- promoting a clearer understanding of men's experience -
Need some advice. I live in Aus, children with their mum in NZ. Mother has shifted and refuses to give me any contact details for my children. Children have been told not to give me any information.
Mother’s motive is that I am abusive and she wants to protect herself and the kids.
What can I do?
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.
This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.
Contact me for rates
NZ teacher Peter Joyce’s settled life was disrupted when a woman he had never met accused him of historic rape. With a unique brand of angry humour, his diary plots the stages of his despair and traces his attempts to find justice in the face of the current insistence that we must “believe the victim”.
Dry Ice is a compelling memoir, but much more. The accusation made the writer a reluctant expert on similar cases from all over the world. He throws light on everything that limits public knowledge of false sexual allegations, from dangerous counselling to flawed statistics, and he exposes police investigation methods as blinkered, inefficient and insensitive.
You can purchase Dry Ice on Kindle for just $6.00 here: https://www.amazon.com/Dry-Ice-Peter-Joyce-ebook/dp/B01N19JKAR
Peter Joyce writes a blog: www.blackstonesdrum.com
shoot the stupid bitchThis sort of comment is not permitted on MENZ – see my comment below – JohnP.Comment by Ford — Sun 23rd October 2011 @ 7:22 pm
Mikey,
As a guardian you are entitled to this information.
Apply in the Family Court section 44 Dispute between guardians and ask (section 7) for Lawyer for Child to be appointed on a without notice basis who should have this matter all resolved withing seven days.
Sorry Ford maybe you are having a bad day but what a stupid suggestion.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Sun 23rd October 2011 @ 9:52 pm
not so much a stupid suggestion as it would be if one carried it out..and its a really good idea
Comment by Ford — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 7:19 am
Actually Allan and Ford, the option of “shoot(ing) the bitch” has become more widely recognized as viable in the US. Even attorneys present it as an option to their male clients who are victims of unilateral and malicious divorce (seriously). A man will likely spend less time in prison and have more options when he gets out if he kills his ex-wife than if he has to pay her child support. Since he likely will never see his children again, at least in any meaningful way, than the children are not a concern. Unfortunately, shooting the bitch isn’t as bad as an idea as it sounds given the alternatives. That’s what happens when women and the gov’t impose too much upon an innocent man. His options narrow considerably and are not always in favor of the ex-wife.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 7:48 am
I’m pleased you realise it would be stupid to carry out Ford. It would get someone locked up and loose contact with their kids completly. This guy wants contact and as such he needs to show respect for his children’s mother. They love her 100% , they love him 100%. Bad mouthing and foolish comments do not help kids to maintain a strong relationship with both their parents.
The best parent is BOTH parents!
Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 7:51 am
DarrylX,
I am sorry for your experience about separation and child support. In this country such a suggestion would be viewed as extremely stupid and unethical by any lawyer or experienced support person. Also we do not have parents locked up for Child Support matters and a person’s Child Support situation has virtually no impact on their parenting matters. I know of 2 chaps who owe 6 figure sums and have been dragged to Court for “examination of means” and others who have had property distrained, or sold to recover IRD debt, who still enjoy shared care of their children.
I am sorry for your experience but in this country it seems quite different. Parents are likely to have continuing contact with their children if that is what they wish. The exceptions to this are those whose mental health is so damaged they top themselves, or those who committ crimes as suggested by yourself and Ford. In New Zealand we do not find it helpful to threaten or joke about murder.
The best parent is BOTH parents!
Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 8:05 am
Darryl X,
In New Zealnd the latest IRD figures show they issued 19 warrants for arrest and obtained 24 charging orders over property because of unpaid child support.
We have about 180,000 people paying Child Support so action against probably 30-40 people in a year is fairly insignificant compared to the tales you tell.
Perhaps you could put the US situation into perspective for us. How many liable parents for Child Support and what kind of numbers suffer punitive actions such as imprisonment each year?
The warrants are used to drag people to Court for “examination of means” which normally means less than 4 hours detention. Charging orders are when property is seized and sold to repay alleged debt. This is normally motor vehicles. Several of the 19 and 24 mentioned above will be the same individual taxpayers.
Many more have garnishing orders attached to their pay but even then limits to how much of someones pay can be seized apply. I think that is 70% of the gross for all forms of taxation including CS, Student Loans and any other Court fines etc that may be part of the recovery.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 8:16 am
allan harvey..with the woman screamig abuse and movig countries..what do you think his chances are of seeing his kids again anyway..in a maningful way at least..chances are not that good are they..time to clean the gun
Comment by Ford — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 8:24 am
Hi Allan
again I read your posts and am forced to wonder if its a wind up.
“and a person’s Child Support situation has virtually no impact on their parenting matters”
can I get a hands up here from other readers,
who has found that any hiccup in the child tax has an impact that differs from Allans “virtually no impact”?
I’ll go first and say in my case it is/was huge.
There always seems to be this theme that “I know of a chap who didnt get completely shafted by the femily caught” therefore the caught must be all goodness and light.
Parents are likely to have continuing contact with their children if that is what they wish
This sounds so much like the legalese tripe spouted at the femily caught, is it possible you have been to near the trough for too long Allan? With all due respect, “are likely”, “continuing contact”,”if thats what they wish”.
Does that sounds like meaningful parenting to you???
And then this
The exceptions to this are those whose mental health is so damaged they top themselves
My question here is who is it? Who does the damage to these poor soul’s mental health?
You seem to tout the femily caught as the panacea for relationship problems see a lawyer, pay some money, get a Mckenzie friend, engage in the system, run the risk of damaging your mental health, until someone either you or the mother of your child ends up dead. If its you then the caught will ignore youre death. If its her, they will use it as evidence of your unfitness and their lack of culpability.
I have been dragged into this mire for the good of my children and the only good advice I received was not to take this farce seriously.
That did more for my mental health than all the pontificating of the snouts in the system that it is all for the good of the children.
