A startling new development on the frontiers of anti-male oppression. According to the loquacious lady MRA known as girlwriteswhat on Reddit, men are being oppressed by evil feminist dudes cruelly clamping down on their right to bitch about ladies in the bathroom. In a recent comment she writes:
No space is allowed to be male-only, or male-viewpoint-only, but women insist on female-only or female-viewpoint-only spaces all the time.
The only male safe space left on the planet is the men’s bathroom, ffs. And even then, there will be feminist-leaning men policing what is said. It’s very frustrating.
As a dude feminist who is a regular user of men’s restrooms, I should note that dudes do not actually talk in restrooms.
Happily, this does not prevent me, as a dude feminist, from policing the non-existent speech of other dudes in said restrooms.
Here is the complete transcript of a restroom discussion I recently policed:
Dude One: [silently urinates]
Dude Two: [silently urinates]
Dude Three: [silently poops]
Me: Goddessdamnit, keep it down with all your lady-bashing! Men are bad!
Always glad to help.
HT to Shit Reddit Says, which has just ended its month-long moratorium on r/mensrights posts, for pointing me to girlwriteswhat’s observation.
Yeah, we did, but it also wasn’t the facts of the case they were flogging.
I also don’t really give a shit about Antsy’s dreams about how it’s so mean to the menz to do this. I care because it’s mean to the poor.
@Rutee:
I’m just agreeing to that hypothetically, in that bare bones structure, but I don’t know if Antz is talking about an actual sentence like Thomas Ball or something. Obviously knowing more details about a particular case would change a lot.
an actual case*
On the othet hand, refusal to pay when the means exist is another matter. As with willful tax evasion and the willful failure to pay wages due, legal sanction would be appropriate.
You can see one case of a father sent to prison for hard time because of inability to pay child support on today’s spearhead — if you don’t want to read the article, just scroll down to the video and click on it:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/02/01/its-time-to-nurse-our-grievances/
On any given day, 50,000 fathers are doing hard time for inability to pay child support. This is your legacy. Watch it. Feel the burning shame of your own evil bigotry. Then multiply that story by 50,000 and think “this is modern feminism”.
I know Marcotte is against this. I pointed that out when we first talked about this issue. I still could not get anyone to agree.
AntZ:
I don’t actually see the point in putting people in gaol for not paying child support. They’re even less likely to be able to pay if they’re in gaol than if they aren’t.
And another thing I don’t understand: what’s wrong with 50/50 child custody as long as neither parent has a history of abusing their children? That way nobody pays child support and both parents get time with their kids. I don’t understand why the MRA doesn’t see this.
And I never understood alimony. We don’t have it in Australia.
And the reason we don’t talk about this stuff with you is the nasty, insulting inflammatory way you frame your questions.
I also don’t believe parents unable to pay child support should be jailed.
And yet I’m a feminist. Or are you going to tell me that I’m 100% MRA too?
I don’t know about 50/50 time for kids with each parent. I’d have to hear from a lot of people raised this way before I could work out an opinion.
Feel the burning shame of your own evil bigotry.
Should I do this before or after I eat my nightly meal of roasted baby? Should I give the clip my full attention, or can I multi-task–say, by masturbating while strangling a puppy? I want to get this “evil” thing exactly right.
I know the problem with it-most of the time the men (and women) who wind up in jail or prison had multiple chances to avoid it. Some judges give so many chances the custodial parent might as well give up.
Even in Turner v Rogers the defendant had a chance to not screw his kids over-if he had enough money for drugs, he should have at least set aside some of it for his kids. (And yes, I am quite aware that addiction is a serious problem.) He did not. He did not even bother filing something showing he was unemployed. At some point people cannot expect someone else to take care of their own situation and take a few steps to ensure those who need to know about their financial difficulties know about it.
W.F Price: “W.F Price: ” Women are harder-hearted than executioners when it comes to the fathers of their children. It’s evolutionarily hard-wired — if they feel an impulse to mate with new cock eliminating the prior man becomes a top priority.”
See, this here is a perfect example of what is so very wrong with your movement. Even ifn an MRA raises a legitimate point or at least something that can be debated, he has to ruin it with his trollish nature and his rampant misogyny.
This could simply be an opinion piece about how some men are unfairly (again, in the author’s opinion, fine whatever) arrested and thrown in jail for being unable to pay child support. Now I don’t know anything about law so I don’t know if , but that’s besides the point. Price could write the article, I could read it and maybe disagree, and then be on my way.
But of course he has to pepper it with misogynistic language that serves absolutely no purpose, thereby making himself look like a misogynistic ass.
