MRA: Thomas Ball is no martyr
Not everyone in the MRM is hailing Thomas Ball as a martyr. Here’s what the blogger at Rise of the Zeta Male has to say on the subject:
What happened was a tragedy, and he absolutely should be honored for his fight. But at the end of the day, I still think his methods, and advocacy for violence (see the Molotov cocktail section) are wrong. The only thing violence breeds is more violence, and I am not going to excuse that, just because he proves a point I stand by. This was not an act of self defense, it was not an act of selfishness, it was an act of self destructive protest and it is a great tragedy.
I don’t often agree with what’s posted at Zeta Male – I’m not sure I’ve ever agreed with anything he’s said previously – and there are things in this comment and the rest of the post that I think are problematic. But I have to give the blogger credit for taking a principled stance on this issue, and one that is distinctly unpopular amongst MRAs online.
Posted on June 28, 2011, in internal debate, MRA. Bookmark the permalink. 243 Comments.
Many MRA’s are filled with grief and anger because the mis-treatment that Thomas Ball received in family court is the mistreatment that we have all received. Some of this grief and anger spills out in negative ways. However, the MRM is a positive movement. A movement that seeks equality for men and boys. A movement of hope:
* We MRAs are mostly fathers, who have been cut out of the lives of our children by family courts that believe any lie that a mother says, without question.
* We MRAs are mostly fathers, who know that 92% of primary custody is awarded to mothers.
* We MRAs are mostly fathers, who face hard, multi-year prison sentences if we miss 6-12 child support payments — often due to unemployment or health problems.
* We MRAs are mostly men, who think that men and boys should have equal rights under the law, and equal protection of the government.
* We MRAs are angry at feminists because feminists no longer advocate for women. Feminists advocate against men. Feminism has become a movement of hate. If you need proof, examine the NOW campaign to have fathers thrown in prison for years or decades when they fall behind on child support:
http://rinow.org/legislative-agenda/2011-legislative-agenda-draft-as-of-21411/
What POSSIBLE advantage is there for mothers or children, if a father is thrown in federal prison for 10 years when he loses his job? Think carefully about the words of the NOW. Why are they trying to make “child support arrearage constituting a felony”? It cannot be to help women. A father in prison is a liability for his entire family.
It is simply hate. Feminism is a movement of hate.
The MRM is a movement for equality, legal and political. Feminism is a gender superiority hate movement.
If you are tempted to forget this, ask yourself … why prison? Why not a misdemeanor jail sentence of a few weeks (as has been the case for 50 years)? Jail could convince a man to pay. But prison? For decades? Because of unemployment?!? What are the feminists REALLY trying to do?
Every voice of dissent in the MRM gives me hope.
With any luck, some of the less extreme MRAs out there will branch off from the main body and create their own spaces. Maybe more moderate people who actually care about men’s rights will gravitate towards those groups because the only major alternative group is still a haterage clusterfuck. Maybe, without being surrounded by a barrage of pro-violence, blatant misogyny, and veiled misandry, those offshoots will eventually grow into a legitimate pro-man-focused side of the MRM. Then the radical haters will fade into history alongside such over-the-top feminists as Andrea Dworkin, and then MRAs and feminists can skip off together into the gender equality sunset.
*smiles blithely from within Radically Optimistic Bubble*
Wow that’s very admirable of him :] <3 to him! :D
(what's a Zeta Male?)
(also the first comment seems to be boilerplate xD )
Jeez, who can tell I didn’t refresh before posting? *bubble pops*
Ami, a Zeta Male is a man who “opts out”. Opt out means the man refuses to participate in society (no employment and no relationships). It is how a growing number of men protest against a government that (we feel) is increasingly the enemy of men and boys.
As to my comment, the only thing I can say is, political repression leads to anger, possibly even over-reaction. Men and boys do not usually have a voice. I was expecting Futrelle to delete my comment. I must admit that I am very surprised that he has not.
The MRA would be much more reasonable, if we did not feel like society was hunting us like animals.
Maybe you can answer me, Ami. You seem reasonable.