Mits
Comment by mits — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 8:44 am
I join Allan Harvey in rejecting any encouragement here for resorting to violence. If men resort to violent reactions, they become no better morally than those whose immoral behaviour they criticize. Aside from that, postings on MENZ that incite or plot criminal offences will inevitably lead to state responses. The NZ government has already taken advantage of the ‘war on terror’ to remove many more rights, freedoms and protections from its citizens with new state powers that have already been used to terrorize small communities in which a few individuals were believed to have illegal firearms and to be plotting violent actions. I do not want to be raided by police in military clothing threatening me with automatic weapons, seizing my computers that they then withhold for months or years even though they find no evidence on them. I do not want to be charged with the seriously-punished offence of ‘participating in a criminal group’, another recent NZ removal of fundamental human liberties (in this case the freedom of association) through a law that can easily be used against any unfavoured political movement. I do not want police to use the new powers the NZ govt recently provided them to break surreptitiously into my house to hide surveillance cameras so they can watch me having sex and all other personal activities. You can be sure the new powers the state has allowed itself will eventually be used against the men’s movement given the slightest excuse to do so. Please, please refrain from inciting, encouraging or plotting violence or other offending. Kneejerk outbursts to that effect may be understandable for a frustrated, second-class gender that is routinely exploited, denigrated, lied about and abused under a feminist regime, but we simply cannot afford to be provoked into foolish comments; this will simply play into the hands of the feminist state that will in no way observe the same limits against ‘violence’ that it has placed on male citizens.
Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 9:23 am
dont worry hans..if i get raided they wont even find a potato gun..i sold my guns years ago and handed in my licence before the x remebered i had them so she couldnt use that against me as well..i bought 2 fishing rods for what i got..come and confiscate those if the etate wants to..other than my openly bitter attitude about women i am generally a law abiding citizen..so go hard
Comment by Ford — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 11:17 am
p,s hans..i dont even mind if people find out my real idenity..i dont hide..i dont have to
Comment by Ford — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 11:18 am
Thank you Allan. I will contact the lawyer for child. There is one appointed already, as I have applied to the court for holiday contact and removal of the CAPS order.
Comment by Mikey — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 11:22 am
hans..ive come to the conclusion you are more over dramatic than any woman ive ever met..haha
Comment by Ford — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 11:37 am
I personally know of a woman who poisoned her husband, causing his hospitalisation. She used to stand over him with a carving knife while he slept, contemplating murder and then claiming spousal abuse. Later, she plotted to kill him with his .22 rifle but her plans were stifled by his father (her father in law) who confiscated and destroyed his rifle. This woman also tried to kill their three children on at least three separate occasions that I am aware of, possibly more. She was never arrested or charged with any crime despite a complaint being made to the Policy Officers.
So, it seems that advocating spousal murder can be safe if you have the correct genitalia. Do you have two X chromosomes?
My three children and I are just lucky to have survived to tell the tale I guess.
Comment by Wayne — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 12:47 pm
Hello again everyone,
This would be a crime, talk to someone. Surely nobody can take children away from guardians without explanation?
During a crime course (for sociology) we were told that the reason that a women gets a lower sentence for the same crime than a man is that in the justice and prison system they are seen as not being able to handle a large sentence, and aare still opressed there. But in larger society now they are not, why? (If you were that empowered as a women you wouldn’t need to have this paradox in the justice system. You would be confident enough in your innocence to not be treated like that, wouldn’t you?)
Thank you,
Benjamin
Comment by Benjamin — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 1:35 pm
Hi Wayne (#15): Yes, we often see women get away with violence and other crime. When a man phones the police because his female partner has assaulted / is assaulting him, he is likely to be the one thrown out of his home under a police protection order if not charged with domestic violence while she is unlikely to be charged with anything. That’s how life is for men under feminist government.
Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 4:06 pm
Mikey, you state that “mother’s motive is that I am abusive and she wants to protect herself and the kids. Is her motive justified or is she simply making stuff up?
Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 4:16 pm
Ford, (#1 and #8) comments encouraging or condoning violence are not permitted on this site. Please refrain from doing so again to avoid having your posts moderated.
Comment by JohnPotter — Mon 24th October 2011 @ 9:03 pm
@Allan – Most child support obligors in the US (almost all men) have garnishing orders against them. It’s not something the courts do for punishment or for enforcement, it’s just the way it works. Most orders exceed cost of raising a child by a multiple of approximately two to four. Or greater than what the father should be paying (if the mother pays for half the cost) by a multiple of four to eight.
Approximately one-half of all obligors during the past forty years have been in arrears. Approximately one-quarter are in perpetual arrears – meaning that they have incomes that will not allow them to ever be able to comply with the order.
Furthermore, many states apply interest to the arrears. In some, like Puerto Rico or Massachusetts, the interest exceeds ten percent (so inflation would not erase the arrears or the interest – of course this is deliberate).
At any given time, approximately 50,000 men are in prison for arrears on average per year for each year during the past forty years. Since the economy started tanking here, that number has increased dramatically. In Ohio, for instance, approximately seventy percent of obligors (almost all men) are now in arrears (with automatic suspension of licenses – that’s about seven percent of the entire male population of Ohio who have or will lose their driver licences soon. In Illinois, I read recently that it is 88% (haven’t confirmed that anywhere but it is totally believable).
In the US, time in prison is not just a temporary detention of a few hours. In New York, for instance, the State can and frequently does, incarcerate a man for up to six months. However, since arrears are accumulating during those six months, he is often released and then arrested again and thrown back in. I know of several instances in which a man was arrested and sent to prison for $2,500 arrears but then has spent the past fifteen years in prison because arrears keep accumulating and they keep throwing him in prison.
It’s common for this to happen. There is supposed to be a “purge” amount ordered (an amount the man can pay to get out, but typically it exceeds his means – this is a debtor’s prison). Cost for a man to be in prison is approximately $30,000 per year. So, putting men in prison for child support doesn’t make any sense. It’s just an expression of malignant narcissism on the part of the officers of the courts and the Divorce Industry and mothers.
During the past forty years, more than two-million men have been in prison for arrears. I have read reports that the number is actually closer to nine-million (if you include those in county lock-up for only a few days instead of months or years in state or federal prison). Average time in prison is six months. Incarceration can last anywhere from a few days to decades. It’s completely arbitrary depending upon the judge, the jurisdiciton, the circumstances, etc…
Most men in prison for arrears are unable to pay the amount of child support ordered. It’s not that they can pay and wont but that they can’t. Furthermore, in the rare instance a man can pay but refuses, he has legitimate reasons – the mother is failing to comply with a visitation order and refuses to let the father see his children (and has dismissed shared parenting) and courts do not enforce visitation orders. Period. Chidlren are hostages of the mother and states for ransom.
