Keep at it Judy.
Press Release: United Future NZ Party
Wednesday, 30 May 2007
Turner dismayed at schools teaching bad dad book
United Future deputy leader Judy Turner, says that primary schools need to work far harder to send positive messages to boys in school about men and fathers, citing a book given to children showing a useless dad as a prime example of what should not be happening.
“Boys are lacking positive male role models, lacking male teachers, and lacking fathers. Why on earth are young boys being told to read books like ‘The Bad Dad List’ as homework?” asks Mrs Turner, a former primary school teacher.
The Bad Dad List is about a father who has just lost his job, and is now a stay-at-home dad. His daughter thinks he’s doing a bad job and makes a list of his continual mistakes. The list includes: Forgetting to give her any lunch (twice), watching TV instead of getting her breakfast - while flooding the laundry because he put the wrong powder in, and getting a speeding ticket.
‘Dad’ finally does something useful by helping another child who suffers a broken leg, regaining a small part of his daughter’s respect, which is articulated by his daughter saying:
‘By the end of the year, dad had turned into quite a good mum.’
“The fact that when dad finally stopped being useless, he is referred to as a mum, just reinforces the negative stereo-type of men to our kids,” says Mrs Turner.
“The ‘girls can do anything’ message has been marvellous for our girls, but we are constantly sending a ‘boys and men are silly or useless’ message to boys. We have a problem with a Government that undervalues fathers and men, but our primary schools should not be a part of this.
“Less than 20% of primary teachers are male, and about a quarter of all kids have no dad at home. Schools should be actively trying to encourage a positive picture of men to young males, not make them read ‘Bad Dad Lists’ for homework,” says Mrs Turner.
ENDS
Shame that Peter isn’t voicing the same as Political leader of the Party.
Kind Regards
Paul Catton
East Auckland Refuge for Men and Families
940 6236
Posts RSS 2.0
And we expected anything different?
These are only platitudes intended to appease the masses.
Don’t be sucked in by Judy T
Comment by Ethos — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 3:54 pm
Yes I agree, don’t be sucked by her , as I sent this high horse bitch a letter titled “Thank you Judy ” after her article in the local paper stating that Dads need a fair go in Family Court . She hasn’t even had the decency to acknowledge my thank you , pathetic creep is just another liarbore lickspittle !
My wasted letter to the feminazi ;
Dear Judy,
I thank you for your recent balanced appraisal of what is becoming a major contributor to the new age phenomenon of fatherlessness in our societies. I agree that dads need a fair go . Often the authorities that claim to act in the best interests of the children are purposely blind to violence directed toward the male species and that probably explains why we do not have a female assaults male offence written into our archaic Westminster law system.
My partner of nearly a decade wanted out of the relationship , because she could move away to be with your family, so she pushed me through a plate glass window and called police. They arrested me for assault against female and smacked me with – application without notice - ex parte protection orders. That was six heartbreaking years ago. She was awarded interim custody of my children and that was that. They did not care that eyewitnesses saw her attack me for no apparent reason?
I was a loving father of two daughters for the first eight and six years of their early childhood nurturing experience, and naturally I was the proudest and happiest man in the world, as the biological dad to such beautiful girls. Then like a bolt of lightening my once stable family unit was obliterated by gender bias machine of venomous hate. I become a file number in a spurious court system and I reluctantly became a non- – custodial dad (I detest the reference as it sounds like a bloody prisoner and in most cases it might as well be).
The mother who always gets the kids often gets caught out lying in the caring feminazi regime of the civil de -family court. She never gets referred onto to criminal jurisdiction? Oh no – they’re allowed to present vexatious and malicious testimony without accountability, as the courts do not prosecute lying mothers for contempt or perjury in this country. The de - family court just shift the goalposts eh to suit mum -eh! The Government in it’s bias wisdom does not bother with keeping Court statistic’s, which if kept - without a doubt a simple analysis of the statistic’s would reveal the prejudice and unlawful gender discrimination that is firmly entrenched into our secret de - family court.
As a forced respondent client of the sinister Kangaroo court I celebrated a tragic milestone this week by surpassing 150 Court appearances in a futile effort to try and clear my name as a decent and loving father. Only other dads in my position can experience the trauma and frustration of being stereotyped as a perpetrator of domestic violence. I hate the insidious and unfair tag as a deadbeat dad who has lost all his credibility, integrity and dignity as a father. No wonder the gender bias system breeds resentment!
I am helping countless men and women stuck in the lewd world of the Family Court and CYFS trying hopelessly to reconnect them in healthy bonds of love with their stolen children.It is so sad and I am ashamed to be called a New Zealander.
Yours sincerely
Peter Joseph Burns
Comment by dad4justice — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 4:26 pm
Suggested Slogan for us:
Men can move Mountains.
Thoughts?
Comment by Alastair — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 4:49 pm
Suggested Slogan for us :
Dads can love children too .
Comment by dad4justice — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 4:53 pm
Judy-T has no power to back her statements good or bad - I think her heart is in the right place but alas to late has she risen from naivety
Slogan
Only DADS can do DADS Stuff
Kids need **Equal** doses of Mum-n-DAD-and-all-4-Grands from Conception
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 5:18 pm
Isn’t it sad that whenever men’s rights are mentioned in parliament it comes from a female MP?
Why isn’t there a single male MP’s who has the balls to make a stand for males in parliament? Are they all whimps or girls blouses shitting themselves from the rad-fems predictable response.
I’m convinced that it will take a male (perhaps MP) who won’t be intimidated by the “way past their use-by date” feminists to get the ball rolling.
Comment by Pete — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 8:38 pm
Pete,
Right-On - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 8:46 pm
Pete,
Here’s my take on this.
If any MP from either of the big parties mentioned “Men’s Rights”, whatever words that followed would turn-off half the voters. They don’t want the term discussed. To agree Men’s Rights are legitimate would alienate women voters, to disagree would lose men voters.
Judy Turner’s tossing the issue around in the hope a National or Labour spokesman bites and provokes vote seepage to smaller parties (like UF).
Peter Dunne’s not saying a word publicly because then it would be harder to drop the issue if UF won votes off the back of it and got back into parliament next year.
Just a personal view.
