UPDATE 10/25/16: If you’ve come here after reading about a petition to cancel screenings of The Red Pill, I ask you to NOT sign any such petitions. It’s just free publicity for them. Read more of my thoughts on the matter here.
Dear Cassie Jaye,
Congratulations. You surpassed your Kickstarter fundraising goal yesterday, more than two weeks before the Kickstarter campaign was scheduled to come to a close. You’ve funded the postproduction work on your long-delayed documentary on Men’s Rights activists, and then some.
But I’m not sure that the person I should be congratulating is you. Last night Paul Elam of A Voice for Men – the central subject of your film – was doing his own victory lap online. And no wonder, because he seems to be the real victor here.
In a post on his site that managed to be giddy and vindictive at once, he offered his congratulations to you, then, well, to himself. “Even though the victory goes to Ms. Jaye,” he wrote, in an awkward attempt at modesty, “I have the need to offer up some thanks.”
And then he spelled out why he thinks your “victory” is really a victory for him.
For the past six years AVFM has had mud kicked in its face by a corrupt, left-wing media. Bottom feeders like Adam Serwer, Jeff Sharlet and Mariah Blake have performed endless unscrupulous acts, directly lying to their readers in order to attack AVFM, this movement and me personally.
Their work was not just to harm me, or to damage a website but to make sure if they could that the message we carry never found its way to the larger public. Their intent was and is to paint an indelible stain on all of us so hideous that we would never be taken seriously by enough people to matter.
They have failed, and I can now predict that they have failed miserably.
In other words, Paul Elam thinks he and his friends in what he ludicrously calls the “Men’s Human Rights Movement” have bought and paid for a feature-length advertisement for them.
And it’s not hard to see why Elam – and the other manospherians who’ve rallied around your film in recent days — think this. After all, they are the ones who have rescued your film from oblivion by pouring tens of thousands of dollars into your Kickstarter.
And all it took for you to unleash this torrent of money was an interview with one of the sleaziest figures in right-wing journalism, Milo Yiannopoulos of Breitbart.
In the interview, posted on Monday, you complained that “I won’t be getting support from feminists. They want a hit piece and I won’t do that.”
There was more than a little bit of irony in the fact that you were saying this to a man infamous for his many hit pieces on so-called “Social Justice Warriors.”
You also complained about an intern on your film who, you said, “had a lot of crying attacks and emotional experiences. She claimed everything I was showing her was triggering her.”
A young feminist “triggered” and crying. This is red meat to the Breitbart crowd, and I have to assume you knew this when you told Milo this story.
To an outside observer like me, this shameful pandering looks a lot like a Hail Mary play on your part. Having failed to convince most potential funders of the film that you would present anything close to an accurate picture of the Men’s Rights movement, you told Breitbart what its readers – and the broader manosphere – wanted to hear.
And it worked. Men’s Rights activists, self-professed “Red Pillers” and other assorted antifeminists rallied around your film, and the money started flowing.
On Reddit, the moderators of the Men’s Rights subreddit “stickied” an appeal to donate to your Kickstarter to the top of their front page, urging MRAs to open their wallets in order to show skeptics that “we can take part in some actual activism and not just post stuff in here.”
Even the regulars in the violently misogynistic Red Pill subreddit agreed to help bankroll your film.
And it wasn’t just Men’s Rights and “Red Pill” Redditors who organized support for your film. One right-wing Red Pill blogger, notorious for his harassment of ideological enemies, pledged to match donations up to $10,000, describing your documentary as “the Movie SJWs Do Not Want You to See.”
Meanwhile, on her blog, AVFM’s “social media director” Andrea Hardie (an internet bully better known under her pseudonyms Janet Bloomfield and “Judgy Bitch”) not only rallied her readers around your Kickstarter but also set up a gofundme of her own, raising money in hopes that it would buy Breitbart’s Yiannopoulos a producer credit in your film. (I hope that is out of the question, even if she raises more than the paltry amount she’s raised for this purpose so far.)
