This comment didn’t get a ton of upvotes in r/mr, but it was just too idiotic to ignore:
Thanks, r/againstmensrights for pointing this one out!
We Hunted The MammothBucking the Backlash
We Hunted The MammothThis comment didn’t get a ton of upvotes in r/mr, but it was just too idiotic to ignore:
Thanks, r/againstmensrights for pointing this one out!
DKM: Single people get gov’t assistance. Childless/childfree couples get gov’t assistance. It’s not like Obama up and decided last week that ONLY single mothers (not single fathers or cohabitating couples with children) get any kind of cash or food benefits. As long as you fit the income criteria (and asset criteria in some states), you get assistance.
Additionally, they–and their children–deserve better than to have the unwed mother’s fatherless spawn grow up to terrorize their schools,parks, streets, and neighborhoods, as well as have the daughters of unwed slut grow up to breed more of the same 13-16 years down the line!
And when the great Mellerian Uprising happens, all those evil women who won’t submit to the gentle and loving rule of men, will be killed as they deserve.
Me,I figure that food on the table, clothes on their back, a decent education, and the sense that society doesn’t hate them is a lot more likely to keep them from being bitter people with no skills, no hope, and no reason to care about society.
I’ll bet you don’t know what it takes to get food stamps. I was disqualified, when I had an income of zero, because I was enrolled in college. Yep, if you aren’t employed at 20 hours a week, guaranteed; so no on-call, part-time shift work: modern retail doesn’t qualify, and are enrolled in any school (trade, continuing ed between jobs, college) the great (and oh so liberal state) of Calif. refuses to help you eat.
But, quit school and be willing to look for a 40 hour a week job, even if you can’t get one, and you will get those food stamps, so you can live high on the hog with your lack of a paycheck.
I was on food stamps for 5-6 months 13 years ago. I had medical problems and couldn’t work for a while. The first month wasn’t too bad, since I still had a lot of the staples, such as cooking oil, pasta, beans, rice, canned and frozen goods, etc. But after I had used them up and had to replace them, I found it hard to make do on the amount I received. Maybe if I were a better cook or had access to a store like Sam’s or Costco, I would have done better. I didn’t starve on food stamps, but there were many meals that left me unsatisfied.
I was ashamed of using food stamps. And while most of the supermarket cashiers were nice to me, other shoppers sometimes weren’t. I received a lecture from one woman when I had the nerve to use food stamps to buy a cheap carton of chocolate ice cream. She suggested that I should be buying oatmeal, not ice cream. I was civil to her, but I felt like both crying and smacking her. Not sure why some people get so judgmental over something like food stamps, unless it’s the ugly desire to kick people when they’re down.
Wisteria: When I was training to be a cashier, I was specifically told that I should never tread a customer of food stamps any differently than any other. My response was pretty much, “Well, DUH!” I do not understand where this need to shove one’s nose into other’s business comes from! Why the fuck does it matter that I’m buying a bag of peppermint patties or you’re buying ice cream or that other guy is buying steak and lobster for all his unemployed friends (yes, someone actually claimed that people on food stamps do this ‘all the time’)? All that stuff getting bought puts money in the store’s coffers, which lets the cashiers get paid, which results in a net $1.82 in economic activity for every $1 actually spent on the program.
RedandGonzo, yes, I agree with you. There does seem to be a certain percentage of USAians who want to turn back the clock to the good old days when it was the survival of the fittest and to hell with everyone else. For all the hatred of FDR by many Republicans, he probably saved American capitalism. And now the Republicans and even many Democrats are doing everything they can to remove the social safety nets: attacking Social Security (initiated by FDR), Medicare, Medicaid, food stamp programs, TANF, unemployment benefits, etc.
“Nothing is too good for the working class.”
– Rudolph Rocker
Good, pleasurable food is a *right*, not a privilege. Fuck the judgmental fucks.
QFT. For what it’s worth, anyone on food assistance has my full permission and every blessing to smack assholes like that upside the head.
There was a chef in the SF Bay who took a month to live on the budget of food stamps., to see what he could do.
This was a professional, a guy who knows how to cook, what goes well together. He said it was brutally hard. He had a fundraiser recently, to raise money for people who don’t have enough to eat, in part because of how limiting it was to try and make do on that budget.
Complaints against my post are so “all over the map” that there is little purpose in trying to respond to each post one by one. I’ll try to clarify my position in terms clear enough so that even women (hopefully) can understand.
1-Providing an environment for which children could be supported–by both the mother–domestically–and the father–financially–is what MARRIAGE was for!
2) a woman who has–and “raises(?)” children out of wedlock deprives the children of such support, and is an unfit mother for that reason alone!
3) Men don’t normally abandon families–indeed, fatherhood is a major,determinant of manhood itself in most cultures, communities, and nations around the world. and as late as the 1950’s, even in the USA. Few transgressions guaranteed a man’s total exclusion from acceptance BY OTHER MEN than neglect or abuse of wife or children!