Why is the NOW pushing for long felony prison sentences for men who fall behind on their child support? For years, “two nights in jail” was the standard. This usually got fathers to pay, if they could. Things are different, there are so few jobs. Many men simply cannot pay, no matter how harsh the penalties. I am sure that the NOW knows this. So, what are they really trying to do?
There are many states that have already changed the law, in response to feminist pressure. This month, the Rhode Island NOW is trying to make late child support a felony in RI:
http://rinow.org/legislative-agenda/2011-legislative-agenda-draft-as-of-21411/
Thanks for your answer.
Rly? o_O *I* seem reasonable? xDDD (Crack Emcee and NWO and others would disagree w/ you xD )
As for NOW, I’m not them, maybe you should ask them :)
Anthony, how does a man “opt out” with no job and not become a drain on the government (getting welfare or whatever doesn’t seem like an effective protest) he despises? I’m not trying to be a smart-ass, I’m truly curious as to how this works.
“This month, the Rhode Island NOW is trying to make late child support a felony in RI”
No, it’s already a felony if it’s $10,000 or more. They want it to be $5,000 or more.
You know, like if you steal a car. Even a used one. It’s a felony. This is money the kid is supposed to eat on.
I’m meeting a lot of ppl I’ve never seen before on this blog before :O yay! :D
“* We MRAs are mostly fathers, who face hard, multi-year prison sentences if we miss 6-12 child support payments — often due to unemployment or health problems.”
If you’re unemployed you go back to court. LIke my friend’s husband, who always mysteriously got re-employed every time his child support was cut to zero or near-zero.
Hi Anthony,
I know your question was directed to Ami, but I’m going to weigh in with my two cents.
I think you are conflating NOW with all feminists. NOW is indeed an organization that considers itself feminist, but I am not convinced that NOW accurately represents most feminists.
In some senses, the term “feminist” is so broad it’s almost useless; at the heart of the matter the only real ideal connecting these diverse groups is that they believe in gender equality. When you start asking individual feminists or feminist groups what that means, and how it can be best achieved you will get a myriad of different answers.
Much like any other large group of people sharing a core belief (say, the Christian community, Muslim community, atheist community, pagan community, or Hindu community) you will find that there are a range of viewpoints that often seem to have little to do with each other.
I would argue that feminism is far from a hate movement. There may be hate factions within it, but they are far from the norm.
@oldfeminist
That is how it used to be. After pressure from feminists like you, courts simply say “get a job, and quick”. Courts rarely modify a child support order due to unemployment. Family courts have changed over the past 20 years. For a mother, they are all smiles. For a father, they are cruel, inhuman, capricious, and compassion-less
“Courts rarely modify a child support order due to unemployment. ”
Citation, please.
@oldfeminist
Your car analogy indicates just how bigoted and cruel you are:
“No, it’s already a felony if it’s $10,000 or more. They want it to be $5,000 or more.
You know, like if you steal a car. Even a used one. It’s a felony. This is money the kid is supposed to eat on.”
People are not thrown in prison when they lose their job and cannot make payments on a car. In the 1980s, the only debit in the US with misdemeanor non-payment penalty was child support. But that was not enough for feminists like “oldfeminist”. Only felony, multi-year imprisonment is enough “punishment” for the crime of being born male.
Those of you who feel that MRAs are “over reacting” should read “oldfeminist” and her justification for felony imprisonment of fathers who lose their jobs.
“Those of you who feel that MRAs are “over reacting” should read “oldfeminist” and her justification for felony imprisonment of fathers who lose their jobs.”
And you should go read what I said about diversity within feminism.
Is feminism a hate movement? Lets contrast the comments from feministe concerning the death of Thomas Ball -VS- Osama bin Laden.
PrettyAmiable, on bin Laden…”I’m not happy, per se, about bin Laden, but the Hussein thing sickened me.”
PrettyAmiable, on Thomas Ball…”Also, I’m sure it’s inappropriate to laugh at someone’s suicide note, but this is the best line by far: “No wonder the Speaker of the House is always crying.” hahahahahahahaha
Obviously she feels Ball was more worthy of her scorn than bin Laden.