The US Supreme Court ruled recently (June 2011) that courts can incarcerate a man for arrears but they are required to provide him “safeguarding mechanisms” to prevent his incarceration. The obvious first step would be to order a reasonable amount of child support or force the mother to share parenting. But neither of these ever happens because states receive federal subsidies for every dollar transferred from father to mother. So, states have an incentive to order amounts in great excess of what a man can pay and what it costs to raise a child. The states do not “examine means”. If they did, most orders would be small fractions of what they are. The US Supreme Court decision of June 2011 actually recommended that the courts “examine means” as a safeguarding mechanism against incarceration (like this is not obvious that they should) but it will be many years if not decades before that decision gets any traction.
For instance, the best circumstances for myself, concerning one of my children, would be shared parenting. But false allegations of domestic violence and child abuse make that impossible (although the allegations were proven to be false and the mother was proven to have made the allegations by perjury and falsifying police reports, she was not punished). Still, there are the allegations. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, you can’t put it back in. Since I have to pay child support, the amount that I should be paying is about $4,200 per year for the one child (and the mother pays the other $4,200 for a total of about $8,400 – this is a sensible amount). However, I have been ordered to pay approximately $16,000 per year for the one child. I pay another $16,000 for another. There are additional costs too, including medical care and insurance and interest on arrears, etc… My bank account and retirement annuity have been seized so those are all gone. I take home less than $10,000. This past year, I took how about $7,000. Can’t live on that. Eventually, I will lose my job because I cannot afford to work anymore. Even working, I live so far below the poverty threshold. I’ve already been in prison for arrears and am threatened frequently with prison if I do not pay the rapidly accumulating arrears.
Also, the Bradley Amendment to Title IV-D prevents downward modification of any child support order. So, support awards, which already typically exceed cost of raising a child by many multiples are made worse for the man because if he loses his job for any reason and can’t pay, he goes into perpetual arrears because he can’t get the order reduced. Less than 5% of all petitions for reducing an order are ever successful. Approximately 6% of all child support obligors for whom arrears and interest continue accumulating are in fact dead. Some by suicide.
Basically, the State and the federal governements are just engineering the circumstances for these men to be marginalized in society or to become debt slaves or to be incarcerated. They can’t collect social security or retirement and they can’t collect any public assistance. No health care, no food stamps, nothing. And they can’t afford these things either. During the past forty years, approximately 1.1-million men have committed suicide in the US. At least 250,000 have committed suicide in response to these irrational circumstances concerning child support and loss of children for which there is no relief possible (Thomas Ball for instance). Almost none of these men, like Thomas Ball, are mentally ill or emotionally unstable. There just exists no mechanism for these men to escape the circumstances imposed upon them and they would rather die free than live as slaves or in prison.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 12:25 am
@Allan and JP – Sorry to joke about such a macabre subject. BUT unfortunately, the consequences for murdering your ex-wife and inability to pay child support is a comparison the our brutal and irrational post feminist dystopian fascist police state has made. I’m just reporting the comparison it has already made. If you don’t like the comparison, tell the post feminist dystopian fascist police state, which has driven 250,000 men to suicide, imprisoned millions more and condemned to the street even more millions. Not to mention forcibly separating more than 50-million children from more than 30-million fathers. I already know that is sick. The State does not. And it is very funny for the State do do something so imcomprehensibly stupid. I’m not promoting murder; the State is by failing to dispense punishment for murder that is not much different than inability to pay child support. And it can do something about it but refuses because it is too busy transferring vast amounts of wealth from the poor to the rich, the men to the women and the responsible to the irresponsible. Perhaps it’s about time for a revolution when the State becomes so arbitrary and capricious and irresponsible in treatment of its citizens.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 12:38 am
Hi Darryl,
Thanks for the information and I’m gobsmacked to hear 50,000 CS debters end up in prison each year. That is equivalent to about 700 NZ taxpayers (per capita) being locked up for CS “debt”. I’m not surprised such a tactic is counterproductive for the collection authorities. Much better people are in work rather than out of work and costing the rest of us to house and feed them in jail.
In New Zealand about 80-85% of CS payers get into some “debt” and the situation can quickly escalate. Few owe any significant amounts and it is just a cashflow matter of a few months before payments are made in full.
Our revenue authority and politicans have realised the futility of our current penalty regieme such that the great majority of the NZ CS “debt” is made up of penalties rather than substantive CS liability. Much of the “debt’ mountain is over 5 years old (probably 80% of it) and completly uncollectable so we are having new legislation to encourage payment rather than this stupid penalty regieme that encourages non-compliance.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 12:57 am
Another disturbing development with regards to the incarceration of men for murder and child support concerns budgets for the states. As you all are probably aware, the US economy (and ecnonomy of the states) is tanking. Cost for incarcerating a man for one year is an average of $30,000. To deal with their smaller budgets, states have had to start reducing their prison population by releasing men early. Who do they choose to release? Not child support obligors or men responsible for other non-violent crimes like minor drug possession. You’d think that a man in prison for child support would be the first to go. He has committed no real crime – certainly no violent crime. But no. The states are releasing convicted murderers before they release a man for child support arrears. Why? Because it’s all about the money. Child support obligors owe the state money (to reimburse it for “welfare” costs – that’s what child support is, even though most mothers who recieve child support have higher degrees and incomes that equal or exceed those of the fathers). Convicted murderers do not owe the state money. So, they get to be released first. Shows how screwed up the reasoning is. So, another example of the preferential treatment you will get if you murder your wife instead of paying her child support. Again, that is a judgment and comparison the State is making. Not me. I’m just reporting it. I don’t promote murder. The State does.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 12:59 am
@Allan – Sounds reasonable. But like you and I have agreed before, shared parenting is the goal that everyone should be working towards. That way, child support will be a thing of the past and will not be causing all the problems it has in NZ or the US.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 1:05 am
john potter..is it ok to sign ones name as ‘axe murderer’?
Comment by Ford — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 7:01 am
Darryl X, even with shared childsupport doesnt stop, only when your child turns 19 or you die befor hand.. It should stop but it doesnt. Your ex can go on the dpb with only 40% of the care…..
Comment by huh — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 2:44 pm
40% is what you need to have shared care which equals 3 nights per week..i also understand its about where the children sleep at nights as what matters in the assessment of shared care..but as a male applying for the dpb im required to have majority of the shared care arrangement and to work out my share of the care they sit there with a pen and paper and work it out down to the minute
Comment by Ford — Tue 25th October 2011 @ 4:28 pm
@huh – Wow. It sounds like the women are in a win-win situation and the men are in a lose-lose situation no matter how you look at it.
