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.
@Captain Bathrobe you’re also not human (or mortal) so you dun rly count…
@MizDarwin…In the childminder/breadwinner model that worked before the divorce, the “father” had full access to his children. In the after divorce model, the “father” has limited access if any. His access hinges upon what the woman and courts decide. “He” has his family, (children), kidnapped to whatever degree the woman and courts decide. He will then be extorted for whatever money the woman and courts decide, (in the best interest of the child of course, HAHA).
Mandatory joint custody, (unless one party reliquishes custody), would of course solve this problem. But where’s the money and power in that? You’ll of course say this IS the default position of the courts and women. But as someone thoughtfully provided percentages of custody we know this isn’t the case. Also since men have to “fight” for equal custody, (and lose), we again know this isn’t the case.
I know, citation, citation, citation. But really, whats the point? When I give them, they’re disreguarded. Then you’ll move to mockery, or you might just ramble on about cookies or cats or fantasy. It makes no difference. Your hatred of men and belief in your own moral superiority has been so thoroughly indoctrinated you’ll never admit to the misandry that infects every aspect of modern society.
Who says demons can’t be good caregivers? You’re not misdemonist, are you Ami?
No, just handing money over is not parenting or caretaking, really. Of course, most working parents do spend time with their children, but if we supposed that only money was being transferred, nope, that’s not parenting. If that was it, a far better system would be a general tax pool to provide for children and their primary caretakers. If it is just the money, then that person is completely interchangeable with any other money source.
“hen I give them, they’re disreguarded”
No. They are critiqued, usually because you give shitty citations. And because that’s why you give citations – so people can judge where you got your information from. You often give fairly flawed sources, people read them and critique them, and then you interpret this as being “disregarded.”
For example: The gender brain difference study. Looked like solid work, but I disagreed with your interpretation of what it meant. I said, “yes, interesting, but doesn’t answer x y z questions.” You’re response: “You’re just disregarding it because it doesn’t fit your agenda!”
You didn’t even challenge my critique, you simply claimed I was disregarding it.
Slavey’s like an itchy rash: hard to ignore, but if you scratch it, it only itches worse.
[meta]
Guys! Don’t forget, NWOaf lies through his teeth. He is not working from an evidence-based worldview, and he doesn’t value facts and rationality. He has no intellectual or ideological framework that would hold him back from presenting whatever lies are convenient to make his “point.”
Never neglect to point this out. Asking him for citations is pointless. Remind the audience that he’s a pathological liar, THEN debunk his bullshit links.
@darksidecat…Or mandatory joint custody, which would completely eliminate any money aspect of divorce and childcare.
@Ami
Since I haven’t been on recently, so it looks like I missed how the whole Magyc: The Gendering got started, but it looks awesome.
If you are taking requests, I wouldn’t mind a card myself. Amnesia the Forgotten, perhaps? Just an idea, you don’t have to use it if you don’t want to.
*”your response”…eep, this is what happens when you don’t proofread.
So why, then, is the Family Court wrong when it views heterosexual parental “roles and responsibilities” through the same narrow lens of dominant cultural norms and values that you do?
In addition, I have read comments on MRA sites denouncing policies designed to encourage father-friendliness in workplaces, such as those implemented in Sweden and the Netherlands, due to their “forcing” fathers to take time off work in order to care for their child/children. You’d think that persons concerned with fathers’ rights would welcome attempts to increase father-friendly policies in the workplace.
Of course if you are against joint custody after divorce, this means you like the power given by the courts that feminists have fought for. Which of course you can’t be blamed for since your not like that particular brand of feminism. Yet you still retain the privileges of those bad feminists, and you love it.
Cya, liars.
And there’s the flounce xD
@Amnesia sure!
@Pam it reminds me of how NWO is constantly going on about the pressures on being male and etc etc, but then when ppl (like Ozymandias) talk about wanting to get rid of these gender roles and constructs and pressures, he accuses us of wanting to turn men into women >_>;;
In hockey discussions, a lot of the anti-fighting, anti-head shots, anti-boys should suck it up types get this too, ppl complain about how men are expected to take all this punishment, and we say we should get rid of this, and they’re like “BUT THEN THEY’LL BE GIRLS!” -_-;;
XD
Wow… NWO’s come and flounce already? You guys are good.