Comment by Rob Case — Thu 31st May 2007 @ 9:10 pm
You got it all wrong Rob.
The vast majority of women don’t give a toss about feminism because as far as they are concerned, they are not discriminated against.
You do find many radical feminists in high powered positions and they still pedal the outdated stereo types that males are chauvinist pigs and oppressors of the worst kind (Clark, Hobbs, Dyson, Cartwright, Bradford, King, to name but a few).
For every Neville Robertson opposed to men’s rights, there will be hundreds of females in support.
Comment by Pete — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 1:08 pm
Pete,
You may well be right - The APATHETIC women who do NOTHING but enjoy the fruit of Femi-FASCISM are as dangerous if not more than the radical Feminists as you call them
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 1:24 pm
I cannot quite believe what i’m reading. This is exactly the problem wiht the mens movement in NZ - it is so splintered, with so many thinking they have monopoly over the issues and actions that should be focused upon.
The saddest part is the way that you abuse others who are trying for the same things and have similar goals. If you have ever read a single history book, it is obvious that while infighting occurs, and factions argue, everybody loses. It is only with unity that anything positive happens.
I saw the post under the Bad Dad Post form last week, that says:
Holy shit!
Scrap, Thankyou for posting this.
What a find!
Little would surprise me about the feminisation of nz primary schools. This is simply another low point amongst many.
How about sending the book or a reference to it to Judy Turner? She may well need the support of such actions to fend off her femmie colleagues, and it seems like a classic example of the kind of male-bashing she’s saying she’s concerned about.
Comment by Stephen — Thu 24th May 2007 @ 7:52 pm
And now Judy T has spoken out about this, no doubt getting critiscism from the other side, she is attacked from people on the same blog, that actually agree with the content of her statement?!
Infact, she is being called a “high horse bitch”, a “Pathetic Creep” and a “Feminazi”?!
Apart from the obvious unnecessary and immature nature of such personal abuse, it takes away any moral authority or credibility one has in their argument. People like Mr Burns are doing far far more harm than good for his cause. People would have sympathy for his case, and if he put this case rationally and without resorting to personal abuse, he would gain sympathy and support for fathers. I have seen it on the Kiwiblog website, read by a large range of peoples, where the same abusive tone is used and people turn against him and father’s greviences in general because of his abusive nature to everybody else.
Why would anybody try to support men and men’s rights when theya re likley to suffer more criticism form the people they are trying to support, than from the otherside?
This brings me to another shortcoming in my personal opinion of fathers and men’s groups, which is their failure to understand the political environment from where change must occur. Polititians and parties are being looked at from a confused perspective. MP’s are simply tools for change. I think Rob Case made a nice post a few days ago saying a similar thing, about how ‘trust’ has nothing to do with our political model. The approach appears to be of viewing politicans personally, looking at their traits, backgrounds, “hidden agendas” etc…
MP’s are to be used. They articulate many views on many subjects in many areas of life. None of them are ever going to champion nothing but men’s issues, as they would soon lose their seat, losing any ability to further any cause. Men’s groups should be lobbying MP’s to support issues that are important to them. Child Support, shared aprenting, the education system - whatever. If someone with voice - an MP, academic, Judge, sports person, journo - anyone whose opinion gets heard, comes out saying something that support the values shared by men, then they should be supported for voiving those comments. MPs put oput statement, to try and get that issue raised in public. They hope the media picks them up, and that the public or significant amount of the electorate supports the stance. If they get positive feedback, they have the confidence to repeat the call. Things will only change in parliament if a decent amount of the elctorate is supportive - that is democracy. MP’s issuing statemetns is one way to try and bandy this support, from the media, in radio talkback etc. They can put the issues on the public agenda for debate.
thta is why MP’s are a tool, and why it is the comments, not the personalities of the MP that should be addressed by people lobbying for change of any sorts.
That is what you are not doing, and why no one wishes to become close to men’s groups. There is a perception that if you get close, you will be tarred by association with the crazy brush. This is a challenge to try and change that perception.
My advice:
1. Get more organised in terms of lobby group, so one particular or even two become known and have credibility.
2. Stop attacking people who are supporting your cause, be they Julie, MP’s, or anyone else. You need friends and you need people not to be scared of associating with you. (Note: Who cares if an MP didn’t thank you for sending you a thankyou letter Mr Burns - think of the bigger picture than your ego).
One MP at a time is what you need. If one MP says something pro-male and gets support, more MPs are likley to do the same. You only need 51% to change wahtever law you want.
Comment by Doug — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 2:31 pm
Boys are also lacking the protection they need from the law.
Look at this bit of favoritism towards a nz female paedophie
Comment by Stephen — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 2:35 pm
Thank you for that Stephen I cannot believe that story , if that was me I would get 5 years prison as class one status !!Regarding the role of the father, forget the pendulum theory Doug ,as it isn’t going to swing back because radical feminists have smashed the clock . All we hear about is misogyny but never misandry. Hey Doug do you like my comments on kiwiblog ? Oh yes Dougy boy - I can’t believe how many people viewed that blog last month -gives me a head spin , welcome to your worse nightmare -lol.Bring it on Smellon.
Comment by dad4justice — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 4:06 pm
Doug,
Tell us about yourself and the reasons for us to listen loudly to you.
Tell us about your experience and HandsOn application so we can get a grip on how seriously to take you
Onward - JIm
Comment by Jim Bailey — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 4:12 pm
doug.. all you are doing is making excuses for people ( and most likely yourself) who cannot stand up to do what is right and truly needed. It is likely that you have hidden behind these often so as to appear sympathetic but not truly take action to doing what should be done. The fathers group are all for DOING rather than sitting around a couch and making the excuses you are making. One thing I can say tho.. you have shown to have a very weak character. One who bows under peer pressure just cos someone calls an action uncool no matter how right and much needed that action truly is.
Comment by starr — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 5:22 pm
Doug,
thanks for your awesome comments. I seldom comment on this site any more because of the constant put downs and attacks, and of course one person in particular who resorts to name calling, and is disrespectful in that his comments include a person’s actual name instead of the username that he wishes to be known by. This is a serious breach in many on-line communities, especially one that deals with law.
The personal attacks I recieve are not because I don’t support or advance mens rights, but because I don’t do it in a way that suites those “on high”.