@Allan – Robert Franklin wrote an article with reference to you at Fathers and Families titled New Zealand Moves Toward Sanity in Child Support Laws – http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=20375
Comment by Darryl X — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 12:42 am
@Allan – In the article by Robert Franklin I reference in my previous post, what do you think the probability of a father being allowed 28% of time with his children are so that he may qualify for “shared parenting”?
It’s a nice gesture by the government but not very meaningful given the hostile parent veto imposed upon most father-child relationships by the mother. I mean, all the mother has to do is refuse to give 28% of time to the father. And she has a huge financial incentive not to.
In Oregon, a shared parening bill passed not long ago but all it did is increase the incidence and frequency of false allegations of domestic violence and child abuse (by mothers), the time required to muddle through the divorce process and it increased the acrimony to which the children are exposed and the cost to the father of the divorce. And in the end, the cost of shared parenting, which really didn’t see much increase in incidence, became so great that the father couldn’t afford it any more than he could afford the alternatives.
It seems that no matter what laws have been created to promote shared parenting, the hostile parent veto by the mother interferes. So, without changes in laws and enforcement of those laws concerning false allegations, shared parenting didn’t work in Oregon. The hostile parent veto will always be an obstacle to shared parenting unless mothers are discouraged from imposing it. And currently they are not.
For these reasons I have written and continue to write that there is no legal, political or social solution to the problems of child support. It is child trafficking and abuse and slavery for fathers and institutionalized adultery. There can be no responsible or constructive administration of child support. Once children are defined as commodities to be bought and sold, someone and everyone will be trying to make money off them. That’s real child abuse.
Denying the children access to their fathers and buying and selling the children. That’s why I have always written that shared parenting should be the default, and if the mother imposes her hostile parent veto with false allegations or some other expression of parental alienation, then full legal and physical custody should be switched to the father and the mother should be punished with severe criminal sanctions and then forced to pay child support.
These are the only circumstances under which child support should be imposed. Under these circumstances, its administration should be relatively simple. Since mothers are responsible for most child abuse and child murder and almost all parental alienation and since they are the ones who refuse to pay child support disproportionately more than fathers out of spite (in the rare instance mothers are ordered to pay) then the responsiblity should be placed upon them.
The changes implemented by Dunne (and not until 2012 and 2013) still places most if not almost all of the responsibility on fathers still. The mothers still have no responsibility. I’m glad you concede that changes could go further, like 14% of time to qualify for shared parenting. Although I fear, like in Oregon, it would increase the incidence and frequency of false allegations and acrimony and expense for fathers. No change in the system without severe penalties against the mother for false allegations will work.
Comment by Darryl X — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 1:35 am
mothers have so much to gain by lying and manipulating
Comment by Ford — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 6:14 am
Ford #25:
No, someone else is already using that name, and it would get confusing.
Otherwise you can call yourself whatever you want, as long as it doesn’t break the law by inciting criminal activity.
Comment by JohnPotter — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 3:00 pm
so you have seen it.what do you think ‘axe murderer’ suggests?..murdering with an axe is a criminal activity,,cant be any worse than my comments aye..no double standards now
Comment by Ford — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 3:56 pm
John writes,
This is real funny.
Hey Ford, many of us know Mr. axe murderer is an awesome man. It’s a joke in a way. Your comment can be damaging to everyone and that’s the reason it’s not OK to put online.
If you were in a group setting, someone would say a smart remark like “We’ve got funding for that”.
Everyone who knows each other here knows you mean no harm, but the enemies will use it against everyone not just you.
I hope you don’t mind.
Comment by julie — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 4:21 pm
It has happened in New Zealand many times. Those are the stories that are reported in the media as….
The media is never going to report that this is a Family Court case or that the counsel for child was a feminist bitch looking for a place to extract revenge for her perceived injustices, or that the father hadn’t seen his children for twelve months because the system doesn’t give a shit about men’s emotional wellbeing.
While I understand that some men in New Zealand who have been placed in circumstances worse than a Libyan Tribal civil war have behaved in an extreme manner resulting in the death of a women – who is in essence nothing more than the flag of a cowardly enemy, we just can’t go about blogging shoot the bitch without realising that it doesn’t get the real story out to the public.
Comment by Down Under — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 4:58 pm
As Julie says, I do know Mr Axe-Murderer personally, and I’m convinced he is now a reformed character.
If he ever writes anything on this site which encourages others to become axe murderers, he will be moderated same as anyone else.
Comment by JohnPotter — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 5:41 pm
Oh common JP, can you actually reform an engineering student.
Comment by Down Under — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 6:12 pm
double standards and reeks of hypocrisy..sounds like family court
Comment by Ford — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 6:33 pm
Ford I think there’s a difference between someone calling themselves Axe Murderer tongue in cheek, and someone advocating use of violence.
I’m with John Potter and others on this.
Comment by Dangerous Cereal Killer — Wed 26th October 2011 @ 11:40 pm
all depends on the individuals opinion really and he and others ‘choose’ to see whatever they want in whatever context they like and seeing this site is johns baby he can say whatever he likes..no matter how contradictory it sounds
Signed by Ford-Gun Polisher
Comment by Ford — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 7:29 am
Cereal Killer – LOL
The handle for a poster on another site (Save The Turnips!) is Stop Abusing the Child Support You Whore-Able Wench. LOL
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 8:44 am
Dear Mikey,
(on topic?) if you would like assistance, meet with me or call me (09) 638 7275. I live just outside the prison bars, now. As Allan said, with patience it can be sensibly sorted.
(Off topic!) Mr. F Prefect, I make the same offer to you, as to Mikey. It seems that we have both been in the same situation for many years, so I am surprised that you might need any assistance after all this time has passed by.
It seems that you are taking familycaught too seriously? and alas I have observed that these are the people whom it can most easily and seriously damage. Why put yourself into this space? See Jon Kabat-Zinn’s Full Catastrophe Living.
My ex used to tell me that if I was angry for more than 20 minutes, that I was doing something wrong. She was right, I should have hit her straight away.
The only time that I have claimed to have carried out actual axe murders, was perhaps tongue in cheek and fairly clearly still within upper half North Island laws (as presently prosecuted by police):
lesbian-axe-murderer
I try to explore many dark spaces, where an axe would offer a quick escape from (I love my axes for this reason), but I always try to show a worthwhile path or paths to a better place.
If I espouse accountability, I do so with my legal name and often give several means by which I may be readily contacted.
