Irony alert! The level of irony in this post is so extreme it might actually harm your computer.
So a couple of days ago, MGTOWer extraordinaire MarkyMark, continuing on with his post-retirement posting binge, shared with us an email he got from a fella who had skipped the country in order to avoid paying child support for his three kids.
I’m a deadbeat dad!!! (light your torches – gasoline in 89, 91, and 95 octane is available in your choice of containers). Yep, I’ve got three kids and I’m behind on my child kidnapping payments by probably 10 grand at present and considerably more behind on alimony and her lawyer fees. I skipped the country rather than be jailed for all of the above compounding my crimes. A runaway slave is the worst kind of slave – one that absolutely refuses to serve his massa.
Yep, that’s right. He compared the legal requirement that he provide financial assistance to his own children to … slavery.
In the rest of his letter, he encouraged other “slaves” to follow in his path.
My favorite bit is the quote I used as the headline:
Women from around the world look better than anything back in the states, cost less unless you’re totally stupid, and are much more easily disposed of.
Ooh. That last bit is rather unfortunately worded – unless he really is suggesting that outside the US it is easier to get rid of the bodies of murdered girlfriends and wives.
So anyway, MarkyMark’s post got linked to on the Men’s Rights subreddit. And this little discussion ensued. You may wish to activate your irony shields now.
Take note of the upvotes and downvotes for these three comments.
I am cool with MRAs being held responsible for what they do.
I can refrain from using the words criminally insane, and will look for better descriptors of what I wish to convey.
The mentally ill are almost always more harmed than harming in the real world.
New Troll is boring and post-happy, can we trade him for one of the classics?
Going back to the OP… I believe, if you helped create a child, it’s your responsibility to help that child in whatever way you can. That said, I can see how, if you’ve accidentally impregnated someone, it would seem like a financial burden you didn’t plan for and don’t want. I can see not necessarily wanting to spend money and time to raise the resulting child. It’s still your responsibility though, obviously.
What I truly don’t understand is how someone can have kids on purpose with their partner, parent them for years, tend to their scraped knees, collect their drawings of ponies, learn their personality quirks, teach them how to tell what tree a leaf comes from, coach their soccer team, and accept their sticky I-just-ate-candy kisses; and then, at that point, not want to contribute to their well-being. I don’t see how divorcing your spouse could magically unmake the love you have for your children. I guess they must have been terrible parents when they lived with their children.
Sorry, each time I hear “Nephy” I think of NephilimFree!
LOL XD
Both are just as silly! XD XD
Damn it, I leave to write a blog post and watch a few episodes of Glee and I miss Sugar Booger’s rampage.
I think the funniest thing about this particular tantrum (beyond that his debate skills appear to consist mostly of taking someone else’s question and tacking “Have/do you?” on the end of it) is that he assumes that having posts in moderation means that David is trying to silence his great words or whatever, instead of realizing that putting a truckload of links in a post will automatically put it in moderation. I’m pretty sure that has been discussed in other threads he’s posted in, so reading comprehension! Yeah.
I’ve mentioned my ex owes upwards of $30k in back child support. He works off the books for cash to make it hard for the state to track his income. He buys new vehicles, the newest model of phone the second it comes out, travels, etc.
He sees the kids once or twice a year when he gets dragged by his mother, where he sulks and looks at the floor until they leave.
He also tells people he is a devoted father and that he is best friends with me.
[i]I don’t see how divorcing your spouse could magically unmake the love you have for your children. I guess they must have been terrible parents when they lived with their children.[/i]
Pretty much. It isn’t a hard logic step to see the possibility that someone being deliberately neglectful of their children probably isn’t great at any relationship they’re in.
Pillow, I totally get choosing to view life not looking through the “rage filter.” Abusers take things; giving them the rest of life never helps.
And hey, Nephrite was my favorite Sailor Moon bad guy, too! He was paired kinda with Sailor Jupiter in the manga.
Bleh, quote fail. And I work in I.T. /shame
@ Viscaria,
Yeah, I’d imagine that you are right on the money. I have a feeling that people who are mysogynistic and authoritarian are bad at getting to know their kids when they are living at home, because well, that’s women’s work. And once they no longer have the perfect nuclear family as a status symbol, why should they invest any time and/or effort into the well being of people that no longer prop up their ego?
… This all makes me super sad, because my dad would give every red cent he had for my sister and I, even if he and my mom were not still happily married. And I know that having us in his life makes him just super incredibly happy, after being the product of a deadbeat dad himself. Families, when they work right, are supposed to make people more happy, supported and fulfilled. What is wrong with these people that they don’t UNDERSTAND that?
I can tell you how a man can be a father to wanted children and then just leave them without a thought or care. First, he requires a complete inability to see children as people in their own right. They only exist as extentions of their parents’ egos. Second, he needs to despise their mother in an obsessive nightmarish sort of way. Third, pure, unadulterated self serving greed.