Recently I learned that the decision on whether or not to have an inquiry into the Family Court has been put into the hands of some one outside the Law & Order Select Committee, someone I believe will agree to an inquiry. I am currently drafting a letter to this person in support, and possibly to arrange a meeting.
Now personally I am excited and proud of the part I have played in all this, and remain very positive about the prospect of an inquiry. And those men who read and post on this site should also be excited. Wrong…..some may be excited but won’t dare show it…..others will attack me and scoff at the very idea of an inquiry, and one person will call me a pontificator.
I would love to keep the readers on this site up to date with the progress of the petition & inquiry, but it just isn’t worth the personal attacks.
Neither can I openly support anyone who I beleive is advancing the rights and lives of men and fathers for similar reasons. I take my hat of to Judy Turner, and don’t give a toss what others think about me.
Starr, your comments are bizarre. You say that Doug has “shown to have a very weak character”, yet obviously Doug has been reading the comments on this site and would have known that by posting his comment, which was absolutley on the money, he would recieve attacks on his character.
IMO anyone who is familiar with how this site works but still posts comments like Doug’s, Julie’s and Judy Turner’s, cannot possibly be weak, but rather have balls the size of pumpkins.
What is required is a web site where people can discuss and share ideas without fear of insult and attack, show mutual support for initiatives without fear of insult or attack, share advice, and work towards unity instead of further fracture. Sadly, this site has been hijacked and looses credibilty by the day.
Comment by xsryder — Fri 1st June 2007 @ 9:47 pm
Oh right so Doug and Wayne know what it’s like to have their children stripped from them for six years beacuse of lies . Yes Mr Burns is angry . This is my last post here girls - and forget the trust and I won’t work with wimps made in New Zealand . To know the pain you must experience the heartbreak . Wayne - you just blew it and do carrying on with your stupid select committees. Name calling Mr Burns is going . What a bunch of pc wimps !!!
Comment by dad4justice — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 5:57 am
Oh yes Doug boy - come around am met Mr Burns and I will show you sadness of the real kind , what a bunch of pc pathetic wimps , you can have your web site . Don’t worry Wayne the hijacker and horrible nasty Mr Burns who is devoid of credibility is leaving wimpland and Julie I will send you all the trust papers as I can’t work with idiots who think they have been hard done by !!
Comment by dad4justice — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 6:04 am
Been locked up in a round prison cell and forced psychotropic meds have you Wayne or Dougy boy !!!! ??? -Yeah right , had a bullet fired at you lately Dougy boy , oh poor affected wimps , boo who , you are deluded if you think government will help you Wayne !! Great - another split in men’s movement because of some wimp called Doug , I’ll stick to kiwiblog and it’s million views a month to get my very un pc message accross. Julie I mean that about the trust - its all over -thanks Wayne !!!!
Comment by dad4justice — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 6:10 am
Couldn’t resist it girls and eunuchs as this is my credibilty from the naughty , nasty , make wimps cry d4j .Just posted it on kiwiblog where I get attacked daily , won’t be getting attacked from deluded pc wankers here anymore , enjoy your namby pamby crap.
“Ms Bludgingbenefiarybasher , I wish WINZ would stop sending falsely accused fathers to my house to live . Got one police bailed here ( Maori chap ) and the cops got me passport, so I can’t fly the big bird outta this cess -pit country .Watched both me tradesmen sons recently leave on the kiwisender. I earnt $10k last year bitch , what did you earn , don’t bother with a reply snake .”
Comment by dad4justice — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 7:00 am
Here is an email sent to my PC from Jim Bailey, and I’ll ask publicly that he send no more;
Peter,
The trust was a con by the originator anyway
It has achieved exactly what it was designed to do
Division
Stay strong my friend
I hope and pray we catch-up at Napier -/- Hastings
There has been discussion to BLOCK the PC-dividers
My response;
Jim, firstly, you repeatedly state that Julie won’t listen. Do you remember after my walk to Wellington when I tried to tell you about the comments made by those hundreds and hundreds of petition supporters? How many hours did I waste talking to you and how many words did you actually hear. NOTHING. NOUGHT. ZIP. You didn’t give a toss about anything anyone who supported the petition had to say. Why? I came home from my walk inspired by the support WE got from the public for change in the Family Court, but then I was totally shattered by YOUR arrogance alone. To date you are still the only person who has never cared to listen to what the Public had to say. You are the one who has an innate inability to listen; not Julie.
BTW; Pontificate; -v, 1. state ones opinions as if they were the only possible correct ones. -n, 2. period of office of a Pope. It is somewhat ironic that you are the only person I have EVER heard using the word “pontificate” to describe others, while being the only person I have EVER met whose behaviour fits that description.
Also I will thank you to address me by the user-name I choose to use on-line. Just because you know my real name, and obviously have personal issues with me and anyone who doesn’t fall in behind you, does not allow you to be so disrespectful. We have user names which we expect to be known by, so try some respect.
Quite frankly the MENZ website often resembles a hostile battle zone rather than a caring a supportive place for people to discuss the issues facing men. I really can’t be BOTHERED returning.
You mentioned in your email to dad4justice “there has been discussion to block the PC -dividers”….you Jim have done more to divide the mens movement than anyone. You are the one who should be blocked. You’ve got your own web site, why come on MENZ and upset those who might want to keep thier distance from you?
Can someone please let me know when Jim is finally banned completely so we can all go back to supporting each other and tackling menz issues in as many ways as possible instead of just ***bothering*** according to Saint Jim, patron saint of those without ears.
Comment by xsryder — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 8:50 am
Wayne,
Stick your plastic name
I did not listen because almost all of what you TOLD me was old hat and I had plyed with those old hat methods for years and gone beyond and still learning and changing
MENZ is a war zone because its real we are in a war
Face it
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 10:14 am
A house divided is a house conquered.
Thankyou Judy Turner for your pro-male public statements.
Thankyou Pete and Doug for very sensible comments.
Thankyou xryder for trying to use the system to get positive change and equal rights for men.
