So, you don’t have empathy or you don’t feel like you have empathy?
A small percentage of the population don’t and that has a significant affect on their personalities and their relationships with other people.
But don’t let feminists fool you into believing you’re not empathetic if you don’t agree with them or don’t feel for the person hanging out their broken wing.
Your empathy will kick in when it should simply because it’s a human emotion.
Feminists employ consistent patterns of behavior and one is to attack any man who
– doesn’t agree with them
– doesn’t accept that a person is a victim because they say so
– and that any woman can be a victim if she feels the need and this is socially acceptable.
It’s consistent propaganda, repetitive enforcement, that requires you to be silent in the face of their complaints and if you’re not … you don’t have empathy, that makes you one of those defective people.
Of course you are empathetic but there simply is no reason to be emotionally engaged in that stupidity at someone else’s request or an ideology’s political demands and requirements.
So, put your empathy on the alter of feminist ideology?
Why would you abandon your biology, if that is what is required to be a man in their world?
The tactic dictates that most men simply shut up and we don’t say anything.
The result of this is that many men or groups of men become isolated, the victims of feminist agression and often the defendant of our modern courts and our justice system.
This is what we have become too tolerant of … Feminist agression, both in the street and in our law and also in common civility.
That very much dictates what I think about politicians like Andrew Little.
It’s an unacceptable arrogance I have no tolerance for.
Downunder – you are absolutely correct. Often Lawyers will encourage respondents going through the family court system to remain passive, take the hits, don’t rock the boat but to succumb to what is being said about you. This is not the right approach and has perpetuated why the system is biased towards supporting the applicant.
The family court is a fight for your life. For your future. While you need to stay calm, you attack back. You remember those times that the applicant abused you, hit you and denigrated you. You make sure you include these events in your affidavit. If children are involved, it goes without saying that they are the center of your world. You fight to remind the court that your relationship with the children is just as important as the applicants. The court certainly has no empathy when they remove contact from the respondent. Empathy is selective, manipulated.
Family Violence law is bent by lawyers and courts to meet a criteria. Whether it be psychological abuse, sexual abuse or physical abuse. An argument in the kitchen will be turned into psychological abuse that happened every day, a tiff over not sleeping together will be turned into sexual abuse that happened every week etc. Physical abuse however, is a game over moment. As it should be unless it is self-defense being twisted in some way.
Empathy is natural as you say. But it has been weaponized and applicants manipulate the system
and the court allows this to happen. Domestic Violence support groups such as Shine also perpetuate this mentality. They provide manufactured empathy. At the end of the day, there are always two sides to every story. Not everyone respondent is an applicant beating narcissist.
Unfortunately only the applicants side of the story is being encouraged/heard. Respondents need to speak up and not remain silent just because their lawyer says it will provide a better outcome. If the respondent is being unjustly accused and is genuine, fight back as if your life depends on it. It really does.
My 5 cents contribution of how the things got out of control and basic human decency being abandoned :
My “victim “claimed that Quote : I contacted her by coming to her mail box inside her house ( home inavasion ? ) to leave a letter for her . As a proof she exhibited the letter and an envelope from NZ Post with the stamp and data whne the letter was delivered by the NZ Post . By the way I sent the first to her lawyer but no reply at all .Then on written permision from the Court I mailed he letter using NZ Post .
When I aksed my lawyer why he didn’t ask the “victim “about this , he said – she will start crying and that is not good for me as a defendant ??? So, her lawyer was pushing this “unsolicited contact “argument , while my lawyes didn’t say anything
Is the family court up to its old tricks again?
Claims were never the mind of the woman alone but also the menace of her lawyer and the minefield of legislation before even considered the corrupting influence of the relationships between counsel and the court (ironically some are married) let alone the mindless pursuits of their ideological foundations.
Nevertheless, every man’s situation is different and there is no one suitable response that may be applied to every case.
The previous commonalities included that the man was generally the respondent (except perhaps in applications to settle disputes) and that the respondent’s lawyer was immediately hamstrung by the gendered influence and a predestination of outcome.
With the formation of the Union of Fathers, the gathering of information and collective knowledge fathers were better able to respond to their individual cases, often without a lawyer.
Should it be case that the court has again become mischievous in its dealings with men, like last time, there will be hundreds of men across the country willing to protest such behavior.
Happy New Year everyone.. haha!.. and let this year bloody well be a year where Men take any encouragement they can to take it to the streets,, make it come to public conversation, the other side of the story is now Mens’ and needs to be heard like any body else’s.
There have been many laws put in place for women lately, we have a womens ministry,, the list goes on and on,,,Men on the other hand are in the negatives with so much too loose and already lost… we need guys for guys sake kinda action, but as a country, as a whole, a patriotism of Man.
In my experience of the family court system, it must be the only industry that you never hear women crying out about gender inequality. It’s an industry run by women for women. Even the ancillary services such as supervised visits are run by women.
In most hearings, unless your lawyer is a male, chances are you will be surrounded by at least 5 women. Oh the hypocrisy 🙂
Even if the lawyer is the man he must fit with the existing radical feminism ideology , otherwise he will be crucified
A documentary that sums up the issues men face is called The Red Pill. Comments on the Duluth model and Erin Pizzey are fantastic. Check out it.
#7 I knew the previous Judge Dredd, now deceased.
Did you happen to met him at some stage or is this a idea you’ve stumbled across that has suited the occasion?
@Downunder. My idea given my experiences with Judges. Also a favorite comic of mine as a kid but never thought it would come back to me with a completely different life meaning.