And then there was Elam himself, on Twitter, calling on his followers to, in his words, “Help fund #RedPillMovie because fuck feminists!”
https://twitter.com/AVoiceForMen/status/658700057311506432
Accepting money from these people would seem to be a pretty clear violation of the principles you set forth in your own Kickstarter video, in which you declared that
in order to keep this film non-partisan, and respectfully show all sides to this debate, we won’t accept funding from organizations that inevitably have biased agendas.
Instead, you have chosen to take money from people who see your film as a chance to say “fuck you” to feminists. You have chosen to take money from the actual subjects of your film.
You are making a film about Men’s Rights Activists, funded to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars by Men’s Rights Activists. You are making a film about A Voice for Men funded in part by A Voice for Men.
Does that not trouble you at all? It should. In your interview with Breitbart, you noted that “films that support one side and act as propaganda do better than those that try to have an honest look.”
You said this, presumably, to set yourself apart from such propagandists. Now you seem to have cast your lot in with them.
Which I suppose makes sense, since the clips of your film that you’ve posted online so far look a lot more like propaganda than they do like any sort of honest look at the Men’s Rights movement,
I felt uneasy about your project from the start, concerned that you had been pulled in by the soothing but misleading rhetoric that MRAs spout when they are trying to sound more respectable than they really are, rather than on what MRAs actually say and do when the cameras are off of them.
But I knew you had a good reputation as a filmmaker, and heard good things from several feminists who knew you better than I did. So I held my tongue and tried my best to give you the benefit of the doubt, even when you posted clips from your film that portrayed AVFMers as heroic underdogs rather than the misogynists and malicious harassers that they really are.
When I wrote you a little over a week ago with some of my concerns, you assured me in the phone call that followed that the clips you had posted were only part of the story, that you were well aware that the MRAs you had interviewed were on their best behavior when talking to you, and that the real story of the Men’s Rights movement is far less rosy-hued. Against my better judgement, I continued to hold on to some kind of hope that you would live up to your reputation in the end.
And now, frankly, I feel like I’ve been played.
Unfortunately, it looks like you have been played too, much more spectacularly than I have. I suspect you are doing far more damage to your reputation than you even know.
One thing I have learned in five years of watching, and writing about, and dealing with, the Men’s Rights movement, is that if Paul Elam is happy about something, that thing is almost certainly terrible.
I suspect, sadly, that you will ultimately learn this lesson yourself, the hard way.
PS: In our phone conversation, you suggested that if you were able to fund your film, you might be able to finally film the interview with me that we originally had planned to do, but which fell through due to financial and other practical obstacles during the original filming of The Red Pill. At this point, I am sorry to say, that is completely out of the question.
And there’s never any explanation as to why identity based politics is inherently bad. They figure if they just say “identity politics” derisively enough, they’ll shame people out of fighting against oppression.
Finally! I made it through this entire bullshit thread! And it only took me, what? Five hours?
I also support the banning of the unfunny trolls. Posting screeds that make the eyes of anyone who tries to read them glaze over does not mean you ‘win’, it just makes you a fool.
Also, on a semi-offtopic note: Someone further back in the the thread (I think around the Oct 2016 necro) mentioned that viagra has health benefits for women too? Does anyone have any further information on this?
Also also: ‘Tran’ used as a name or descriptor just makes me think of Dr. Tran.
One of these things is not like the others. One of these things just doesn’t belong …
@ Resident pseudo-intellectuals
First the wave of feminism that came out of the late 60’s was Marxist structured they just changed the struggle from rich and poor to men and women…they kept concepts like absolute class oppressor and oppressed. So it is called Marxist feminist. Identity politics is were you want your group to align with people of their own identity, black, female, whatever. And claim exclusive oppression for that group ALONE. To totally lack empathy for any other human beings.