4) Since the feminist revolution, ‘no-fault’ divorce has seen to it that most divorces are applied for, and awarded to WOMEN! Men did not, and could not, ‘abandon’ their children–they were kicked out by feminist wives who decided to “fulfill themselves” by entering the workforce (what was left of it) and driving down wage rates, accelerating offshoring of American jobs, and raising taxes (making employers here less competitive) which accounts for not only the “two-income” household who can’t support itself even as well as the male breadwinner was able to in the ’40s, 50’s..
Get rid of the excess women, reduce taxes–and spending–even to the level of c.1950,, repeal no-fault divorce insanity, and once again America will be blessed with intact single income marriages and families.
Reassert the traditions of paternal custody which were common in the XIX century! This would automatically provide a disincentive for mothers to divorce fathers, since they would lose their children if they did so, and probably provide additional insurance against “deadbeat dads’ who would have to support children who were living with him 24/7, whatever he thought of the shrew who kicked him–and them–out.
besides, XIX century family courts were probably correct in their assumption that a woman shameful enough to sue for divorce was probably an unfit mother in the first place! Anybody care to google up divorce and separation rates between e.g. 1840-1880, and say, 1970-2010? I didn’t think so! This has to be considered also in the light of the facts that daily life, for both men and women, was MUCH harder then than it is today!
What about bankers, Corporate CEOs, and their chief lawyers? THEY DON’T PAY FOR FOOD STAMPS, AMERICA’S WARS, OR ANYTHING ELSE? They are paid for by people who are one–very precarious–step away from the desperation self-inflicted on unwed mothers/sexually “liberated” women, and increasingly cannot afford to support someone else’s kids along with their own!
Whenever possible, marriage should be regarded once again as a union of two families or households, not merely of two individuals. This would reassure new couples that they were getting the support of their respective families, but on the other hand, both Husband and Wife were carrying on the traditions, name, and probably the property of both households, and trivial or selfish “reasons” for divorce–least of all, not by the woman–would not be accepted by their families or their community!
Why do you think we hear Warren Buffet (one of the world’s wealthiest men) now babbling about higher taxes for billionaires? For politically connected NWO banksters like him, it would at most be moving money from his left pocket (“private business”) into his right pocket (“public interest” or government that financiers like him own lock stock and barrel anyhow). The other 99% of us get nothing but the bills,whether we are on welfare or not! It is also worth noting that many of the TAX EXEMPT oundations, e.g. Ford Foundation, Guggenheim fund, Rockefeller Brothers fund, Council on Foreign Relations,Carnegie Endowment, etc… supported, and indeed designed most, if not all, of the legislation that later went into the “New Deal” and later Great Society, and successors, and eagerly embraced feminism when it came along in the 1970’s.!
What we are experiencing now is some of the consequences (which have a ways to run yet) of feminism, environmentalism run amok,”progressive education”, and other fads, fantasies, and delusions of this criminal elite which are coming to fruition today! Society was held to be a kind of ‘laboratory’ and guess who all the lab rats were? Look in the mirror lately?
I hope that I answered some of the questions and concerns regarding broken families, State “benefits”, and why feminism made a bad situation worse for almost everybody!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
Hey, Meller admits the world “before feminism was bad.
feminism made a bad situation worse for almost everybody!
I don’t think it’s worse, but at least he admits it wasn’t good before.
So, DKM, you support progressive taxation? That’s cool, me too!
However, I would love it if you would explain to me why I should have to get married and become a stay at home mom just because I have a vagina. I’m not a very feminine person, I’ve never particularly liked children, and I’ve got a degree and a good job. I would be bored out of my mind if I stayed at home, and I don’t even think I’d be good at it.
DKM – So if we didn’t give poor people food, they’d wise up and be less poor?
Your whole thesis seems to hinge on the idea that every single mother voluntarily left a loving and willing-to-help man, which is… so far from reality it might as well involve velociraptors.
I went to high school in a city that somewhat routinely appears on “best” city to live lists, and let me tell you that there are middle-class or higher gentry that are happy to get thier assistance checks every month. Maybe we wouldn’t have to begrudge the actual poor every last dime if their betters would not be such douchebags.
What about single women with no children, Meller? They gonna be on sex farms come your revolution?
Get rid of excess women… you really are a piece of work.
Nullpointer-27 September 2011@6:41 pm
You misunderstand. I don’t support progressive–or any other form of–taxation. Taxation is simply a form of extortion and theft whereby those with the control of the political means obtain money that they could NOT earn in any kind of market context. I cited the Buffet case as an example of its (progressive taxation’s) futility. The reason Billionaires like Buffet today–and like Warburg, Morgan, and Rockefeller in 1913–supported the progressive income tax is because they ALREADY OWN the means of predation–the apparatus of theft, extortion, and property transfer–and it is sometimes easier for them to work through the cover of “public interest” than it is through ‘private enterprise”. 99% of the rest of us get screwed all the same!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
Holly, if in David’s world i have to be dependent on a man no matter what, even if the man is…. well, like David, can I have a pet velociraptor? You know, while we’re playing make-believe and all.
David, you do realize that we as human beings are all different, right? And that what works for some people might not work for others? And not all women want or are cut out to be housewives and not all men want or are cut out to be breadwinners, and that some people just don’t want to marry at all or are queer?
