where women leave not because the man treated her poorly, but because she has no motivation to stay if she can kick him out and still take his money.


I asked:
Just exactly what number constitutes "many"? And how do you know such personal, reliable information about the situation?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Post by _ajax18 »

I asked:
How many men have you met that don't pay child support? Do any of them live in a different state than the state in which they owe support? I'm curious about this, because my sister's exhusband rarely paid child support, but since he lived in a different state, there was nothing she could do about it. The law didn't bother him at all, much less put him in jail.


It seemed to me that in most states, men who didn't pay child support lost their credit. In some states men go to jail, not all. In WV, you go to jail, but I venture to say that has more to do with prison overcrowding vs. somewhere like TN where the urban prisons are already so full of thugs that it's difficult enough to get the violent offenders off the street. And as was rightly pointed out, putting a man in jail doesn't squeeze any more money out of him. OFten times one of the main reasons for lack of child support payment is underemployment of the father. It can also be due to parental alienation syndrome in which the father is deprived of visitation for all practical purposes due to the increased cost created by a mother who moves far away. If fathers were given shared parenting and were truly equal partners rather than just have "visitation rights," and child support could be lowered due to their increased role as primary caregivers and not just a nameless paycheck, we might see these problems start to diminish. But our current adversarial court system and the secrecy and hidden agenda of hte family court system leaves a lot of room for attempts at "vengeance," through use of the children.

Just exactly what number constitutes "many"? And how do you know such personal, reliable information about the situation?


Other men that I've worked with and lived with, family, friends, neighbors. If that sounds unreliable, than I've dug up a case here that demonstrates what I'm talking about as the consequence of the "no fault" divorce, which basically has been instituted to stop the punishment of women for ending relationships as men were once punished and continue to be punished for doing so.

Members of the fathers' rights movement state that laws establishing no-fault divorce did not stop at removing the requirement that grounds be cited for a divorce, so as to allow for divorce by "mutual consent;" they also allow either spouse to end the marriage without any agreement or fault by the other


^ Phyllis Schlafly's keynote address. American Coalition of Fathers and Children (September 2006). Retrieved on 2007-05-12.

They state that family courts operate in secret, which protects them from public scrutiny,[51] and that family courts have engaged in censorship.[
52]

This seemed to be what you were getting at with, "How do I know about these personal matters." Well, it's going to get out one way or another.

Here is one important piece of legislation from our "progressive," state Colorado

http://www.coloradopaternityfraud.com/

Any fraud a man commits is called a crime. In forty-six states, the one exclusive to women is protected.

Your wife could have an affair, become pregnant, and tell you it's your child knowing full well it is not or may not be. She may even divorce you and have you pay child support. If you acquire DNA evidence that you and the child are the victims of deceit, not only is she not charged with an offense, the courts insist that she's right. The child is yours forever and you pay support, not the real father who could be found.


http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/11/09/1162661797800.html


I also mentioned the Duke rape case in which Crystal Gail Mangum was caught in a lie of false accusation. After costing the families of the young men nearly a million dollars in legal fees in a brutal fight to keep them out of jail from a friendly white prosecutor pandering to the black community in an effort to win an election, Ms. Mangum walked away without any consequences to her actions.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Look, I’m sure you realize, on some level, that you’re still dodging my questions and will have to admit that you engaged in some exaggeration and hyperbole. You state that “every man you’ve met that doesn’t pay child support” ends up in jail, and cite one friend who worked at walmart. When I ask how many men you know who don’t pay child support, you respond evasively, and instead, talk about men losing their credit for not paying child support (are you saying that they shouldn’t?), and if they didn’t go to jail, it’s due to overcrowding.

So, for the sake of clarity, how about just admitting that you really don’t know men who are in jail for not paying child support, other than your walmart friend? And just how egregious was his case, that he landed in jail? It must have been pretty darn egregious, because the courts aren’t stupid, and they aren’t man-hating feminazis. The state’s primary objective is to keep children out of poverty by holding their parents responsible for their upkeep. The state knows as well as you do that a jailed parent isn’t a source of income.