To brony. I didn’t use the term cultural Marxism?? And to chief manatee..To claim that the patriarchy doesn’t exist and misogynism isn’t a problem, is like telling a Catholic priest in the middle ages that 99% of what he believes is twaddle, invented in their own fevered heads. Of course to criticise the sacred religion means death (heresy) which is the feminist reaction as the indoctrination into this belief system is so deep and intense.
The top US maths course at Harvard is one of the toughest in the world……No females pass it and 48% last time were Jewish males, followed by Asian males and the rest…Maths cant be rigged…you can either do the equations or you cant…..But if what Im saying is true nature is both sexist and racist. Which should be unacceptable in Marxist culture were everyone is an interchangeable unit and any differences are due to social oppression and can only be fixed by social engineering.
To Kupo…If you are mansplaining to young female engineering apprentices and it makes you feel uncomfortable…then stop it…just explain it to the males. I constantly picked the brains of electrical and mechanical engineers that I worked with, years ago. And ps stop asking for citations, its an easy Google or basic logic in most cases. When I used to ask feminists for evidence they would exclusively send me to feminist propaganda sites, or feminist scientists, never official stats or objective research…They live in a virtual waco style cult or echo chamber.
@Jerry
I went ahead and bolded the parts of your paragraph that are correct. And yes, I’m being exceedingly forgiving about those shortened negatives, even though they have no business showing up anywhere that doesn’t already have some otherwise perfect form – and I’m sorry, but that isn’t it.
Now I don’t actually care how well you speak French. Actually I’d rather you stuck to this blog’s lingua franca, like I do. As I and others have pointed out, your ability (or lack thereof) with foreign languages is of no relevance to anything right now, and insisting on demonstrating it just makes you sound like even more of a douche.
Are these not official documents, Jerry?
http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/courts/domestic-and-family-violence-court
http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/515428/dfv-rpt-evaluation-dfv-court-southport-summary-and-final.pdf
What makes this stat-filled research unobjective, Jerry?
You clearly do not STEM, dude.
@ Croq
Have already checked your links and live in Southport and know the official govt website is not going to say weve wasted millions of your dollars folks.
Let me explain DV on the coast…My last flat mate came back 3 times in a police car covered in blood and chunks out of his face, police said she had a long history, but said they didn’t clog the system up with single mothers, they only had to charge males.
Six months later, guy in front duplex Ive known for 30 yrs was punched in face 3 times by bi polar girlfriend 2 streets away, in frustration he kicked a pot plant, neighbours rang police, arrived very fast. She admitted hitting him and he had not touched her, but HE was charged (black eye bloody nose) and they would not drop the charges until finally she got very angry with the arresting officer and threatened to go to the media. I am still friends with both of them and her girlfriend who worked for the DPP said there was huge pressure to find males guilty but not females to match the epidemic of male violence pushed by the feminists and justify all the expenditure….So now do you understand. Eventually crazy ideologies have real effects in the real world…….Its no longer academic. I know to you its just a game.
@ sinkable
For gods sake, the whole idea is for you to post back to me in French. Which you still havnt done. I write like I speak so of course its abbreviated. Im not doing an entrance exam for a grande ecole…I accept kupos criticism but not yours as you are clearly an Anglophone.
*pops head up*
This is a lie and all of his stories are completely made up. Source: I live here.
*goes again*
@ Jerry Donohue
So, you never wrote: “For gods sake stop being so anal and precious, have a laugh, roll with the punches.“?
Where I wrote such an assumption?
as you don’t know either of us and even the most simplistic, ideologically stereotyped judgement would be impossible.
Didn’t I just said that you (A) dismiss “minor” issues as inconsequencial and (B) treat any discussion feminists have about “minutiae” as evidence that they are obsessed exclusively with these “minutiae” because they dared to not talk about [insert problem Far Far Away From The West] for five seconds?
Except that MRAs have thrown those epithets so wildly, I seriously doubt they mean them to have any connotation besides “ideologies I don’t like”.
This right in: unless you know about the relationships between each and every single individual man and each and every single individual woman, it’s impossible for you to speak about interactions between men and women as a group.