Notice how, in NWO’s response to MizDarwin, he takes “breadwinner/childminder” and turns it into “father/mother,” when MizDarwin clearly made each gender neuteral. ^__^ Thus insinuating that only the fathers are separated from their children in any and every divorce…
Alright, back to reading through the threads. 😀
“The vast majority of men have low paying jobs.” REALLY? Citation needed.
Ami, I still wanna be keeper of the feminist cats! xD
Indeed, and he’s certainly not the only one that flies that banner. Can’t possibly expect us to do that, cos then you’d be turning us into [CRINGE] women… but that doesn’t mean that we men think less of you women.
Nah, couldn’t be.
Whoa…those KIA ads are really disturbing…
Robert Franklin at Fathers and Families took that stance at the time the suicide happened.
You should subscribe to their blog.
I get so tired of this. Do you know how many men get visitation/custody and have no FUCKING idea what they’re doing because they never spent more than 5 minutes with their kids before the divorce? It takes a hell of a lot more to be a parent (mother or father) than a biological donation and some cash. It takes time and attention and energy.
And all these men wah, wah, wah whining about their rights. FUCK YOU! What about your kids’ rights? None of you seem to give a fuck about that. Do you have the slightest idea how emotionally traumatic is it to kids, especially very young ones, to be ripped away from their primary careprovider on what to them is a random basis and to be left with someone they barely know, someone who spent so little time before they invoked their “right” to be involved with the child that they have no idea what the child normally eats, who their doctor is, what their bedtime rituals are or anything else important? Grow the fuck up. Your kids’ rights come way before yours do. Sadly, the courts don’t seem to agree and seem to think parental “rights” trump children’s real needs. If courts really put the children first, I think there’d be a lot better decisions in custody cases.
When they get older, they can decide if they want to be with you or not. My personal opinion is that kids 10 or over should have their wishes taken into account when courts decide custody/visitation. And that kids under 3 should have custody decided based on who provided the majority of day to day care for them, unless the primary caregiver is abusive. I also think that under 3 years, there should be no overnight visitations. It’s too confusing and traumatic for the child. Between 3 and 10, hopefully something amicable can be worked out and if not, the court should decide what would be the least stressful and traumatic FOR THE CHILD.
Oh hey, look what I found!
@Alex I think that the first one def is being read by many as disturbing (like that it’s the same scene going on, but the teacher is seeing the interaction differently, like “this is what a pedophile sees!” or that the girl is imagining seducing him or something >__>;;
@Alex I think that the first one def is being read by many as disturbing (like that it’s the same scene going on, but the teacher is seeing the interaction differently, like “this is what a pedophile sees!” or that the girl is imagining seducing him or something -_-)… like again, whether it’s “intent” or not, if a lot of ppl are reading it the “wrong” way, then it’s failed as an ad designed to make ppl like your company and product.. xD
http://ami-rants.blogspot.com/2011/06/on-controversial-kia-ads-o.html
I actually find the whole CONCEPT behind the ads rly interesting tho (as I discuss here) even tho i also ttlly understand what’s problematic in them, and also the idea that the viewer is expected to be a straight male (with a fetish for childhood imagery or situations) >_>;;
@MizDarwin…In the childminder/breadwinner model that worked before the divorce, the “father” had full access to his children. In the after divorce model, the “father” has limited access if any. His access hinges upon what the woman and courts decide. “He” has his family, (children), kidnapped to whatever degree the woman and courts decide. He will then be extorted for whatever money the woman and courts decide, (in the best interest of the child of course, HAHA).
So in the 17.4% of cases where the fathers are made the primary custodians after a divorce, have the courts kidnapped a woman’s children away from her? 17.4% is somewhere between 1 in 5 and 1 in 6 cases. In those cases, does her access to her children hinge upon whatever degree the father and courts decide? In the 40% of cases where custodial fathers are awarded child support, is she being extorted for whatever money the father and courts decide? 81.7% of non-custodial parents who pay child support have a visitation agreement worked out; only 65.4% of parents not ordered to pay support have visitation rights.
Here’s a scenario: Breadwinner works a 40+ hour workweek during the week in order to provide for hir children. Breadwinner and childminder divorce. The judge, being a fair-minded sort, decrees absolute 50/50 custody – but this actually doesn’t work out too well. The breadwinner has very little time or resources to be able to devote to hir children during the workweek – since, y’know, working and whatnot. But an alternate weekend arrangement gives the breadwinner ample leisure time to spend with hir children when not distracted by competing work demands.