I don’t know if the situation is actually the way it’s presented by Price*
I need to take more time typing. But I’m always in a rush because I think by the time I’m done, the topic will have moved on.
New! Good news! Canada created frozen clone army…plans to take over the world.
Proof from a site more credible than Spearhead http://www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=232665
The problem isn’t with 50/50 shared physical and legal custody, per se. The problem is in mandating that this be the default, in spite of what the best interests of the child may be. In other words, it puts the interests of the parents over the interests of the child. Now, the courts’ idea of the best interests of the child may be influenced by old-fashioned sexist values that dictate that the mother is always the better parent, but this is hardly the fault of feminism.
This is the bill (that the National Organization for Women supported) which I posted about three months ago:
http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText12/SenateText12/S2152.pdf
Read it if you want. Five years in prison for falling behind $5000 on child support.
EN:
“One of the basic theories of feminism is that men must reserve a part of their lives for women and women must not do any thing for pleasing men.”
This makes no sense. Have you ever actually been in a relationship? They tend to be about sharing cool stuff. Sex is just one of those shared things. Most women will go out of their way to please their partners, just as most men will go out of their way to please theirs. I don’t know where you’re digging this bullshit up from. Or is this another stupid drive-by comment?
I think what Elizabeth said bears repeating: men who are jailed for non-payment typically have multiple chances to avoid being jailed. If you flout a court order for long enough, without even taking minimal steps to show efforts at compliance, most judges are going to be a wee bit pissed off.
I think the figure of 50,000 men jailed for sheer inability to pay is highly suspect.
Captain Bathrobe – exactly, especially since these are couples who have been through mediation and still can’t agree, so have come to court. At its worst, it leads to throwing kids off a bridge.
“.. men who are jailed for non-payment typically have multiple chances to avoid being jailed ..”
No they don’t. Did you read the law? It says nothing of multiple chances to avoid jail. The guy in the video winds up in prison 2 years after the divorce is final. Just enough time for him to run out of relatives that he can beg money from. No time for non-existent fantasy feminist “chances”. The blood on your hands will never wash off, bigots. Never.
From the text of the Texas bill:
Every person who is obligated to pay child support pursuant to an order or decree established by or registered with the family court pursuant to chapter 11 of title 15, who has incurred arrearage of past-due child support in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) five thousand dollars ($5,000), and who shall willfully thereafter,
having the means to do so, fail to pay three (3) or more installments of child support in an amount previously set by the court, according to the terms previously set by the court, shall be guilty of a felony for each instance of failure to make the subsequent payments and upon conviction shall be punished by imprisonment for a period not to exceed five (5) years.
Have you read it, Antz?
I support that bill. Unlike you I find the fact that noncustodial parents refusing to pay or even do the bare minimum of effort to show they cannot pay worthy of being chucked into jail for. Maybe even prison.
Also, unless those are mandatory jail sentences (which would never pass), most noncustodial parents will get at most a few weeks. The ones who do not should be in prison anyway for being such assholes to their own offspring.
Okay, ignoring for the moment that I have no power to change or implement US laws, and therefore had absolutely nothing to do with this o_O
Are they all getting murdered in jail? Where’s the blood coming from?
Ok so the text of the bill says,
“EVERY PERSON, who already OWES 5,000
and who shall WILLFULLY thereafter,
HAVING THE MEANS TO DO SO, fail to pay three (3) or more installments of child support in an amount
previously set by the court, according to the terms previously set by the court, shall be guilty of a
felony for each instance of failure to make the subsequent payments and upon conviction shall be punished by imprisonment for a period not to exceed five (5) years.
so only those who owe 5,000, and who have the means to pay, and who willfully refuse to pay three installments, might go to jail for less than 5 years.”
Most parents paying child support, who have the means to pay, do not owe 5,000 fucking dollars in the first place.
So this penalty has many avenues of avoidance, and is strictly limited as well.
So only the rich assholes who have this kind of money will be punished in this way, not poor dudes who cannot pay.
All caps words mine, for emphasis
“We have seen the destruction caused by feminism, and women in general. Women are getting pissed because they know the gravy train is about to come to a screeching halt. The manginas and white knights who serve women are becoming an endangered species. Men like me aren’t going to put themselves in harm’s way anymore. We understand the true nature of women, and we are disgusted by it…..Women have committed crimes against humanity, and it about time they faced justice.” (9 upvotes, 1 downvote)
It looks like Price’s readers really read the piece thoroughly and understood it well, huh.
Willful failure, having the ability to pay. If you willfully refused to pay your taxes, and you had the ability to pay, where do you think that would get you? I’m just not buying that these guys are the victims they’re made out to be. And the whole “blood on your hands” schtick just makes you sound like a fanatic. Which, of course, you are.