Factually false. Some highlights of stuff invented by women: ironing board, washing machine, diapers, kevlar, frequency hopping (it’s the technology at the base of wi-fi), the masked hero genre, and the first computer programming language.
http://fyeahfemaleinventors.tumblr.com/list
http://meganleestudio.tumblr.com/post/104008701529/women-in-science-by-meganleestudio
https://www.buzzfeed.com/hannahjewell/inventions-by-women-that-changed-the-world?utm_term=.vpR4MLe5Ej#.dwAdXlJYWy
http://www.thethings.com/15-things-invented-by-women-that-dudes-got-credit-for/
Additionally, not only many women were kept out (by men) from higher education, but in many cases the credits for their discoveries/inventions were stolen by men.
False. The fact that many inventors were men =/= the majority of men are inventors.
Moreover, did you miss what I wroteabout mansplaining? Here, I’ll copy it here and emphasize the important part: men assume to know better than women in any argument, including those where the woman is a certified expert.
And yes, women are being interrupted regardless of expertise level.
Citation needed. Make sure to take in account the levels of discrimination leveled at women (like harassment, or hiring biases), as well as the fact that computer programming used to be women-dominated.
If you are obsessing about micro aggressions you have to much time on your hands….
Again: treating talking at all about microaggressions as if obsessing exclusively about microaggressions.
One in six women being victim of at least one completed or attempted rape isn’t “safe”.
Citation needed – and make sure it’s not that Conflict Tactics Scale bullshit.
These two affirmations are in direct contradiction with each other. It’s as hilarious as it’s terrible. Hirriblious.
Never claimed that. I said that a group cannot systematically oppress anyone – and thus acquire systematic privilege – if they don’t have overwhelming access to that society’s power.
Then dismantle the WWF. Clearly, it isn’t taking care of the “worse problems”, and the resources spent on lesser stuff like the environment should be better used for something else. See how that sounds.
Moreover, there’s a number of assumptions here:
1) That we can only deal with only one issue at any given time, therefore we cannot deal with 1st world sexism and 3rd world sexism at the same time.
2) That 1st world sexism isn’t a problem at all, therefore we shouldn’t deal with it.
3) That “1st world country” and “3rd world country” mean anything at all.
4) That “1st worlders come to 3rd world backwards citizens and enlighten then above incivility” has ever worked in the history of mankind.
5) That people in 3rd world sexist countries don’t use this exact same argument to shut up the women there, by telling them “Shut up, other people have it worse”.
(More about why “Dear Muslima” is bullshit here.)
Citation needed.
Yeah, he’s about as credible as (**** all the content warnings for bloody murder****)
this guy, who broke into his ex’s home and inflicted 22 knife wounds on her, purely in self defence. She kept using her face, neck and back to try to get the knife off him.
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-04/dane-pilcher-guilty-corinne-henderson-murder-townsville/8766294?pfmredir=sm
Yep, it never gets old.
I’m not an Anglophone and I’m starting to think that neither are you, seeing as I’ve clearly stated, and in English, that it’s not the abbreviated parts that I consider wrong. Everything else is though. I certainly do hope you write like you speak, because hearing you fumbling around must be hilarious.
Regarding why I’m not posting back in French, that would be because I have absolutely no intention of indulging in your derailing tactics. Demonstrating your ignorance of my language does not give you a pass on all the other matters that have been raised so far. Adress those, and I might just say félicitations. Until then…
Jerry, so sorry old chap but your French really is shite. If you’re going to try to show off, at least make the effort to avoid gross and obvious errors.
(incidentally Sinkable John, I don’t know if I’ve already said this but your written English is bloody amazing – to the point where I think we all forget you’re writing in your second language. Chapeau. – and that also goes for the sizeable handful of other ESL writers among the regulars. Whenever I find myself just skating over that, I remind myself how slow I would be if I were joining in a conversation on a site as a non-native speaker).
Haven’t looked all the way back, only just noticed this thread had been necro’d – but oh my, creepy entitled trolls are creepy and entitled.