Best regards, MurrayBacon insatiable axe-murderer.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 9:06 am
craig foote..06 359 2488..hows that
Comment by Ford — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 9:15 am
p.s..ill probably have to change ph numbers after the hate calls start coming in..but what the hell aye
Comment by Ford — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 9:16 am
We’ve boned and buried our differences, MurrayBacon paranoid axe-murderer.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 9:59 am
You’ve got my support, Murray B, from the US for all it’s worth (and I think it’s worth a lot). Never give up y’all. And never lower yourselves to the standards the gov’t and women have set. Once you do that, they win. The winds of change are blowing. I feel them. They’re here and there and everywhere. This can’t go on forever. Children will be returned to their fathers and the rich who did these horrible things to satisfy their addiction to power and control will be separated from their gold and their silver will be dumped in the streets. It’s written by the prophets. Hang in there. A little longer. I know it’s hard to ask but patience is a virtue. The Truth always wins. Always. It is the final arbiter of our fate.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 10:55 am
Dear Darryl X, thanks for your support. Uplifting as a bra? Anyway, I fear that you generalise groups, for example governments and women, where some are supportive of your interests and some damaging. It is really worth noting the difference, as in many cases the support they offer us is valuable, maybe even essential. Succeeding in the political arena requires large amounts of support in the wider community and this will never happen if I or you alienate some of the sources of our support.
Besides, in many cases women offer us ideas, that we may be weak at clarifying on our own.
There are many ongoing wars in the caughts, rust never sleeps, neither lust nor greed for wealth either. Rights once won must be defended once and defended again. So these fights will always be ongoing, we had better get used to this and surviving through it, the game of life. The Truth always wins, but often too late to be really useful. There are many casualties in the meantime.
Thanks, Murray.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 2:23 pm
Ford,
I’ve got a bone to pick with you.
I’ll flesh it out for you.
You’ve got some guts, but the heart seems terribly missing.
I see a badly cut liver with lots of bile – soaked in acid.
Deep down in the bowels of darkness apparently.
Stripped and hung to dry, yet wanting to emulate feminist butchery.
Fat on rhetoric.
Advocating blood in the streets even.
A terrible sight to behold.
Comment by Ford's body in the basement — Thu 27th October 2011 @ 7:07 pm
Ford says,
Hehehe. I am not sure I can beat axe murderer and gun polisher, but I’m going to think of one too.
Comment by julie — Sat 29th October 2011 @ 9:05 am
Quotes ‘Kneejerk outbursts to that effect may be understandable for a frustrated, second-class gender that is routinely exploited, denigrated, lied about and abused under a feminist regime, but we simply cannot afford to be provoked into foolish comments; this will simply play into the hands of the feminist state that will in no way observe the same limits against ‘violence’ that it has placed on male citizens.’
Uruukk, what a load of paranoid, deluded, misogynous nonsense. You poor little victims. Just wipe that giant mind-bending chip off your shoulders and move on. If I see suggestions on this site inciting violence or hatred towards women again, I will report it.
Then again the whole site is about how awful women are anyway eh…
Comment by Chris — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 12:05 am
Chris,
You threaten to report inciting violence on this site then try to make out the whole site is anti-woman.
Duh! The nerve to call others paranoid and having a chip on their shoulder!
Too much victim feminist cool aide methinks.
Oh, and ever heard of emotional violence?
Comment by Skeptic — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 1:21 am
is that ‘Chris’ as in Christine..your post comes across like a typical female response
Comment by Ford — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 6:25 am
Does it matter? Are we so keen to have MENZ as a women free forum? Surely we are not scared of interacting with the ideas of anyone.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 7:59 am
allan harvey..i would love to have a place to go that was women free..and as for too scared to interact with women..your not far wrong..they give me the f#@k%n shits
Comment by Ford — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 8:06 am
@Allan Harvey…
One of the reasons boys are doing so poorly today is the destruction of male only environments over the past fifty years.
Comment by gwallan — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 8:44 am
Allan (#52): From my experience, most contributors here are happy to interact with the ideas of anyone male or female. However, the contribution of ‘Chris’ (#49) is so abusive that it’s unlikely any attempts to ‘interact’ will be worthwhile. Unfortunately, Chris’ contribution is somewhat typical of feminist visitors to MENZ who deal with their surprise that any men would be brave enough to speak the truth about gender issues by launching in with illogical, inaccurate, name-calling, trivializing, condescending abuse rather than debate, having read little of the background analysis here concerning any issue. Efforts to discuss matters further with such trolls almost always simply invites more violent abuse. This wastes a lot of time and seldom helps us to clarify thinking on relevant issues, but I guess it’s useful to have a permanent written record showing the low calibre of much feminist communication. The kneejerk reaction from Chris (#49) adds handsomely to this evidence base demonstrating how closed-minded, dishonest, anti-male and violent feminists really are.
Keep in mind that Chris was complaining about a situation here in which some contributors were attempting to keep in check another poster from statements that might be seen to threaten or to encourage violence. But we can’t expect any recognition from the likes of Chris of men’s social responsibility. Of course, a quick perusal of many feminist blog sites will show an appalling degree of hate speech against men but you are unlikely to see any of them raising objections to the rampant misandry and otherwise low standards of discourse.
It’s understandable, given successful dissemination of feminist propaganda over the last 50 years, that some people will be surprised and skeptical of a statement describing men as a ‘frustrated, second-class gender that is routinely exploited, denigrated, lied about and abused under a feminist regime’. It takes a while for people to start paying attention to the copious evidence supporting such statements, and it also takes honesty.
Chris claims that the statement is deluded but provides no rational argument in support. Chris claims that the statement is misogynous, but where in the statement is anything that shows hatred of women? It’s a statement about feminist ideology, something that both men and women promote and prioritize in laws and policies. Chris goes on to indulge in some typical feminist condescension then tells us to ‘move on’. I guess slave traders said exactly the same to slaves, “that’s just how things are so stop complaining and move on”. Well Chris, men will move on but not according to your plan. We will one day hold accountable those who have denigrated men, wrecked families and society through application of feminist ideology. Chris then goes on to claim that the “whole site” of MENZ is about how awful women are. Another dishonest attack typical of the manipulative tactics of feminst apologists, totally ignoring the fact that only a small proportion of postings or comments here are about women at all.
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 9:33 am
#49..BANG!!
Comment by Ford — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 11:09 am
Ford you should really take the time to watch Operation 8.
Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 2:20 pm
#57..i googled Operation 8..funny im not maori and i dont attend terrorist training camps..i dont own firearms and im not planning an uprising..so if theres any idiots out there that want to come kick my door in..go hard..i find it all rather amusing that armed offenders would even waste their time over me but the system is pendantic isnt it.signed by Ford-Gun Polisher
Comment by Ford — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 3:00 pm
p.s #57..could they make my life any worse than what the X and the family rort have already done…i doubt it
Comment by Ford — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 3:03 pm
I agree with what you say in 55 Hans,
Ford their are some groups whose membership is controlled that you may wish to seek out.
With regards to post #58 most of those arrested in the so called terror raids were activists and not Maori. Unfortunately I know of several blokes who have had the AOS visit with their black jeeps and black uniforms and the tear gas and smoke bombs. One chap very peacfully in front of the telly with his kids. Uzi’s in his face and marched outside laid on the grass with several knees on his back and held there for his three kids to watch as another cop car pulls up with mum to collect the children and take them off to Women’s refuge. When they had left the scene he is processed and gets his requisite Protection Order and three historic charges of Male asualts female. We showed the coppers they were crap and they eventually dropped the charges seven months later but of course he only got supervised contact during those seven months. I suggest again as scrap does, watch Operation 8 and just compare that story with the one I describe above. Unfortunately real life events are sometimes more unbelievable than any fiction.
I went through the 1981 tour as a fairly active protester and I know the games the coppers got up to then and now their tactics are more unbelievable, more brutal and legislation now says their harrasment is OK. Back in 1981 despoite being detained on several occasions I came out conviction free.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 3:17 pm
my kids are 15 and 17..ive never assaulted a female and never been charged with assault..like i said…go hard..report away
Ford-Gun Polisher
Comment by Ford — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 3:26 pm
Gwallan says,
As an Australian I can assure all interested parties that the boys have all this time had ‘boy’s clubs’ in every class, lol.
Also, so does and has NZ. There really is parts that are not Matriarchal.
Comment by julie — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 5:15 pm
Hey, ummm,, seems Labour is more popular than National but the media is republic.
Did any of you watch the DEBATE (political) on TV1 last night. I had a call asking for an interview today and setting up young single mothers. I pulled out cause baby was sick and I put forward lots of single parents for things that I can put the kids first.
Comment by julie — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 5:20 pm
Please don’t take my comment of lack of matriarchy. I voted for National last vote not to ‘for them’ but to get Labour out because they wouldn’t listen from their ivory towers.
I am not sure they are listening though so I don’t want them in again. Some are listening after years of activism, but they don’t get it they have become what they hated.
Comment by julie — Tue 1st November 2011 @ 5:39 pm
Great thread –
Darryl X – unrepentant scholar, anti-totalitarian-post-feminist-dystopian-fascist-police-state rebel, cigar-smoker and sagittarian
Comment by Darryl X — Wed 2nd November 2011 @ 1:53 am
julie says…
As an Australian I can assure all interested parties that the boys have all this time had ‘boy’s clubs’ in every class, lol.
What use is a boys club particularly when virtually only women are allowed to run them. I’m speaking of organisations like the scouts, YMCA, Rotary and other environments where boys learned leadership from men. Environments where boys and men could once be free of women.
You can’t seriously be suggesting that an occasional classroom activity, almost certainly run by women, can substitute for what has been lost through so many other institutions and organisations.
You have a proven track record of ignorance of the dynamic to which I refer and once again you choose to display that ignorance for all to see.
Comment by gwallan — Wed 2nd November 2011 @ 10:46 am
Gwallan says,
I spent my morning yesterday smiling because I had hit the streets with pamphlets 4-5 years back and I learned the men working on the roads, streets, gardens ect wanted a men;s affairs. Yesterday I meet up with many who are now contracted to the council through a company. Wow! They have new trucks, neat uniforms and meet-up once a week to discuss what they need and want. It was awesome to see smiles all round instead of the glum faces I saw years back.
Then I was entertained by an all male singing (choir) group who for some reason chose the color red for their blazers. They were fantastic.
……….
I don’t know Gwallan, if you can’t see what men are doing, then so be it. Perhaps you’re more concentrated on what women are doing and it will be good when I start writing (on a new site) about men as I interview them.
Y’know, I questioned men’s groups when online people told me women were taking over. They said they were just using women for certain skills like office work. As more men become secretaries, this will change.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it’s always me whose the ignorant one just because I disagree 🙂
Comment by Julie — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 10:44 am
no julie..your ignorant cos your a woman
Comment by Ford — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 1:42 pm
Lol Ford.
But then perhaps you are wrong. Do you know how many daddy’s little girls there are in this country? Do you recognise outsiders don’t have the ‘cussie bros’ to protect them?
And just to be a pain, I will add that I value the gift of listening and so ….. (fill in the gap)
Comment by Julie — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 2:04 pm
I value the gift of listening and so ..when theres something worth listening to im all ears and i dont really understand the cussie bro sentence
Comment by Ford — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 4:14 pm
I always find it funny when Allan Harvey comments about Child Support, strange that he has such a rich life style, i wonder how he does it ? Why does the CSA never investigate HIM ?
Why Allan ? Tell us your little secret
Comment by Brian Scott — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 5:01 pm
The reason why I comment about Child Support is because I assist many people with child support matters. One of my fruistrations in that role is people who come to see me when they are already deep in do dos. It is much easier to help before people dig themselves into their own elephant trap and the sides are steep, and slippery.
Why would Child Support wish to investigate me? They did on multiple occasions when I was a paying parent. I am now past the stage of being a liable parent, maybe that is the “little secret” you need to find. That can happen in seven ways that I know of; You can become a long term prisoner or patient, you can reach an agreement outside of IRD with the custodial parent, your children can be over 19 years of age or working more than 30 hours a week in a permanent job, you become the custodial parent or you can become deceased. Seven possibilities for you to ponder on Brian.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 5:28 pm
Looking at the male to female ratio in NZ – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sex_ratio, father’s will never get rights”¦. IRD, child support system, the family court a.k.a female court, all prey upon the paternal feelings of… males in this country. All males are kept in the same basket so to speak. All males are considered wife bashers in this country. Therefore, its time we took the right decision, surpress our paternal feelings, look away from our cultural and moral values, treat our estranged kids as investments for feminists, and let a fatherless society be created. Only then, I believe, there will be true reforms of the domestic laws in this country. Consider a liability to be a liability and not a moral obligation – start thinking with your head rather than your heart, and all problems will be solved.
Comment by Ashish Naicker — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 7:45 pm
No, julie, your ignorance stems from intransigence rather than disagreement. It was demonstrated previously in the emails and friend requests you pummelled me with after an explicit request to leave me alone.