Raja, on bin Laden…”Under International law we had the right to kill Bin Laden because he declared war on us and engaged in hostile actions against our country.”
Raja, on Thomas Ball…”This man is sick. I’m glad he did the world a favor and ended his life its a better place without him, however it is disturbing that people are taking up his cause.”
It seems bin Laden’s death was justified but garnished no negative or positive emotion. While Thomas Ball’s death brought joy and happiness.
Of course I could go on with more of their comments, but many of you seem to have an aversion to reading more than a few paragraphs. It would seem mockery, hatred and ridicule reign supreme when talking about Thomas Ball. While with bin Laden, there was actual anger expressed at anyone who said they were happy in any way with his death. There wasn’t any ridicule or mockery.
@Anthony Zarat
I have to take the trash out, so I’ll just leave you with some questions:
When a man is made caretaker of the children and his female ex doesn’t pay child support on time, is she ever punished?
If these men lose their jobs, why do they not notify the court of their changed status?
Does the law explicitly state the punishment is for people of a specific gender?
S0023
Would decrease the amount of child support arrearage constituting a felony from $10,000 to $5,000
H5411
Would decrease the amount of child support arrearage constituting a felony from $10,000 to $5,000
This are the bills that Rhode Island NOW supports. But these are amendments. What do the bills they are hoping to amend say about unemployment? I know other laws specifically make exceptions for unemployment. What are they in this case? (the links lead me to a wall)
Links please!
‘Nother troll with selective reading skills.
NWO, you should probably have mentioned that none of those quotes are from comments here.
Oops. You did.
Or maybe you did. Are those quotes from the blog feministe, or was that a typo on your part — ie, were you trying to type “feminists?”
I ask only because you and accurate typing do not generally go together.
@theLaplaceDemon, you say…”And you should go read what I said about diversity within feminism.”
Well I’m afraid that doesn’t work, precious. If you are garnishing privileges by law, due to the members within your faction you are culpable. Every law that gives women privilege, entitlement and power over men has been obtained thru the efforts of your privileged group. You LIKE those privileges that you enjoy in all sphere’s of society. YOU enjoy the security of knowing that at any time you can use one of these many privileges and entitlements. YOU like being able to wield the guns of the State; to use men to subjugate other men, which is all feminism ever was.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/bax/1909/09/women.htm
Dave, those comments are from your sister site. Doesn’t feministe foot the bill for this site?
It is how a growing number of men protest against a government that (we feel) is increasingly the enemy of men and boys.
That’s the dumbest protest, ever. You don’t change things by surrendering your power – you change things by becoming powerful.
Also, you probably missed the last time I brought up Actual Real Facts ™, but here you go, taken directly from the U.S. Census report:
* Mothers are the custodial parent in 82.6% of the cases, fathers are custodial parents 17.4% of the time. This isn’t a perfect 50/50 – but when you look at the stats of mothers who are primary caretakers pre-divorce vs fathers who are primary caretakers, it’s actually pretty even. Whoever was primary caretaker pre-divorce gets primary custody.
* 57% of custodial mothers are awarded child support. Only 47.1% of mothers awarded child support received the full amount. 33.3% of custodial mothers who were entitled to it received no child support at all. The numbers are fairly equitable when it comes to women paying child support (yes, women pay child support – 40% of custodial fathers were ordered by the courts to receive child support).
* 81.7% of non-custodial parents who were ordered to pay child support also had some sort of joint custody or visitation worked out.
For what it’s worth, I know a guy who owes about 45K in child support and has no intention of paying a penny of it. And he still sees his kids and is not threatened with jail time. Also, I spent about 5 minutes on Google, and now know exactly what I would need to do in my state in the eventuality that I lost my job and needed a child support payment plan to be modified (hint: all it involves is filing some paperwork with the court and then a hearing).
Anthony
From the link that you provided, they’re supporting a proposal to decrease the felony child support arrearage threshhold from $10,000 to $5,000. There’s no information on “sentencing” – presumably because there is no “sentencing” as such. I’m not really that familiar with the vagaries of US state laws, but I would guess that this is because the failure to pay is “contempt of court”.