My sister tried for over a decade to get some child support for her three children. Her husband had a “revelation” that he didn’t have to take care of his children, because God would do it for him, you see, because he’d been called to a higher purpose. Moving out of state ensured that he wouldn’t be inconvienced in his higher purpose as well. It is extraordinarily difficult to get child support enforced across state lines.

Your other assertion:

And yes I've seen many cases where women leave not because the man treated her poorly, but because she has no motivation to stay if she can kick him out and still take his money.


And your response to my question about these “many cases”??? To assert that “personal information gets out” – yes, it “gets out” from one party who is very angry and hurt at the other party, which means, of course, that the personal information that has been shared may be biased and distorted. And let’s not overlook the fact that you really aren’t even sharing “how many” cases you’ve seen at all, are you? Instead you shift to criticizing no fault divorce and paternity fraud.

Look, your assertion doesn’t even make sense. I’m not disputing there are some cases where women (and men) marry for money. But if this money-digger then divorces her/his wealthy spouse, they’re not going to end up with access to as much money as they would have if they had stayed married to the spouse.

Some of the rest of your rants (like women not being pressured to go on missions, Mormon women treating their college careers as hobbies) really ought to be addressed to the LDS church, and not women in general. The LDS church deliberately cultivates this, and the women are responding to it as faithful followers.

My opinion is that you were probably badly hurt in a messy divorce, and maybe a crappy childhood. I’m sorry for that, I had a terrible divorce, too. But I suggest you focus your anger on the person who deserves it, instead of an entire gender. And, by the way, in many states, like my own, joint physical custody is the default unless it can be proven not to be in the child’s best interest.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Post by _ajax18 »

So, for the sake of clarity, how about just admitting that you really don’t know men who are in jail for not paying child support, other than your walmart friend


No I don't personally know very many men who have gone to jail over child support. My point in my references was the fact that it is the law that men can go to jail for not paying. I also pointed out the unfairness of actual laws that are on the books, which I referenced. That is what angers me. That is what I think needs changed. I know it's the law in WV because I'm friends with the family court judge in the county. No I don't know exact men, except one, who have gone to jail for failure to pay child support, but I do know that it's the law. To me that's more telling than if I knew a 100 men in jail for not paying child support. Yes, men who fail to pay child support should be sent to collection agencies. My issue is with the division of direct care responsibilities and the child support amounts ordered in the first place and also how those funds are audited and managed. There is no hyperbole in any of this. It's the truth.

While I admittedly don't have flawless documentation, I don't think I'm exaggerating all that much. Yes, sometimes women get the short end of the stick in relationships with immoral and selfish men, but I think it's more often the other way around. Yes I admit that information from a party hurt in a divorce is biased. My contention is that family courts themselves are very secretive, almost like the LDS church on finance, and I think they do this specifically to avoid public scrutiny. To me there is something really backward about such secrecy. The public should have a right to know all the details so that we can vote responsibly and not blindly.

And yes, I admit that perhaps I could have been more tactful in speaking my mind and I'm sorry if it has hurt your feelings as a woman. I believe you to be a fair minded person and do not believe that you or TD would support cheating men the way they are currently cheated in family court. So if we can, let's move on to my question of feminist and masculinist uniting under gender egalitarianism. Do you believe that to be a good thing? As stated by TD I have no problem with what the feminists are asking for. Do you have any problem with what the masculinists are asking for as stated on Wikipedia under "Father's rights."
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

No I don't personally know very many men who have gone to jail over child support. My point in my references was the fact that it is the law that men can go to jail for not paying.


So too can women go to jail for not paying child support.

I also pointed out the unfairness of actual laws that are on the books, which I referenced. That is what angers me. That is what I think needs changed. I know it's the law in WV because I'm friends with the family court judge in the county.


I'm not an expert on the law, but I do know most judges and law makers are trying to do what is in the best interest of the children. We don't live in a perfect world but our current system and family law is about 1000 times better than it used to be. We are just at the very beginning of a society that accepts women as fully human and recognizes the needs of children... at the very beginning. After five thousand years it is only in the last few decades that we are seeing a semblance of equality.

No I don't know exact men, except one, who have gone to jail for failure to pay child support, but I do know that it's the law.