Comment by gwallan — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 7:45 pm
Welcome to the MGTOW movement Ashish. It’s been going only a few years now but is growing exponentially.
The central idea is to reject the traditional masculine role as thoroughly as the fems abandoned the traditional feminine role, and to live according to your own values (the fems don’t seem to like it much, seeing it has the same effect on them as having your phone disconnected has on telemarketing companies).
Comment by rc — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 8:22 pm
Thanks for the hint rc…. I didn’t know one existed. I actually came up with the idea after being on acute depression for 2 long years and then scanning through the whole of the domestic law. I am a NCP, haven’t got a single criminal record, don’t believe in violence, believe in total gender equality, and the closest I have been to a family court was up to the reception.
If you read through the Family Court website, the sentence “Mother is automatically the guardian, but the father may be granted…” speaks heaps about the Family Law and the atitude of the Family Law towards males.
Having done a lot of research, the best option I found out was to beat the fems at their own games. If they want it, let them have it. Violence is not the answer.
We have been brain-washed by religion, by culture, by our elders… who still ask males to keep to their values, whilst they have lost control of the females.
To change, we need to live the change. We have to change ourselves now. Agreed, there are some males who resort to violence, but five fingers are not alike. Do we really need to make children??? Praise the manufacturer of the CONDOM.
Give the women the liberty they want. Just don’t give them children. Learn from the mistakes we have done…
Comment by Ashish Naicker — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 8:51 pm
Gwallan #74 said –
Join the queue bro!
Julie respecting men’s boundaries? LMAO!
Comment by Skeptic — Thu 3rd November 2011 @ 9:10 pm
Gwallan says,
Seems everyone selectively brings things up when it’s convenient. So let’s see if I can get and give some clarification.
You wrote something on this site one time that was …. something about you not wanting to talk to me (please enlighten me) and I emailed you to sort it out. You then came online and said…… “don’t write to me” or “Look what Julie did” ….. once again enlighten me.
Soooooo, did you get sent a friend request or two or more when I joined facebook? I can only apologise for I didn’t know that it goes into your email account and sends requests to everyone.
But then perhaps you got a request a couple of weeks ago from a request I got from an activist. We have both realised the site is crazy and have since quit.
If you have a gmail or yahoo or similar account, you can block certain email addresses. Why don’t you take this into your own hands so you can be a happy chappy.
Skeptic says,
You have copped the brunt of my growth that has been a large amount and I do feel guilt for this. On the good side I was able to give allot of support to others and those that didn’t agree with my actions never heard a bad word or complaint from me.
Comment by julie — Fri 4th November 2011 @ 6:42 am
Not that this is of concern to anyone, but I want to share it anyways. I am going to vote Labour because they have a few gays that I believe will quickly bring men’s rights into the political arena and on commissions. I don’t think there will be a feminist takeover but instead men and women working together.
I also want to add that single parents has always had a man as the head of the group and we also use men and women’s skills. One thing I have organised with a men’s advocate I respect is a workshop for both men and women that started Wednesday and Thursday night.
It is fabulous IMO and attendees seemed to get allot from it already. Our group is mixed for a purpose and that is to help men and women who are not too harmed by the opposite sex or others get back on their feet.
I support men only groups 100% and after investigation, I have found that everyone including universities, gyms, law society etc, etc, will provide men only groups if there are enough men wanting to be a part of it, or at least one or two men wanting to pursue it. Men’s refuges can be opened but as all community groups, it needs to start from the foundation and build it’s way up.
I think men have done an awesome job pushing back hate over the years I’ve known you, and I salute you 😉
………….
Now to find out which sites have the worst class women hating single parents on benefits and start challenging them. 🙂
Comment by julie — Fri 4th November 2011 @ 7:18 am
julie..try nzdating..youll find all the nasty bitches you want..the place is full of them
Comment by Ford — Fri 4th November 2011 @ 7:31 am
Ford says,
Ummm, gosh. As you know there are always good people amongst a group with a bad rep. 🙂
I would like to introduce you to a special MRA (men’s rights activist and advocate)with the blog Dad4justice
He changed trademe from feminist to reality. I watched it and made comments too.
I have used nzdating to find out how men felt about the supposed ‘man strike’. Most wrote back saying, “I wish”. My conclusion is that young and old men are wanting the same exclusive group of women. (age seems prominent)
Nzdating has a reputation from women as, “Young men show their penises when saying hi”. I asked them what was going on and they said “We play the numbers game as lots of women want this”. nzdating changed the rules so men can no longer do this.
I then learned men were quitting nzdating because lots of women send them a picture of their face and body and ask, “Can I have your baby – give me your sperm”.
…………
I once challenged the group and one woman got on backing me big time. Perhaps it needs some more challenge as if time changed things. Thanks for the heads up.
Comment by julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 1:45 pm
As a note Ford,
I don’t think you should encourage my involvement on this site. You are IMO a good man and an intelligent man.
I wasn’t intelligent and used my real name here. I can never be a someone for the agendas behind all this are unfucken-believable.
All I can do is support activists. I wish you all the best cause you deserve it. 🙂
Plus, I have no career waiting for me, lol.
Comment by julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 1:58 pm
opps. Sorry Ford. My comment before my last comment is moderated cause I linked to an activist (I guess).
This and my last comments will be deleted cause I can only say things that are beneficially to the agenda.
Comment by julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 2:01 pm
i do find your posts hard to understand
Comment by Ford — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 2:50 pm
Yeah, of course. Parts are deleted or completely deleted. This site belongs to those who make money from it. Did you wonder for a moment someone cared?
Comment by Julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 2:53 pm
noone gives a shit.its all about the money..’SHOW ME THE MONAY”
Comment by Ford — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 2:58 pm
Someone should create a page on facebook… I think I’ll do that.. Just don’t know how to share it with the right people… If someone from here is willing to help out, I’ll do it… No money, no benefit… Just personal satisfaction with the feeling of at least being able to do something against the victimisation I’ve been through… (personal agenda)… but I guess, I’m not the only one who belongs to one of the most un-previledged groups in this country (NCP).
Comment by Ashish Naicker — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 3:00 pm
Mind you Ford, I haven’t brought this up until now. You make me speak what’s real and thanks. I can’t ever know you again cause I will banned from reading this site.
Just be…. (babe) Honestly, you have a way with women if only you knew how. Good luck.
Comment by Julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 3:02 pm
Hi Ashish,
we have awesome groups for you to connect with on facebook. I just can’t share links. While we have a window can you email me at [email protected]
I can link you up to some good things happening.