Quite how a state court matter translates into 10 years in federal prison escapes me – perhaps you elucidate, you know, with actual examples of real life individuals that this has happened to.
I’m pretty sure that the minimal standard for being sent to jail is “wilful contempt” – ie the ability to at least pay something, but refusing to do so. Generally speaking, I would guess that those jailed for wilful contempt decide after a couple of nights that paying something is the better option…..
Technical contempt – ie the verifiable inability to pay via job loss, reduction in income, medical or disability issues – is probably not going to get you jailed.
Why is NOW supporting this? Perhaps because the $10k arrearage threshhold is being abused.
Given the current economic climate, is this the best time to be doing this? Perhaps not, but I would note that the other side of the equation is, you know, a kid, or kids who may be in a difficult situation as a result of the arrears.
@Molly Ren
In aswer to your question, “Does the law explicitly state the punishment is for people of a specific gender?”
Yes it is gender specific. The Bradley Ammendment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment
Also, each state is given millions of dollars from the Federal Guv to incarcerate only men who are unable/unwilling to pay their extortion payments. The more men you imprison, the money you get.
Anthony, your first post seemed quite reasonable, but then you lost me when you got to “Feminism is a movement of hate.”
There is a balance that needs to be found, but when you paint feminism as a “movement of hate” instead of reaching out in good faith, you make it difficult for some of us to want to help find that balance. And believe it or not, there are those of us who do want to help – http://noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz.wordpress.com/ (no, I’m not one of the contributors there).
Hey NWO – “Every law that gives women privilege, entitlement and power over men has been obtained thru the efforts of your privileged group.”
[Citation needed][Citation needed][Citation needed]
That link you provided? It’s an opinion piece from 1909, full of assertions without evidence. Please explain how that supports your statement.
@NWOslave, the earlier link you provided is basically 1.) Women are stupid, 2.) votes are useless (with the example that the author himself, presumably a male, doesn’t vote.)
Re: the Bradley Amendment: according to Wikipedia, the reasons offered for people not paying include “being in a coma”, “captive of Saddam Hussein” and, basically, “unable to use the legal system”. I am not terribly convinced.
I read the wiki article on the Bradley Amendment, but I couldn’t find any gender discrimination in there.
Also, each state is given millions of dollars from the Federal Guv to incarcerate only men who are unable/unwilling to pay their extortion payments. The more men you imprison, the money you get
Citation needed.
Also, an edit: I said in my previous post that 33.3% of custodial mothers did not receive any form of child support. This is wrong, the correct number is that 23.3% of custodial mothers do not receive even partial child support. 26% of custodial fathers do not receive even partial child support. So the Bradley Amendment would conceivably apply to those women in arrears.
@Victoria von Syrus…When you say primary caretaker what you’re doing is relegating a man who works and a woman who stays at home as nothing more than an ATM.
Isn’t the mans job in that situation at least as important to the “care” of the child as the woman who stays at home? How, in that situation, is his role any less “caring” than hers?
@NWOSlave, child support payments aren’t usually enough all by themselves to support someone. Many single mothers AND fathers work.
Anthony Zarat: * We MRAs are mostly fathers, who face hard, multi-year prison sentences if we miss 6-12 child support payments — often due to unemployment or health problems. and refuse to go to the courthouse and petition for relief.
FTFY.
I looked at that Rhode Island law you are so upset about.
I took advantage of the Rhode Island Child support calculator. Let’s run some numbers.
First… the law is equally applicable to men and women. The non-custodial parent is the one who pays support.
A custodial parent with an income of $0.00 is to be given $847.00 if the noncustodial parent has an income of 5,000 per month.
The present law means it would take a year of non-payment before any action could be taken.
The actual percentage of income the NC parent is paying, is just under 17 percent.
If the Non-custodial parent is making only 30,000 a year (2,500 a month) the burden is a bit higher, as a percentage, at 20 (i.e. 600 a month). That would take 17 months before the $10,000 threshold kicks in.