Comment by Stephen — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 10:30 am
Stephen,
We-ARE-Conquered
300,000+ Kids without their own DAD and a fast growing number without Mums as well leaving few with all 4 Grands - Some say 400,000+
Look at your own case my friend
While the majority could not care less and some that claim to care fiddle with the system in a PC-Manner that got us here our woes increase
We are at war - wake-up
Only one side is fighting and fighting dirty
Kids-NEED-**Equal**-doses-of-Mum-n-Dad-and-all-4-Grands-where poss.
Wayne or anybody else coming into the debate - having a wild outburst and not answering follow-up many times will not help the chances of coalition
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 11:23 am
I’ll tell you something about Jim that we all know if we are honest. He is a man… (see the full stops) who really is a sucker to women, so he has to work at being strong to women’s power. My God, he has had to learn things the hard way. And here is this man wanting to build an army to stand up against feminism. And yet, he has never denied that he is no saint nor a man who can be a CEO of a team nor has he the abilities to be a ruler of the world. Just an ordinary man trying to do extraordinary things in a system that doesn’t care. And with all his weaknesses and strengths on show to the world to see. Can you ever deny a man who does that.
We are that army guys and girls. We are able to move things forward. He is not going to give up on us. Can you not see that. That is why he persists even though we put him down. What a sweetheart. How many people are like that. Not many.
Don’t worry about Jim having a go at me. He always forgives me for my bringing him down,. have you not noticed how I am a bitch also. And he always give me a cuddle when I see him. It is not him I fight but the commitment. This is a heavy cross we must carry. But he does not give up on us. None of us.
Comment by julie — Sat 2nd June 2007 @ 6:44 pm
Julies mind games exposed
Julies responce to;
“““““““““““““
I am out of the men’s movement
There is no con, Jim. You know how you tackled things. You know it didn’t work that way.
You want an army. An army is coming. But the army is not going to abuse the opposite sex. Just ask you pals. Jim Bagnall is working with women and Kerry is wanting to get in politics. He is going to have to work with women also. And Paul is too nice to take your side. It is hard to adapt I know. I am a parent also. The way I was brought up is not the world my sons live in. Please don’t get left behind. But then I know deep down you want out anyhow.
It is you who has to give now.
““““““““““““““““““`
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 2:09 am
ALL who have been coned into the **Children Need Parents Trust** best review the mind games used to suck you in.
To my knowledge Peter-B is the first to see through Julie’s real intention of the group of you that was actually coned in the first place.
The tactic is to cause division and to detract from the powerful simple concepts of the **NZ-FATHERS-Coalition** and the devastating effects of BOTHERING on those at their hearths where they damage our **Whole-NATURAL-Biological-FAMILIES**.
Julie is a stooge be it by naivety or deliberate I am not sure but will at this stage give her the benefit of the doubt and thus the cuddles as I do Javan’s Mother but she is far from worthy of my trust.
Note the Femi-Fascist inclusion that I ABUSE women – Look deeper into any ABUSE of I shown toward Women – The so called ABUSE is when I challenge them as I challenge male and female
Diane-J has used a similar tactic but a close review of the now 120 Jelicich posts on HandsOnEqualParent E-Group expose the truth as will Julie if you care to look
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 5:39 am
Far out,
Are we now putting e-mails to each other on the site.
OK, so now I have to expalin myself and somehow, I know it is going to be all out war. Jim, why send e-mails to me as you know I am going to keep telling you that you bring your troubles on yourself. You have a reputaion out there of being a misongynist and you have a reputation of throwing tantrums when you don’t get your own way and I have even heard the room once clapped when you left. Men and women. You like to fight, so go and get some boxing gloves and have it out with the men and women you want to resign because things don’t go your own way. If the law and policies say we ALL have to do things this way, you say, I WANT to do things my way and everyone else should resign. You are a spoilt little brat. No-one is going to change the world for Jim. Jim has to fit in with the world. You have lost all my support now. And if you think the answer is not having groups to lobby and win hearts and minds then so be it. If you think no-one should get funding to help parents then so be it. You are evicted, you hit bricks walls all the time. People bend over backwards to help you and you throw shit in their face. How can everyone else be wrong? Sometimes in life you have to look at yourself for the answer. Maybe it is not everyone else at fault, maybe it is you.
Paul does not take sides. He looks at both sides and is a reasonable man whenever I speak to him. He is not always going to take your side, I don’t think. Kerry will work with the feminists because he is going to have to. And Jim Bagnell, well everyone likes him including community groups. He has a great reputation out West. He wouldn’t have that reputaion if he acted the way you do. I am trying to open your eyes but you are too far into yourself that you can’t see truth from fiction.
Comment by julie — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 9:18 am
I will await your personal attack on me Jim and then I will wash my hands of all this. You think you know how it should be then go and do what you must do. If you succeed great. Great for my sons to have rights but if you don’t then there are still others quietly hacking away who will bring things around.
Comment by julie — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 9:37 am
I rest my case
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 11:14 am
I appreciate your comments Doug, and I agree with most of what you say. I personally have become rather discouraged with the lack of political savvy displayed by many members of the Men’s movement.
Peter, I understand your pain and I know you put considerable energy into supporting other men, so I want you to be able to participate here. But the fact is; you are constantly abusive and hostile, giving creedence to the feminist charge that we exemplify the controlling and violent male sterotype. Moderate men visiting this site tend to think we are bunch of radical nutters, so we loose their support.
Because one of the primary aims of MENZ is to give a voice to men who have been damaged by our current social situation, I don’t like the idea of banning people and closely monitoring and censoring everything that is written here.
But please, guys, try to be be respectful of one another, and of the people we need to influence. As then NZ Herald editor John Roughan advised Mens Centre North Shore many years ago: “Play the ball, not the man.”
Comment by JohnP — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 11:52 am
Julie,
There was no need to be sorry or to delete the thread in which I objected to the language you used. It’s enough to acknowledge that you’ve heard, and you did that.
As to your optimism that men can expect equal rights from CYFS/Universities/Government, I don’t share it.
I stated in the now deleted post that men are asking no more than equal treatment under the law, both in letter and application. I also said that denial of such rights has been the oldest cause of discontent in history, and that the outcome is always the same.
Look at any other group of disadvantaged people: blacks in South Africa, blacks in the US in the 1960’s, working men in the early 20th century, the Irish before them, and landowners in the time of King John. None were delivered redress by the wisdom and goodwill of the established power of the time.