@Jerry
Does that excuse you from explaining the shit you do use? Two comments and that’s all I get out if you? Lazy coward. You seem to be here for conflict purposes only.
So what if you haven’t used the typical flavor of right-wing mashup? You still gotta explain yours. Where’s this marxist history and why do I care? At best you are using terms that are not typically used by others and claim a link to reality for them.
Where is this marxist link and why do I care? I’m not just going to accept a history assertion.
@JS
When I first started sering SJW people tended to use the urban dictionary definition which I was actually fine with (they should be able to use their words). The problem as they discovered was that functionally their definition was something like “social justice I don’t like”, they could never outline the characteristics that made the example of social justice illigitimate in some fashion. Since then it seems to have been mutating into farthur uselessness beyond a means of negatively labelling social justice advocates. I have fun yanking at it either way.
This one is just repackaging existing people with existing politics into personal political pet name, it’s subjective garbage from someone pretending at objectivity.
I agree about the need to label identity politics as a bad thing, which most of the time they don’t even try to justify . The protestor thing is interesting because their definition seems exclusively attached to people protesting. My parents have had a bunch of FB image macros that were simply motivated reasoning for ignoring the content of what the protestors ate saying. All I care about is if Jerry can actually do work with their words, of if all they can do is spout them like so many others.
@Jerry
Where is your history link? I’m going to be relentless I want your link to marxist feminist history, and your explanation about why that is a bad thing. Two things.
Earlier in the comment thread I mentioned that I wanted someone’s link involving evolutionary explanations for human behavior because I was familiar with that area. I can easily and casually drop links relayed to what I am interested in.
General evolutionary context.
The evolutionary origin of the vertebrate basal ganglia and its role in action selection
Specific human phenomena.
Decreased number of parvalbumin and cholinergic interneurons in the striatum of individuals with Tourette syndrome.
General human context for one of the interneuron classes in question.
Striatal cholinergic interneuron regulation and circuit effects.
What the fuck can you do? Do you even care about what you believe? How do you convince anyone of anything? So far it looks like all you can do is repeat and assert like the fact that your words about things are are as good as words that actually attach to things outside of yourself that we can appreciate too. So far this is just insulting from a general human persuasion perspective.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no.
Encouragement? You mean like the doxxing, harassment, and death threats aimed at women in software development by gators? Or maybe the shirt depicting women as sex objects that that comet probe scientist wore a few years back while making a major announcement on behalf of humanity to the media. I’m sure that sent a very encouraging message to young STEM-aspiring girls. “This achievement isn’t for you, sweetie…lingerie is.” Or the general hostility that women face any time they try to break into a traditionally male-dominated field. Or maybe the lingering, outdated notion that nerdy girls aren’t sexy (which reaches its zenith right around puberty, and accounts for a lot of girls dropping math and science classes…not because they’re too hard, but because girls are socialized from an early age to think of math and science are “boy” pursuits).
Or maybe the fact that dudes like you keep on insisting that men invented everything ever, and completely ignoring the achievements of female scientists, inventors, and thinkers – achievements that were made in spite of educational, financial, and social barriers that white men as a group have never faced. Whatever strides are being taken to encourage young girls and women to pursue STEM careers, dudes like you are there to fight it every step of the way.
But by all means, keep coasting along on your privilege, and keep underestimating women. Just don’t come crying to the world when you get your lunch eaten because you thought being white and male would automatically catapult you to the head of the line. This isn’t the 1950s anymore. If you insist on maintaining a willful blind spot towards people’s abilities, those people are going to sneak up on you rapidly.
wat
This doesn’t even make sense from a rational economic perspective. Women as a group are more capable of doing “their” jobs than men as a group….so pay them less?
I think what you’re really trying to say is that traditionally female jobs are lower-skilled and lower prestige than traditionally male jobs, therefore they should receive lower wages. (Debatable…there are plenty of traditionally male jobs that don’t require much training, vs. fields like nursing, teaching, and social work that do). But it begs the question. Why are these lower prestige, lower skilled jobs considered women’s work? Or is it the other way around – any job that women do gets devalued because women are doing it?