Comment by Julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 3:17 pm
still dont understand
Comment by Ford — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 3:20 pm
This is fun! Why don’t you put your guard down and email me? You can see more if you dare to.
Comment by Julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 3:35 pm
i dont dare
Comment by Ford — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 4:05 pm
I know.
Comment by Julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 4:19 pm
But, is this how you want to live?
Comment by Julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 4:24 pm
more money would be good
Comment by Ford — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 4:56 pm
Julie said:
It was because you wrote the P word.
Comment by JohnPotter — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 4:58 pm
FOrd @ #92 –
Wise choice Ford.
That way you won’t be spammed to death.
Comment by Skeptic — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 6:02 pm
#97 im tired of listening to women’s point of veiw..its the main reason i have the anti attitudes i have
Comment by Ford — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 6:07 pm
This is real funny.
John likes women while Skeptic hates women and the both came to your rescue. Do you think they took into account you put your home phone number online?
Comment by julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 7:38 pm
MENZ exists to discuss “news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.” Julie has returned to disrupt MENZ as a valuable place for analysis and sharing of views concerning men’s issues, with her numerous self-aggrandizing, chit-chat replies that are largely unintelligible and seem designed to provoke and bait others. I am concerned this will put off visitors and worthwhile posters alike. Why sabotage this site Julie?
Comment by Hans Laven — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 8:08 pm
Hans, I can’t sabotage your great online work – only you can make your work one thing or another.
But for sure I get what’s going on and since I have a personality to finish what I started….. I am considering the end to the goal being men having a political voice.
I need an end goal cause I have much more to consider.
Comment by julie — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 9:50 pm
Thankyou Hans,
I agree with every word of your challenge to Julie.
I warn Ford and others guys who are listening in that if he e-mails her he’s likely to suffer as I did being spammed repeatedly by her.
I say that because even after telling her several times not to e-mail me in future, I’ve received scores of e-mails from her.
They are filtered and go straight to my deleted e-mails folder.
I don’t bother to read them at that point.
That’s why I have nil respect for her ability to respect men’s boundaries.
If it were the other way round and it were me spamming her I’m sure some folks seeing as I’m male would rightly accuse me of stalking.
As for hating men – another dumb shit test from a narcissistic borderline personality.
Time to grow up methinks. Get help if need be.
Now, back on topic.
My favorite comment today seen at The Spearhead –
Comment by Skeptic — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 10:56 pm
My apology.
I wrote “as for hating men”.
I should of course have written “as for hating women” which was Julie’s dumb shit test @ #99.
BTW such a baseless accusation is straight out of the catalog of feminist shaming tactics – code black in fact.
Comment by Skeptic — Sat 5th November 2011 @ 11:02 pm
julie..i really dont get what your on about..you need a hobby
Comment by Ford — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 5:37 am
skeptic..she has already used my ph number
Comment by Ford — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 5:42 am
Yep, that figures.
Jeeze I’m very glad to be ghosting and going my own way.
My life is much simpler and more enjoyable these days.
Comment by Skeptic — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 5:50 am
ghosting?
Comment by Ford — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 6:08 am
http://theghostnation.com/
Comment by Skeptic — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 6:16 am
i didnt read much but i get the picture..my kingdom for some hot sex
Comment by Ford — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 6:24 am
I’d like to add that I have good things to say about everyone that I’ve come across on this site. And that I’d like to keep it this way.
It was nice to chat with you on the phone Ford. And I hope life brings lots of good things your way. I am very grateful for things John has done for me and for teaching me about websites, software plus, plus. I am grateful to Hans for emailing me great advice when I was going through a difficult time with one of my sons. Even you Skeptic. I am grateful for you kept me safe. Mixing with such good men over 5 years can be emotionally tricky especially for someone whose been through what I have (numbed feelings etc).
I haven’t added in anyone else because it would be a post on it’s own. I feel like I’ve had a great experience and I don’t want to look back at 5 years and see it end in a bad way when so much of it was good. I’m proud of myself and some of the people I have come across are now my friends. I couldn’t ask for a better personal outcome.
Comment by julie — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 6:43 am
i didnt mind you ringing..was a good chat i agree but i do find you hard to follow
Comment by Ford — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 6:48 am
Gosh. With compliments like that who needs insults?
Another giant Tui Billboard moment methinks.
I think Julie needs to learn a few of things.
Firstly critiquing womanhood and female behavior doesn’t equate to hating women.
Far from it, and anyone prepared to dig into the site will see I’ve made numerous postings praising certain women for their empathy and action supporting Men’s Rights in any case. To blithely throw around false accusations of misogyny doesn’t enhance her credence with the MRA community. It’s a form of emotional manipulation which sadly I all too often notice women (especially rejected women)resorting to which I clearly don’t buy into.
Secondly, when I respectfully say repeatedly enough’s enough don’t e-mail me any more and she ignores and disrespects that then she is rightly seen as harassing and untrustworthy.
I consider it my duty then to warn other men about her lack of respecting boundaries.
Lastly, I’m pleased to see that thus far there are no pussy begging white knights rushing in to defend this woman’s ‘honor’.
That’s very encouraging.
Comment by Skeptic — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 3:13 pm
skeptic..women running round denigrating a mans personality and character is the lowest..its the favoured tactic of alot of women in the family court..puts the man on the back foot and leaves him there defending himself which he shouldnt have to do..hes not a criminal just because the female says so..controlling tactics
Comment by Ford — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 3:39 pm
Its a very simple analogy – FIVE FINGERS ARE NOT THE SAME LENGTH. We are not women haters. How can we hate the very womb that were born from. What we want to say is that there are certain elements in the female community that have been overcome by greed/desire, and are piggy-backing on the law that is meant to protect the women who really need the protection of the law. The law here is biased. Females are given equal rights, but an offspring makes it more than equal. Therefore, let me re-iterate, GIVE THEM EQUALITY, NOT KIDS… USE A CONDOM…. The very consequence of this, if all men unite and live to the philosophy, will make the government re-look at the Family Law and treat all cases as separate. Right now, its all a money making exercise for the Government.
Comment by Ashish Naicker — Sun 6th November 2011 @ 3:50 pm
Well finally the truth comes out. Annette King was never a police minister, just a silly little piece of shit that hid in the Prime Minister’s Office when Operation 8 hit the news.
Comment by Down Under — Wed 22nd May 2013 @ 5:21 pm