The pressure to change comes from outside government, and government eventually changes when it judges it detrimental to its own interests to continue resisting.
The process of change, as any alcoholic, smoker or drug addict knows, begins with acknowledgement.
Female privilege is so embedded in our social and political landscape that many of us don’t even see it, our attentions being inclined toward the unusual rather than the commonplace. Establishment power doesn’t see it, nor do many women.
Some men see it, many sense it, and a few have felt the full force of it.
Comment by Rob Case — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 12:05 pm
Jim, copying …
(sorry about the premature submission folks - I’m using my phone to do this)
…private emails and revealing names is way over the line. You are therefore banned from commenting here for a month, during which time you should read the rules of this site and decide whether or not you are able to obey them.
Comment by JohnP — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 12:07 pm
Five minutes after writing this I went over to Glenn Sacks’ blog and find this perfect example: (article)
Comment by Rob Case — Sun 3rd June 2007 @ 12:45 pm
Stop tinking. Get a crowd.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 12:25 pm
Right on Ben
Comment by Jim Bailey — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Obeying rules set to guard Femi-FASCISM is not my way
Comment by Jim Bailey — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 12:35 pm
There is no rules in WAR against the radical feminists who are without
” human decency ” . I don’t know defeatism !! Bring it on !!
Comment by dad4justice — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 12:47 pm
Resent MENZ posts should be making it loud and clear why men are so easily duped by women - I expose Julie for who and what she is and look what happens
The Femi-Fascists will always lead while men are duped so easily
Comment by Jim Bailey — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 12:54 pm
Jim/Ben
To win any war you need numbers.
To keep those numbers together, you need to minimise conflict between them, and direct their attention at the enemy.
You also need to understand the enemy.
Every other Men’s Rights site I visit understands this and keeps the focus outward.
Variety of opinion is what draws readers, and the more readers, the more troops.
You can see as well as I the number of visitors to this site at the right of the page. It’s not growing much is it?
Comment by Rob Case — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 3:08 pm
Sure Rob,
I have no problem with what you say. Nor does any other reader it is common sense.
But reading is only part of the issue. Acting is a completely different affair. So where are the numbers when it comes to direct action. We are left with readers and talkers.
If you follow the men’s groups history you will find a dwindling of activity as feminism gets stronger. The strong get stronger and the weaker die. Simple Darwinian fact that one.
So who else is challenging the Care of Children Bill’s false introduction along with me? Nobody. Why? Margaret Wilson broke the law. There is no complaint from the bureaucracy they are just trying to smooth over the event with lots of cowshit because that’s what pays the bills. Our cowshit as sold to international audiences.
Ask the Republicans if they know what I am talking about. Ask Bevan - ask Alan Candy - ask Kerry Bevan. Nope they won’t help you because they want “power”. Ask James Nicholle ask Mark Shipman - ask John Potter. They won’t help the movement because so to do means getting out of the comfort zone.
Ask them. I dare you! They won’t say Benjamin is wrong - they will say “it’s all too much trouble”. They will say we are prepared to live with lies and deceipt.
Maybe that’s because someone else has still got their balls.
The difference between Jim - Jim, me and a few others is that we are prepared to get on the streets and fight for the children and their fathers. How many of the readers have been to prison for their principles?
Yet every tinker or politician would be quite prepared to send a soldier over a hill to take a bullet to stand up for democracy.
Bloody cowards is what I think.
Lest we forget.
Respectfully,
Benjamin Easton.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 3:38 pm
Back off a bit Benjamin please. Radicals and moderators have their place. Any radical change the feminists put forward is backed up by moderators. The “No Smacking Bill’ was backed by a group that started in South Auckland and has been give 4 million dollars. It is now out West, on TV and so forth. You forget to do all the work. it is one thing to go into the bush and slash down the trees but you cannot build the community without the hard yacka of making the ground furtile or building huts etc. You and Jim need the moderators. Else you are nothing., You don’t follow through but just make a stand. That does nothing but make you feel good. You make no changes that way.
Comment by julie — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 3:51 pm
I see Julie’s confidence has been so increased by some of us being slapped at her bidding, that she now returns to the higher ground
You MEN could learn a lot from your reactions to Julie and get over being MOTHERED - Or was it your mum that taught you to be a man?
Why are you some of you so called MEN listening to a woman tell you who you are and how to be and what she thinks you should be
I think we should rename MENZ Issue to
Lets dance with Julie and bugger what wisdom is in MEN
Comment by Jim Bailey — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 4:06 pm
Jim,
What do you want from me that I can give to you? I try so hard to understand you but I feel whatever I say and whatever I offer is not what you want.
You have everything that I could only dream of to make a difference and yet you want? Tell me what you want. All my friends tell me that you are right and that I am right. I really do hate being a bitch. Is it that we cannot understand each other?
Comment by julie — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 4:44 pm
Ben,
I agree with you on the importance of action. You are taking a frontal attack approach to the feminists and I sincerely wish you success.
There are other courses of action though that are less conspicuous though very effective.
Every man on a high income is keeping the feminist machine well-oiled by providing it with high taxes, the produce of his labour and the diversion of his attention from the methods being used to exploit him.
Every man who marries is exacerbating the problem further by directly sponsoring someone who will happily take advantage of a range of laws that enslave him.
So I believe the marriage-strikers and the “Men Going Their Own Way” movement is powerful action, if passive.
This may seem like a radical position, but it is no different in principle to a country refusing to trade with another on the grounds of human rights abuses.
There is no good reason for we men to continue to support this culture.
(And yes I practice what I preach. I chucked the business, stopped dating years ago and live as leanly as possible. It’s a lifestyle far more suited to a man. It’s free, independent and unconcerned with appearances or the emotion-fests that seem to plague life amongst women).
Comment by Rob Case — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 6:37 pm
Goodonya Rob,
It’s amazing how much some guys will do (including selling their bro’s down the feminist river) for a bit of power and getting their wands waxed.
Jim.
I don’t see it as having anything to do with being mothered.
It’s simply that men have the right to listen to women like Julie or ignore them as they see fit.
Those same MEN will make up their own minds about who and how to be MEN.
Comment by Stephen — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 7:12 pm
I only hope your request is genuine Julie and supporters.