As it is for anyone who doesn't pay child support, men or women. The fact is that more men make more money than do women hence they are more numerous but the law is not exclusive to men. I know women who pay child support, men who have sole custody of their children, and every sort of mixture in between. Often there are no really great solutions.

To me that's more telling than if I knew a 100 men in jail for not paying child support. Yes, men who fail to pay child support should be sent to collection agencies. My issue is with the division of direct care responsibilities and the child support amounts ordered in the first place and also how those funds are audited and managed. There is no hyperbole in any of this. It's the truth.


For every case you can come up with I could show you a hundred where the women and children are screwed. It is getting better but in many cases there are no good solutions. Often in divorce everyone is unhappy... especially the children. I think you see a very limited view of what occurs in divorce. Rather than look at a few cases that may support your theories, perhaps you could look at thousands and notice common patterns.

While I admittedly don't have flawless documentation, I don't think I'm exaggerating all that much. Yes, sometimes women get the short end of the stick in relationships with immoral and selfish men, but I think it's more often the other way around.


Again, I think you are looking for the rare bit of evidence to support your already angry view toward women. Few women benefit financially from a divorce. In fact it is the rare exception that a woman would divorce to get money because the reality is in the vast majority of cases her living arrangements become worse. Most women divorce knowing they will become less financially stable.

Let me give you a very common example. A father has been working for a company for twenty years and makes 100,000 dollars a year. The mom stays home, gives up her career to raise their children. The husband runs off with his co-worker. Now, how much money should a woman get in a divorce? She has to BEGIN her career at age 45, working often for minimum wage, and often having to pay for child care. She may get a few hundred dollars a month for her children until they are eighteen, (which may or may not be paid), and a token alimony payment for a few years, then what? The husband OTOH, goes on with his life career, and doesn't look back. He pays a few hundred dollars a month, sees his children every other weekend, get remarried, and life goes on. HIS lifestyle gets better, in terms of finances, while the woman's get considerably worse.

This is the reality for the vast majority of cases in the United States. Are there exceptions, of course. Are there times men get screwed, yes. But lets be real here and look at what is really going on.

Yes I admit that information from a party hurt in a divorce is biased. My contention is that family courts themselves are very secretive, almost like the LDS church on finance, and I think they do this specifically to avoid public scrutiny. To me there is something really backward about such secrecy. The public should have a right to know all the details so that we can vote responsibly and not blindly.


I don't know what this is about. I know of no cases that support this conspiracy idea.

So if we can, let's move on to my question of feminist and masculinist uniting under gender egalitarianism. Do you believe that to be a good thing? As stated by TD I have no problem with what the feminists are asking for. Do you have any problem with what the masculinists are asking for as stated on Wikipedia under "Father's rights."


Gender egalitarianism is a much more enlightened way of life, in my opinion. It is reflective of my beliefs.

As I stated, I think men have gotten the short end of the stick in the past as well, not from the law or religion which has clearly be horrifically degrading and damaging to women, but from society that has produced a very unhealthy image of what is a man. I am happy it is changing.

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Post by _ajax18 »

Let me give you a very common example. A father has been working for a company for twenty years and makes 100,000 dollars a year. The mom stays home, gives up her career to raise their children. The husband runs off with his co-worker. Now, how much money should a woman get in a divorce? She has to BEGIN her career at age 45, working often for minimum wage, and often having to pay for child care. She may get a few hundred dollars a month for her children until they are eighteen, (which may or may not be paid), and a token alimony payment for a few years, then what? The husband OTOH, goes on with his life career, and doesn't look back. He pays a few hundred dollars a month, sees his children every other weekend, get remarried, and life goes on. HIS lifestyle gets better, in terms of finances, while the woman's get considerably worse.


I've stated several times that I think a woman should be supported in such a situation. I just know the family court judge in the county and I've talked to several men who have been divorced and they told me he wouldn't even hear their case for shared custody. He said all children should go with the mother regardless. Three of them had to take second jobs and in two cases it was the woman who found a new partner and ended the relationship. This wasn't even an issue to the judge.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Post Reply