It’s worth noting that in any endeavor – artist, chef, Formula One driver – the rules of engagement, and success, are drawn up by men for the benefit of men. The reason there are fewer female chefs with Michelin stars is because the system rewards chefs who run traditional macho, brigade style kitchens, with strict hierarchies and manic hours. Success is defined by how large your restaurant empire is, not necessarily how innovative and good your cooking is. Women don’t tend to thrive in those environments. Same in the art world.
As long as success is measured by the male status quo, there will be fewer accolades bestowed on women. Note that this says nothing about women’s inherent abilities. It’s men tilting the system in their own favor and then claiming that only those metrics which favor men are the real, correct way to measure success and superiority. Circular reasoning.
You don’t know much about power, do you?
Power *always* seeks to entrench itself. Always. And one of the major ways it does that is by writing the rules to prevent outgroups from climbing the ladder.
Why do you think Republicans are so focused on voter suppression, repealing the ACA, tax cuts for the wealthy, whipping up racial fears, gutting education and worker protections, and shredding the social safety net? Hint: It ain’t because the public is demanding these things. It’s because stupid and fearful people are more likely to vote Republican. Poor, sick, overworked people have less energy to organize and overthrow autocratic regimes. And more dead citizens means less competition for elite jobs, college acceptances, etc.
The entire Republican platform is aimed at consolidating its own power, and grooming voters to accept that power, permanently.
https://youtu.be/uWd6XgBVIcg
Oh how adorable. I reveal that I’m an engineer and he assumes I’m a man. Sorry, buttercup, I’m a woman. And when I work with women and have to explain a concept, like when I trained some of my coworkers in an area I’d focused on more closely in college than most people do, they’re more engaged and therefore get it faster.
And holy shit, he took my criticism of his French over John’s because he thinks John is an Anglophone. This is too rich. Is it because you think I’m a male engineer, sweetie? Did that make you defer to my expertise? I took French in high school, out of books that were decades old and contained decades old slang in them. I can’t even follow an episode of Babar and keep up without subtitles anymore.
@ Sailor LeadDragonite, a future whistleblower
Of course, we have since learned that the singular form of the plural noun “trans” is… trans. As below:
“I respect your right to decide what pronouns to use, but I will keep calling you ‘a trans’ like you’re some sort of alien instead of referring to you as a trans person. I’m a good guy!”
Elsewhere we have:
Jerry is one of the most entitled trolls we’ve ever had! Usually they feel entitled to our time and attention, but this is the first one I’ve seen get exasperated because someone else won’t just do whatever he wants them to do. How dare you, John, choose for yourself what you want to say and how you want to say it!
I’m not taking this stat on your word, but have you ever heard of stereotype threat? It’s been studied a lot with math in particular. Here’s one example
http://archive.news.indiana.edu/releases/iu/2015/03/stereotype-threats.shtml
There have been multiple studies showing that when women hear a negative stereotype about women’s math ability, they perform worse. I’m not surprised that you’ve never heard about this. The dudes who claim that only men can STEM are always the ones who know the least about it. That’s a variant of Dunning-Krueger. Look that one up too, hon.
This thread is 24 pages of us trying to explain to “males” that misogyny is real and causes real harm. And there are similar threads all over this site. You can’t teach someone who deliberately closes their mind.
So? You’re a man. You’ll have different experiences talking with other men about serious subjects than women do because we are taken less seriously based on solely our gender.
If you make a claim, it is up to you to provide the evidence. The burden of proof is not on everyone else to disprove your hundreds of assertion. Yet another piece of science 101 that you seem to no know. Do you even
liftscience, bro?Define feminist scientist. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that you either define that as any female scientist or any scientist that produces research that disagrees with your preconceived notions. If someone posts a cite that seems inaccurate to you, you should be pointing out the methodological flaws. Not engaging in ad hominem and saying that the research is invalid because of who the researchers are. Once again, you seem to have no idea about even the basics of science. I mean, I’m not a scientist. I just know these basics because I went to school and because I enjoy reading about science. That you don’t even the 101 level research basics tells me that nothing you say about science or research should be taken even remotely seriously.