What I want is for you to stop being presumptuous about anything to do with Men and Boys including their Orgs you claim to have listened to – Most that I have listened to including ManAlive tell me a very different message than you receive.
There are millions of Men that have gone before those of us around now to become the men we are now.
We Men have our own answers and would appreciate Women as **Equal** be it friends - Family – Lovers while we find them.
Even the weakest of women have moved into powerful positions buoyed by Law, Social Policy, much undeserved social kudos, and have MOTHERED our Men without the balance of Father.
Gun at the head stuff.
My personal situation with Javan being a perfect example.
Although I have been lucky to receive Parenting of some 54 years and knew 3 of my Grands very well, tons of uncles and auties from both sides. Let alone growing in an area when the local cop was our friend and mentor, plenty of MALE teachers and sports coaches.
I have fought to Father Javan from stolen sperm – Now 12 years later the balance has not been attained even though the FC has done all it can to help in the last few years.
Until that **Equal** in all things balance is attained we head for strife and will find it impossible to bring healthy Kids into the world because of the imbalance and thus the problem grows.
In NZ represented by 300,000+ Kids without Dad, some without Mum, some without both and most certainly nearly all without all 4 grands, some say 400,000+.
While the likes of you who I have said I give the benefit of the doubt that you strive in a naive manner continue to undermine the debate-/-squabble-/-whatever that must go on between MEN-/- we go nowhere.
The debate needs to be held between MEN to decide when and how to take back our place – MOST men don’t yet want to face that we are at WAR, that we are conquered – Most of those who do realise want-/-hope that democratic-/-legal-/-nice-/-PC procedures will suffice -/- a few of us realise we need an agressive though peaceful army to stand to win and that ALL democratic procedures have been commandeered by the Femi-FASCISTS and their supporters.
If that means individual MEN-/-DADS standing alone as most of us do, most of the time then so be it.
I agree we go nowhere until we are in Coalition and even then there will be healthy contention if there is any passion left
I fully realise that its Mens choice-/-LOSS to listen to the likes of you ahead of their peers.
Men so easily fall to Mother unless they have had genuine Father-/-Men-Tor -/- GrandFather -/- Grand Men-Tor and the likes of you are taking advantage of that - Maybe inadvertently maybe not
Comment by Jim Bailey — Wed 6th June 2007 @ 8:37 pm
I had a close relationship with both my Grandfathers.
I got lots of contact my Dad growing up, with his male mates and with my many Uncles.
I grew up in an age where I thankfully had lots of male teachers.
I met more male mentors during my years in the Cub Scouts and Youth Clubs.
Then there were my male Soccer Coaches……….you get the picture.
I listen to Julie AND my male peers.
That’s my choice.
Comment by Stephen — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 9:06 am
I had a great father as well (still have).
I wouldn’t be surprised if those who support father’s rights do so because they recognise the value of their own fathers.
It’s the fatherless who are clueless about the value of men as parents.
Comment by Rob Case — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 10:57 am
I like any other male am built to love women. Why would I want to do anything different from what I am built to do - it doesn’t make sense. Women are built to be loved.
If any of us choose to use or not use certain organs for their purpose them don’t use them. But if a man uses his semen for a purpose, that of love, then his responsibility to purpose does not stop at ejaculation.
If you choose to live alone - good on you. If you choose to raise children - do it with the opposite gender and for the child’s ability to be consistent with their own purpose and function do it under the protection of that opposite gender that provided the child with its life.
Why should there be any problem complicating this issue. It is about function, responsibility and purpose no matter how you compete within the six r’s: reading writing, arithmatic, region, religion and race.
That’s what the men’s movement stands for. It’s not about child support. Thats a secondary issue. Its not about the 6 r’s and it is not an emotion that should be interupted for any other behaviour or emotion. It is about preserving our function through the protection of our “tamariki” (Maori for child).
So where are the soldiers? They are bitching.
Our organisers are busy organising how the world will see them when they are strong and powerful - living in Peter(’s) Pan’s world of marble and bauble chasing.
How will they get a vote if they haven’t got their marbles secured and in their pockets? I’m not being provocative I am being fair. It’s just like always those who get busy figuring they are marginalised - are marginalised so gather around like a bunch of victims.
Victims who have power send soldiers to be killed to fight their war against oppression. Well I’m a soldier. I’ve been threatened now on numerous occassions - been in prison and have orders out against me to control my apparently “poor” behaviour. I’m my own mentor for the moment because there aren’t many others prepared to share the dugout when the going gets too tough.
What I’m telling everyone, where they tink they comprehend the situation: listen to what I say and even agree with me: is that your battle has already been won on “your” behalf. Our Attorney General then and now apparently invulnerable speaker “broke the law”. Judges have lied to cover this up. This is “proved”.
So where are the soldier? Ooooooooh look at this injustice “isn’t it just aweful”. “no dear, don’t challenge an injustice at its core - it’s just far too dangerous”.
The way not to be cowardly is to step it up - not for yourself and your own but on the behalf of others. If men don’t step up then men as we are built to protect will falter and quite possibly fall.
Respectfully,
Benjamin Easton.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 11:03 am
I’ll repeat: Stop tinking. Get a crowd.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 11:08 am
I’m already part of a crowd, and it’s growing.
There are millions of men doing exactly as I am, and for the same reasons.
If you doubt that, do a Google search on ‘Marriage Strike’ or ‘Men Going Their Own Way’.
It’s clear our views are very different.
Comment by Rob Case — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 12:04 pm
I don’t know what everyone else did in the last 24 hours but I put 4 posts on trademe which brought out some good discussion with feminists and support. Now I see we have had 900 extra visitors and sadly, this above is what we gave them to read. I am not taking credit for the visitors because for all I know someone else was promoting men’s rights and a men’s affairs in parliament which a politician is backing in some other way. But how embarrassing.
Comment by julie — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 3:11 pm
Julie,
before you pass on your reply to what I have said in the judgements of your reform, are you aware what was protected by Margaret Wilson putting in the report on the Care of Children Bill a day late?
Do you know why I am battling like this? Can you explain it before you say that my behaviour is improper and undesirable? If so: please, I implore you tell me exactly what it is I have repeatedly complain about and your alternative observation to an as acceptadly illegal problem against our constitution.