If both parents are earning money the amount the non-custodial pays is a lot less. If they are each making 24,000 a year, the Child Support is $368 a month. It would take 28 months to reach the $10,000 threshold.
I’m not seeing a real problem with this, from a purely logical standpoint. Making someone wait more than year, if they are without any income to care for their children is excessive. Making them wait more than two years, while supporting the children alone (and it’s not as if the non-custodial parent wasn’t involved in making the kids) isn’t fair either.
Cutting that to six months, or a year..? Doesn’t seem evil, esp. as the non-custodial parent can petition the court for reductions, suspensions, etc. If one refuses to take part in the process, and the process is known, one takes risks.
I have some mixed feelings about prison for debt… but there is also the question of the interests of the child.
It’s also not “decades”. The most the state can impose in the RI law is five years. That’s the maximum. I can see a court, in the interests of the child, making a suspended sentence. so long as the non-custodial parent in arrears is paying, they stay out of jail. It’s certainly what I, as prosecutor, would be pushing for.
Why? Because the “two nights in jail” wasn’t getting them to pay. Past failures lead to new methods.
@Victoria von Syrus I think NWOSlave just focused on this bit: “The amendment was intended to correct a perceived imbalance between the power of the obligee (usually the mother) and the obligor (usually the father) during subsequent child support disputes. It had been alleged that a significant number of men were running up large child support debts and then finding a sympathetic judge, often in another state, to erase them.”
Damn, I think we chased Anthony away. He was shaping up to be such a nice troll, too. : /
@Victoria von Syrus…When you say primary caretaker what you’re doing is relegating a man who works and a woman who stays at home as nothing more than an ATM.
There are quite a few primary caretaker fathers. It’s estimated that the number of full-time, stay at home dads is somewhere between 2-3% of parents, but the government estimates that fathers who are the primary caretakers could be as high as 20%. Any sort of ‘relegation’ is only happening in your mind, because you apparently can’t distinguish between ‘primary caretaker’ and ‘sole caretaker.’
No one ever said that the non-primary caretaker’s full time career is unimportant. But when it comes to driving the little tykes to school, helping them with their homework, scheduling doctor’s appointments, providing meals, laundering clothes, choosing a safe and reputable daycare or babysitting service as needed, keeping a clean and safe house… what, are you saying that’s not important and that the only measure of ‘care’ for a child is strictly monetary?
Lastly, the mother stays at home and takes care of children while the father works model of the family is based off old gender norms. You know who’s all about trying to dismantle those gender norms to make family and child care more equitable? Feminists.
Dan: http://www.cse.ri.gov/services/enforcement.phpState Criminal Prosecution
An individual who has incurred past due support in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or who has willfully thereafter having the means to do so, fails to pay for over a period of three (3) years, shall be guilty of a felony for each instance of failure to pay and upon conviction, be punished by imprisonment for period not to exceed five (5) years. These cases are referred to the Attorney General’s Office for prosecution.
Bonds
I’m confused.. how are a couple commenters (or ALL the commenters) on feministe responsible for the supposed feminist conspiracy state was live in? o_O did they make the laws? xD NWO also believes that we’re benefiting from the banker controlled world too, does nebody who works at a bank then speak for us too? xD
@Victoria von Syrus
Plain and simple, in a household where only the man works and the woman stays at home. Is his contribution any less beneficial in the “caring” of a child?
My answer of course will be no. He is an equal “caretaker” in the childs welfare.
Whats your answer?
Anthony Zarat: Courts rarely modify a child support order due to unemployment
Citation needed.
. Only felony, multi-year imprisonment is enough “punishment” for the crime of being born male.
Um… no. 1: Imprisonment is the heaviest penalty which may be imposed. 2: It’s not for being male. It’s for having open, and longstanding, failure to fulfill a court order. 3: It’s on any non-custodial parent.
NWO: Primary caregiver = one who is the, “first responder” for things. The one who is making the lunches, changing the diapers, picking them up from school.
In short the one who is doing such things primarily.