If I hadn’t already dismissed your ravings as that of a loon so completely out of touch with reality he cannot comprehend that people’s experiences would be different than his, well, i would have at your comment about single mothers. One of the best decisions my mother made was to divorce my father who was little more than a drunk leach. I shudder to think about what it would have been like to grow up in the toxic household that would have inevitably formed if my parents had stayed together. Instead I grew up enjoying a loving, stable home with a supportive mother. Yea, things were hard, but the resentment and bitterness that my mother spared herself, not to mention the time, money, and energy that she could devote to me instead of a leach, is completely invaluable.
In short, the very fact that you would rate my childhood as the worst ever, and the childhood of my first boyfriend, whose parents were physically and emotionally abusive (but married!) as all for the good, makes me want to do little more than laugh in your face.
Holly Pervocracy–27 September 2011@6:42pm
Try again! Women of all nationalities, socioeconomic classes, and races around the world managed to sustain households, keep their marriages going, and their husbands from abandoning them, even amid circumstances that were FAR more difficult than any prevailing today! Men weren’t always “loving” and willing-to-help”, but they kept their marriages intact, they raised their children to be upright, hard-working, and (for the most part) decent men and women, and they found contentment and satisfaction in homemaking despite the limitations of their husbands.
Women today lack the discipline, the skills, and the patience to inspire love in a man, they are too often faultfinding shrews who are no more skilled in keeping a household or marriage than a fish is at piloting a speedboat. There are States where 75% of divorces are initiated by women! That would not–and could not– be tolerated for a second by the people of previous times of which I admiringly speak.
How about starting with this? If men have a responsibility for financial support, do women have a corresponding responsibility for “domestic support”? I think if this issue of “deadbeat moms” were taken as seriously as “deadbeat dads” who “refuse(?) to support their families fincancially,, we may get somewhere!
Human nature doesn’t change all that much from generation to generation, or from millenium to millenium.That is why today’s readers can still relate so strongly to the Bible and other ancient writings. Men are much the same today as they were 5000 years ago, and, stripped of a useless, pointless, and destructive feminist egalitarian veneer, so are women!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!
David K. Meller,
On what alternate Earth? Single mothers have always been around. Keeping a husband from abandoning you (nice blame assignment) isn’t always possible, and no matter what social rules you follow, some fathers die.
And then there are mothers that would have been been better off single. Whatever goofy claims you want to make about its prevalence, there’s no question that spousal abuse happens, and that mothers who stay with an abusive husband are worse off than single mothers. It’s horrible for the children as well.
And you want to marry one?
Are you in denial about what “not tolerating” would entail, or are you openly welcoming it?
Um… so if I got divorced I’d still have to come over once a week and dust my ex’s furniture? The fuck?
I’m actually all for non-custodial mothers who have money being liable for financial support, but I think alimony pot roasts are just a wee tad over the line.
I think all individuals in a relationship have a responsibility to contribute equally to that relationship, whether it’s the traditional model you describe between a man and a woman in marriage, or when two married persons share domestic and financial responsibilities equally, or in a poly relationship where all involved are doing their share. The thing is, no one model works best for everyone, because people are so diverse. Being open to diverse relationship models in others lives, even if not your own, ensures everyone has a chance of finding something that works for them.
And yea, i don’t relate to the bible even a little bit.
Aw, DKM, you didn’t answer my question 🙁 I was so excited!
In case you missed it in all the confusion about progressive taxation, here it is again:
I would love to see a fish pilot a speedboat. Just I would love to see Meller sprout a brain and a soul.
Funny you should be making the rather odd claim that men never would abandon women in the old days DKM. Or very very rarely.
I am currently reading Women Before the Bar: Gender, Law, and Society in Connecticut, 1639-1789‘s section on divorce. And the vast majority of the petitions (there were about a 1,000 considered and granted) were filed because of desertion by the husband.
So if men almost never deserted their wives, why were these men doing that? They had total and absolute control over their wives, they could kill her (one divorce was granted on grounds of cruelty from the founding of the colony to the 1780s and that was due to the extraordinary viciousness of the husband who not only beat her with a horsewhip, halter and ax-yes, ax-he also tried to strangle her numerous times, did a mock hanging, and threw her out of the house on multiple occasions and he vowed he would “be the Death” of her. He also freely admitted his behavior before the court) and the wife would have no recourse outside of hoping her parents or siblings would help her.
And yet, the men were still walking away. So explain that.
MrB’s parents hated each other. Like you would not believe. Before the aneurysm, his father was an abusive shit, after, his mother was an emotionally abusive and manipulative shit. But they stayed together for him – he was their surprise baby, born fifteen years after his closest sister – and made it perfectly clear that even though they hated each other and would rather be far, far away from each other, they were staying together for MrB’s sake. Yes, that kind of environment will warp the shit out a kid – I’m amazed MrB came out of it as functional as he is.
Yeah, no shit!! Some… possibly most…. women simply can’t get past committing the grievous sin of living beyond 20 years of age.
Can I second NullPointer’s question? Also childfree, also degreed, also not interested in femininity. Where’s my place in the Brave New Mellerverse?