This will clear up the differences as long as you answer the objective.
Respectfully,
Benjmain Easton.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 3:30 pm
Benjamin,
I have no problem with you except that you have alot of energy. lol
I know what you do is worthwhile. I have not followed you recently because you don’t post here. I wish you would. I wish Wayne would also.
Can you tell me what is going on?
Comment by julie — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 3:59 pm
Julie - read back. Read carefully.
You are complaining about attitudes that it appears you are not considering efficiently before making a comment in reply. You are answering from your established point of view rather than considering what has been said. You’ve done thhis before in your strings.
I’ve asked you a question. Do you know what I mean when I quote saying that our Speaker of the House broke a law in constitution when she was our Attorney General - that I have proved this without difficulty and that when presented to the courts the judges tampered with the evidence to suprees the information?
I ask you to read back through this string, consider what I am saying and then comment again. Write tomorrow after you have considered all of the information and slept on it - the brain works better after it has been given a full cycle of computation.
Cheers,
Benjmain.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Thu 7th June 2007 @ 4:25 pm
Goodmorning Benjamin, my brain is working better so I will look over all that I have said to you. I have received some advice from another mens site to try and keep conflict offline because it is not helping the overall men’s movement. There are many more men and women trying to help than our small group. I should be supporting them. I will e-mail you if that’s all right.
Comment by julie — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 7:46 am
Jim Baily writes above:
People who regularly fail to obey normal social conventions end up isolated and alienated from potential supporters.
Even Helen Clark has to play the game by the rules (most of the time) to get what she wants.
Comment by JohnP — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 10:14 am
Tena koe John Potter,
your point is obviously reasonable John except for the word “regularly”.
The reason for protest is because problems exist that are not being addressed and for a natural convenience by those in power social conventions can and are used to overpower the access the protest has to modify against the power in order to balance better against the injustice as it is alleged.
Jim hasn’t been precise in his complaint, yet nor should he have to be precise. This string isn’t about the protocols of the status quo (and please note I mitigate in respect from the term power) being accepted as claiming their functionality in order to justify their existence (or cause).
This string is about the constitution of the men’s movement.
Judy Turner is presently our champion. She is our champion because she is not afraid of the opinions of teh other women in power who for some reason seem to want to pervert against the functions of womanhood where women until this latest (western) generation are dependent on the functionality and health of men.
I am saying so where are the men? Jim agrees and he is pointing out quite articulately I think that change is necessary and it will come from within the body of men as men have to change in order better to achieve the standard that Judy Turner has set as an example.
The expression that is being protected here is, as men in collective fashion attempt to gain their confidence under the banner of another paradigm, that of Republicanism that this is a menz.org.nz site and not apolitical platform that will invariable lead to men being represented by the Republican party.
If that’s an end well all well and good but surely the purpose here is to challenge the raw material. At the moment the main issue for men is that the fathers who are apart from their first or subsequent families for whatever reason are about to bbe named and shamed if for some reason they have not met societies demand of their commitment to that or those families.
What Jim is say is “guys” stop thinking about yourselves. It is men who are in danger here, not you or your take on the philosophical constitution of any democracy, socialism (or oligarchies if really to push any point). It is about men being irrepairably damaged and where are our soldiers?
I agree with conventions as they are necessary for any community no matter their construction, and consequently recognise the values of your point about Jim not complying with the instruction you gave him. Yet we are in a new age now and Jim if he wants can access the site from any computer and because of the guiding rules you have put into place on the site can contribute.
I remember your own reply to Stuart Cummings along the same lines recently. This is the net. You don’t edit the net.
Jim makes an extraordinary contribution by keeping on coming back until the body of power recognises what it is he is saying: There is nowhere to hide. It is time for men to consolidate as one and say the problem is so profound we must look for alternatives. We must find answers where in the past it has been easier to rely on social conventions to absorb our confusion, shame or comprehension.
Most respectfully,
Benjamin Easton.
(of a) fathers coalition.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 11:01 am
John-P,
Editing what I said makes you guilty of spin to your advantage and hides the very real issues between Julie and I as I expose her true aims
Sad you can’t see it
You have been in the game nearly as long as I have
It is not my way to obey Femi-FASCIST rules
Comment by Jim Bailey — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Jim,
to be consistent with what you say, you can afford to leave Julie out of your dialogue. Don’t fight her. There is no need and it will distract the focus trying to prove its merit. Just concentrate, not on perservering at the front line but as we state we have to: preserving the front line.
Benjamin.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 3:21 pm
Jim,
I don’t think I’ve heard so much tripe in my life.
This is a web-site, not a barracks.
At the top of the page it says “promoting a clearer understanding of men’s experience”.
That’s what we do when we say what we think.
Every time you respond with a comment belittling the value of their experience, you are really saying “Shut-up - this is how I see it, and that’s all that counts”.
There are others here, and they all have minds of their own.
If you want to command an army, set up a recruiting office and get to work.
Comment by Rob Case — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 4:10 pm
Judy Turner is presently our champion. She is our champion …..
This is one point of view Ben, not all see Judy as a champion.
This thread is sadly disappointing as it does nothing to address the issues Judy picked up from the original MENZ posting.
Its the 11 year old boy cared for by his dad who brought the Bad Dad List home from school for reading home-work that matters.
Its the portrayal of dads as hopeless losers who have to become a mum to be a good mum to be a good dad that matters.
Regards
Scrap
Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 6:33 pm
Jim,
You’re right - we are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
I’ve been aware for some years of a worsening climate for men with regard to their role in society and their treatment by the courts. You and many others here have made your stories known, and the rest of us are listening.
In the world I was brought up in, men headed the household and generally did a fine job of it.
In this new world, women head the household and men are optional.
A husband can be dismissed at the caprice of his wife, relieved of family, home and standard of living at any moment’s notice. It’s a complete reversal of the state of affairs that existed 100 years ago.
Choosing not to marry is hardly “shutting down” or running anywhere.
It’s a sensible course of action to take, having assessed the risks.
As soon as one rules out marriage and family, one is then left with the question of what to do with one’s life. The answer seems fairly straight-forward to me - Enjoy it. That’s what I’m doing, and I find on the “Men Going Their Own Way” sites plenty of men who have reached the same conclusion as me and who are doing the same thing.