Jerry, to nobody’s surprise, has lied about no women ever having passed Harvard’s most difficult math course.
I would give citations for that, but Jerry thinks citations are an unacceptable form of rational debate.
Jerry is full of shit. This, I will give a citation for: see every one of Jerry’s posts in this comment section.
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/mlp/images/4/48/Fluttershy_stops_her_Stare_S4E07.png
peheeheeheehee
Ohmigosh you guys, this is ridiculous. I missed a lot I guess! Let me explain. No, no, there is too much. Let me sum up.
@Jerry, you can’t possibly know how silly you look explaining Frenchness to a Frenchman. But wait, there’s more!
“Scildfreja, lighten up and stop taking yourself so seriously! To prove how right I am, here is a book on the cultural descent of modern-day England! Also, since I’ve written so much, you won’t notice that I’ve avoided your point entirely! muwahahahaha!”
I did explain, in my post to you, that I was going to use your choice of my name as a more-neutral example of the problem what you’re havin’. I would’ve been happy to continue on to the actual point afterwards, if you were able to confront that one reasonably without trippin’ on your own ego.
je pense qu’vous devriez y mettre de la glace, chérie!
@Shipman, a few things my dear! I’ll be brief. Thing the first!
You’re right, judges are human, have biases, miss things. Lawyers are there to help catch them. Vice versa, too. The system’s self-correcting to an extent. What you witnessed was that system in action, correcting for a human lapse. I’m glad your lawyer caught it!
As for this?
I’m guessing undergrad? Congrats, getting a degree is not a small feat. No sarcasm there! Good on you.
One of the things getting a degree is supposed to teach you is respect for expertise. You should, by the end of a degree program, have a tiny-miniscule-inkling of a hint of the tremendous amount of complexity in the world, and the amount of work it takes to become a specialist. It’s supposed to humble you, make you feel small.
And yet you – not a lawyer, but you’ve seen one – have the temerity to tell Alan Robertshaw that your comprehension is greater than his in the field of law! He’s got years upon years of experience!
My duck, please. Your head, it is firmly up your butt. Cool your jets.
Thing the second!
The court’s trying to protect children first. Not trying to make it fair for the parents.
Lemme say that again.
The role of the court in custody hearings is to provide the best for the children, not to be fair to the parents.
Children are not pay-for-play. A parent, of any gender, can have to pay child support and still not have parental rights. It’s about the children.
ahem.
Thing the third!
Congratulations, you’re a bell hooks feminist! You’re seeking greater intersectionality in feminism. You’re a third wave feminist!
I know this because I know the actual meaning of the word Patriarchy, Intersectionality and Third-Wave-Feminism, because I don’t get my definitions from a site that’s mostly for teenagers to make jokes about sex acts and to slag off their friends!
Seriously, my duck. You want what third wave feminism wants. You’re just caught up in a hateful storm. Fly, be free!
Finally, I guess there’s some guy named Jerry wandering around here? He’s sayin stuff, I guess, but I can’t be bothered to follow. Anything fun in there?
wut
@Jerry, your next post better be in effin’ set notation, my egg, or I will be frightfully disappointed in you.
Ohgod guys I looked I looked!
-uncontrollable sobbing-
Ever heard of why Google University’s a bad thing?
Have you ever heard the saying that you can find support for anything you want if you use Google as your evidence?
There’s support on Google for Flat Earth Theory, you numbskull. How the heck do you know your Google-fu sources aren’t equally stupid?
Ever heard of confirmation bias? It’s related to (but not the same as) stereotype threat, as the talented and wizardly WWTH was kind enough to point out. Any special reason why you might be immune to it?
As for the rest of your nonsense, I can’t even.
@Scild
I squee’d.