See, then the real trick is the mind script they have about how much they LOVE their children and how their life is ruined by that evil bitch.
@Happy:
“It’s always *hilarious* when Paul Elam is held up as some type of MRA master of logical and reason…”
Especially because Elam himself admitted he’s not interested in being reasonable:
“Progress for men will not be gained by debate, reason or typical channels of grievance available to segments of the population that the world actually gives a damn about.”
I don’t understand how anyone can take him seriously after reading that. The man is a clown.
Some of the MRA’s want to reclaim the term ‘deadbeat dad’, or they say it’s a gendered slur. I disagree. I know women who have walked out on their families, never paying a dime to the father, and I say they’re deadbeat moms. Gender has nothing to do with me looking down upon deadbeat parents.
By the way, I use the term deadbeat to describe a parent who has the means to provide for hir child, but chooses not to out of selfishness or spite. I realize some parents do not have the means, and I am not talking about them. If MRA’s think the term deadbeat is shaming language, too bad. People should be ashamed of abandoning their own children.
It does seem to be more common to say ‘deadbeat dad’ though. Google turns up plenty of usages of the term “deadbeat mom’ online but I’ve never heard it used as frequently.
@Crumbelievable:
Probably because 84% of single parents are mothers, and 16% are fathers…
… Yeah. source
Fair enough.
One of the best things about foreign countries is that they don’t have draconian laws against men having sex. The “age of consent” laws are more realistic.
Easy way to get a dad to give up responsibility for their kid(s): Diagnosis of something like Autism (or other spectrum disorders, or some kind of psychological problem, or or or). Anecdata here, but both MomB and MrB have worked with special needs kids, and the overwhelming majority come fro single parent homes where the mother is the primary caretaker.
GodsonB’s father (who is now something like ten grand in the hole for child support and doesn’t give the kid his meds on visitation weekends) said, upon hearing that GodsonB is autistic: “You mean MY SON is a fucking RETARD?!?” He’s lucky we were in Denver at the time, because we would have given him a dual Gibbs-smack, and it would have HURT.
On a totally unrelated note, the appeals court ruled that CA’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional and that anti-abortion woman at Komen resigned with a REALLY cranky letter. Anyway, does anyone know of any studies that show how many noncustodial parents fail to pay child support and for what reasons (inability to pay vs deadbeatism, say)? I can try to look when I’m back at work, but thought one of you ninja researchers might just know… I know a lot of people who grew up with only one parent, mostly mothers, and all of their noncustodial parents paid what they could, when they could. Is that atypical?
buttman just because you cant understand the relationship between minority and consent doesnt mean sane people cant
but lets be honest, the really unrealistic thing is the idea of you talking to a woman without screaming about how shes a liar and a whore
I don’t know what the stats are (they are difficult apparently), but I’d be shocked if a majority of child support court orders put in place an amount that the non-custodial parent couldn’t demonstrably pay.
On the other hand, there are these stats:
“In 2007, 27.3% of custodial parents sought the government’s assistance collecting child support.”
“$34.1 billion dollars in child support was owed during the year 2007. 62.7% of that money—an average of $3,354—was received.”
“Among the 7.8 million custodial single parents who were awarded child support in 2007, only 46.8% received all of the child support money that was due. 23.7% received none of the child support money due.”
source
*they are difficult to find, apparently
Yes, Buttman, because 16 (or whatever the state statute is) is JUST TOO DAMN YOUNG. Oh, no, whatever shall you do?
Jackass.
Thanks, kirbywarp! I can imagine scenarios, especially in this economy, where someone’s circumstances might change — so that they start out able to pay, then get laid off or whatever. It is probably too hard to measure how much of the nonpayment is truly deadbeatism. Deadbeattery?
@M Dubz
I think you’re right. Thing is, the woman-as-caretaker model of families can’t function without the addition of man-as-breadwinner. They’re not even willing to hold up their end of the pointless bargain they’ve created for themselves.
I… wow. I stumbled upon things I should not have stumbled upon over at this site.
Lowest ages of consent:
12: Vatican State
13: Burkina Faso, Nigeria, South Korea, Spain
14: Togo
15: bunch of places
I haven’t included places where the age of consent can be much lower based on circumstances (like close age). If you’re calling the US laws draconian, though, I’d hate to see what you say about places where sex is only legal within a marriage.
Yes, Buttman, terrible, draconian laws against men having sex! Of course, women can have any sex they want OH WAIT
Actually, I double-checked the Vatican State thing… Apparently they follow Italian law, which in the distant past used to be 12 and has since changed. So, in fact, it isn’t true that the age of consent in the Vatican is 12.
Thank God.