If “Daddy” wanted to spend his time at work when they were married, and just contribute money… then it seems fair to continue that arrangement after the divorce (and vice-versa).
NWO, the bill for this site is $0, so, yes, Feministe covers all of that nothing.
Given how a lot of these trolls honestly do seem to believe all feminists and women are linked together in one big hive mind, or we have meetings and votes or.. well something where *I* can get a msg up to our elders who will then enact some sort of law thru our mangina leaders (or something xD ) it’s starting to make a lot of sense to me why their idea of activism is shouting at feminists online xD b/c since commenters at feministe are able to affect policy, and we’re like their.. i dunno buddies or something.. changing our minds is the best way to get actual change IRL xD
David, he means the OTHER things you get … fess up
@Victoria von Syrus
Plain and simple, in a household where only the man works and the woman stays at home. Is his contribution any less beneficial in the “caring” of a child?
My answer of course will be no. He is an equal “caretaker” in the childs welfare.
Whats your answer?
Of course he’s providing for his child(ren), but he’s not doing the majority of the hands-on child care… because he’s too busy at work.
In the case that this couple divorces, where the father works 40+ hours a week to support his family and the mother spends all of her time at home taking care of those children… with which parent ought the children live? I mean, you just said that the father is busy working – he might not even have *time* to take care of the children properly.
@NWOSlave: “Plain and simple, in a household where only the man works and the woman stays at home. Is his contribution any less beneficial in the ‘caring’ of a child?
“My answer of course will be no. He is an equal ‘caretaker’ in the childs welfare.”
Sure, someone has to bring home the bacon. But even though that’s extremely important, it’s not *everything* you have to do to raise a kid. You need to say, feed them, read them stories, change diapers, and make sure they don’t bite their siblings.
If you were a stay at home dad, and your wife came home from work, would you expect her to help you do the dishes? Hold the screaming baby while you took a nap? Take them on playdates? What if she refused to do any of these things because “I went to work today, my half of childcare is done”?
@Pecunium, you say…”If “Daddy” wanted to spend his time at work when they were married, and just contribute money… then it seems fair to continue that arrangement after the divorce”
The vast majority of men are in low paying jobs, or not making very much more than needed to simply survive. Also the reason they call it “work” is because it ain’t fun. Whatever coddled life you might lead doesn’t reflect on the average Joe. My guess is, not many men, including myself, jumps up in the wee hours of the morning screaming hallelujah, another day of hard labor.
Yea thats right, daddy doesn’t really “want” to go to work. He does it to provide and be the primary caretaker of both his wife and children. And you have degraded that down to a vile act. Congrats!
I have a bit of a soft spot for the Zeta Male. He seems so darn fragile. Which is a nice-ish change from all the brittle guys the MRM usually attracts.
Good researchin, Pecunium. I always have to wonder about these horror stories I hear on the internet about good fathers being locked out of their children’s lives by awful moms. I have no trouble believing that it happens sometimes. But out of all the divorced couples with children that I know, I can’t think of one of them where the father has not been granted at least visitation, without very good reason. Like, he abused the mother. Or he abused the child. Or he’s a drug addict. Hell, even in those cases (and even in the ones where the father refuses to pay support), the fathers I know generally get extensive visitation rights; the only difference is that the mom ends up in court a lot more trying (unsuccessfully) to fight it.
Oh well. Anecdotes! Where was I going with that? Oh yeah … I always suspect that in a lot of the MRA sob stories about family courts, there’s some details we’re not hearing. Maybe not in all of them, but at least in some.
Yeah, this isn’t one of those MRM sites where everything’s moderated to within an inch of its life. Nice, ain’t it?
And @NWOSlave once again thinks all men work in coal mines and all women have one perfectly behaved child to take care of. Why, childcare is no more work than cleaning out a gerbil cage once a day!
NWO, thank you for posting that interesting article from 1909.
It is very thought-provoking. For example, it provoked this thought: If the great-great grandson of E. Belfort Bax, the author of your article, were to marry singer Danielle Dax, and she chose to go with a hyphenated name, she would be Danielle Dax-Bax.