You may wonder why I bother visiting Men’s Rights sites, and posting my comments.
I believe that ultimately men will win equal treatment before the law, and that fathers will be recognised as equal parents, amongst other things. I think this change in direction will be brought about by men (and women) applying pressure on law-makers at many different points,
in all manner of ways. The pressure of millions of unmarried women in the West who will soon be past their child-bearing years is already being felt. The cost of supporting them in their later years, without husband or children, is already a factor in government thinking.
Activists such as Fathers for Justice are bringing the plight of fathers under repressive laws to the attention of younger men, and giving them serious pause for thought.
Older men, like myself, who have passed the years where we are easy prey to our egos, can at least let other men know that this is how some of us have chosen to live. That it’s an acceptable choice to make, and a worthwhile life. Not for everyone I grant you, but definitely an option for those younger men who have grave doubts about the battle-field that marriage has become.
I also think that because all men will benefit from a change in direction of the law, it’s right that the cost of that change be borne by as many men as possible. It would be enough if every man simply recognised the wrongness of the current state of affairs, and did some small thing consistently to change course. If women use condescending language, challenge them. If media publish untruths, tell them. If politicians are party to anti-male legislation, don’t vote for them and send them an email saying this. Post your opinions on web-sites, let the world see your numbers.
There’s no need for any of us to carry the cause on our shoulders alone.
Comment by Rob Case — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 7:03 pm
Rob-C,
Great post thanks for your open honesty - I think in that we can find Coalition somewhere with more talking
However I do have a Son who is nearly 12 who is still susceptible to the manipulations of his Mother, her Family and religious mates - I see that as OK as long as I make an **Equal** stance.
Currently our Laws and Social Policies make that dam ni impossible - I recon I did a pretty good job of it while my health and business was strong and could more than match their efforts to use him as their tool of pray, do my part and pay for the privilege twice - Now that I am not so well that is far more difficult and exposes Javan to one sided manipulation and me to the incredible gender bias placed on the venerable
I am no victim and have moved mountains to replace my vigour and income with wit and cunning that has been an embarrassment to many who strive to BLOCK Fathering
In that I can’t run but sure look forward to the day when Javan can BUY his own way to freedom of choice and I can lay on a beach with a long line in hand – an honourable woman beside me – a couple of golden retrievers – vats of Speight’s Porter – and perpetual summer – Bora Bora?
Onward - Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 8:16 pm
Rob,
I’m heartily glad to see you writing this -
“In this new world, women head the household and men are optional.
A husband can be dismissed at the caprice of his wife, relieved of family, home and standard of living at any moment’s notice.
Choosing not to marry is hardly “shutting down” or running anywhere.
It’s a sensible course of action to take, having assessed the risks.
As soon as one rules out marriage and family, one is then left with the question of what to do with one’s life. The answer seems fairly straight-forward to me - Enjoy it. That’s what I’m doing, and I find on the “Men Going Their Own Way” sites plenty of men who have reached the same conclusion as me and who are doing the same thing.
You may wonder why I bother visiting Men’s Rights sites, and posting my comments.
I believe that ultimately men will win equal treatment before the law, and that fathers will be recognised as equal parents, amongst other things. I think this change in direction will be brought about by men (and women) applying pressure on law-makers at many different points,
in all manner of ways. The pressure of millions of unmarried women in the West who will soon be past their child-bearing years is already being felt. The cost of supporting them in their later years, without husband or children, is already a factor in government thinking.
Activists such as Fathers for Justice are bringing the plight of fathers under repressive laws to the attention of younger men, and giving them serious pause for thought.
Older men, like myself, who have passed the years where we are easy prey to our egos, can at least let other men know that this is how some of us have chosen to live. That it’s an acceptable choice to make, and a worthwhile life. Not for everyone I grant you, but definitely an option for those younger men who have grave doubts about the battle-field that marriage has become.
I also think that because all men will benefit from a change in direction of the law, it’s right that the cost of that change be borne by as many men as possible. It would be enough if every man simply recognised the wrongness of the current state of affairs, and did some small thing consistently to change course. If women use condescending language, challenge them. If media publish untruths, tell them. If politicians are party to anti-male legislation, don’t vote for them and send them an email saying this. Post your opinions on web-sites, let the world see your numbers.
There’s no need for any of us to carry the cause on our shoulders alone”.
Well said. I concur entirely with these sentiments. As a fellow man going his own way I have never felt so free and comfortable. I have an enormous amount to offer a woman - not just material wealth, but great character and a bag of skills that would enrich any woman. Yet I have long ago given up the endless and thankless struggle to satisfy women.
In doing so I have breathed a whole new life.
People who meet me cannot believe I am my actual age.
They routinely confess with astonishment that I look 15 years younger than my actual age.
Since I realised my brothers and I were the ones needing help, not the spoilt princesses falsely claiming victimhood, I have increasingly fended for my brothers and I. I’ve left women behind to fend for themselves - after all they’ve been telling us for 40 years now they can do anything!
It’s been about 5 years since I made this decision and every day I grow richer in all senses of the word now that I’m doing everything I can to stop feeding the bloated medussa of modern womanhood.
Every day I find new ways to feed my brothers and I whilst starving her.
I now look forward to a very long and enjoyable life.
In an ironic twist I now see how feminism as well as doing me enormous damage has done me a huge favor. It helped me to see how the vast majority of women are either cold hearted power junkies or callous indifferrent narcicists content to idle away their lives in Oprah,Dr Phil, shopping malls, gossip, office and shop ‘work’, house’work’, bangles, baubles and new age romantisism, resting on easy street firm within the bosom of nanny statism without giving a flying +++k about their menfolk’s welfare.
Enjoy YOUR time brother. It’s arrived!
As Crosby from Crosby Stills Nash and Young once said -
“It’s been a long time coming,
and it’s gonna be a long time going too”.
Comment by Stephen — Fri 8th June 2007 @ 8:20 pm
OK this thread is a pain , please understand that the Families Commission that United Future played as a trump card to gain a role in government has done nothing to help decent fathers trapped in the vile and chaotic world of bias and corrupt family law !
Comment by dad4justice — Sat 9th June 2007 @ 8:31 am