I would also like to call your attention to this article from 1920, which gets to the bottom of a movement even more sneaky and evil than feminism.
Once again, every comment here is proof positive that feminism is a hate movement.
C’mon, @NWOSlave, you didn’t answer my question. If you were a stay at home dad and your working wife came home and said, “I don’t need to help with any housework or change the baby, I bring in a paycheck every day”, how would you feel? Would this be fair?
@Molly Ren… Any job you can do in your pajama’s, ain’t that hard.
@Molly Ren he’ll say either it’d never happen, or the usual “it’s a hypothetical so I can say whatever I want, so I’ll say I would do exactly what I want other ppl to do without rly thinking about the situation” xD
I definitely need to use that as a quote in a card xD
@NWOSlave What if your kids did this?
Or cried constantly?
Or vomited on you?
What if you had more than one?
NWO: The vast majority of men are in low paying jobs, or not making very much more than needed to simply survive.
Then they shouldn’t be having kids. If they want to have them, then they accept the obligations that go with it. Condoms, or a vasectomy, are all they need to do. Personal respnsibilty.
Coddled life… sigh. East LA, Self-paid college, a brief stint homeless, catering, pizza, secutity guard, ditch-digger, studio projectionist, soldier, machinist, self-employed, disabled combat-vet.
Yeah, I see it now, all the coddling I’ve been able to enjoy.
(p.s…. you don’t seem to want to answer my single question about Iceland, when I keep answering your questions… The Age of Consent is 15, and the rate of divorce is 1.7 per thousand…. would you like to live there?)
Once again, every comment here is proof positive that feminism is a hate movement
You going to answer my question? I don’t think it’s that hard. He works, she stays at home, they divorce – with whom do the child(ren) live? If they live with their mother, is the father freed from all financial obligation to his children?
@Ami Angelwings I know, but I gotta stretch my little debate wings somehow… >>
I always love when the trolls run out of arguments and go right back to “I’VE READ EVERYTHING HERE AND CONCLUDED YOU GUYS ARE HATEFUL!” xD
The MRA would be much more reasonable, if we did not feel like society was hunting us like animals.
I hear this excuse from MRAs all the time. “I’m allowed to be a rude/threatening/irrational/bigoted asshole because The Woman is keeping me down, but I promise to act like a decent person the moment all my demands are met and everything in the world goes exactly my way.” No. Act like a decent person now. If you want to be treated reasonably, you have to be reasonable yourself.
Speaking of which, you are not being “hunted like an animal” because you’re not legally allowed to abandon your children. Sheesh.
The vast majority of men are in low paying jobs, or not making very much more than needed to simply survive.
Are the vast majority of women in high-paying jobs? If most people only make enough money to “simply survive,” how does anyone manage to raise a child?
You’re going too soft. Feminism is the Anti-Life equation.
Feminism Justifies My Hate! Feminism Justifies My Hate!
xD that has a double meaning w/ NWO too xD
I’m trying to replace that equation w/ the Ami-Life equation :D
Given that I use a lot of numbers and multiplication signs and brackets, the way i talk is a giant equation neways :D
Slavey, you want to know why I became a feminist? Because God told me to.
I’m on a mission from God.
Or Kristin xD
you should repost your story here btw… I wanted to last night but I wanted your permission :3
I think it’s AWESOME
(also nebody else who wants to add details to their cards or etc, is free to do so cuz that’d be awesome and fun :3 )
I can’t remember if you’ve done me yet (That’s what she…ah, forget it), but I wouldn’t mind something to do with vampires.
@ Ami
I posted a link in another thread, but I can post it again here.
Folks, because Ami is awesomeness personified, I’ve chosen to honor her with a “Magyc: the Gendering” fanfic. Here it is.
Johnny, that’s awesome. All hail Ami Angelwings! XD
Also, y’all need to take a gander at the latest Kate Beaton: Strong Female Characters.
“Doesn’t feministe foot the bill for this site?”
Silly Slavey, David works for the Rothschilds! Keep up, can’t you?
Hay Molly, did you request a card.. I keep forgetting who did :\
And that’s an awesome comic xD