Archive for the ‘divorce’ Category

Remember what I keep saying about kids needing their fathers?

November 19, 2009

Because only fathers are willing and able to apply consistent discipline. (Plus, just having two adults in the house instead of only one makes a huge difference. One adult gets tired, gets busy, gets in a bad mood. If there’s another responsible party around, there’s someone to take up the slack.)

That’s a generalization, of course. Before feminism, widows were often perfectly good mothers of well-behaved children. This is because even though those particular kids didn’t have their fathers, they were in a patriarchal society, full of people whose fathers had taught them to behave. Had their mothers attempted the kind of shenanigans that today’s single mothers do – spending less time with her kids than running around fornicating, putting her energy into a career instead of into homemaking, mostly ignoring the kid and then overreacting to the point of abuse when the kid’s behavior inevitably escalates from unruly to intolerable – the massive societal disapproval would have stopped them long before social workers had to be dragged in.

It’s on my mind because of this article: Police officer uses Taser on 10-year-old girl after ‘mother gives him permission’

Officer Dustin Bradshaw said in a report that police were called to the home in Ozark on November 11 because of a domestic disturbance. When he arrived, the girl was curled up on the floor, screaming, the report said.

Officer Bradshaw’s report said the girl screamed, kicked and resisted any time her mother tried to get her in the shower before bed.

“Her mother told me to Tase her if I needed to,” he wrote.

The child was “violently kicking and verbally combative” when Officer Bradshaw tried to take her into custody and she kicked him in the groin. He delivered “a very brief drive stun to her back”, the report said.

This dame called the police because of a ten-year-old girl??

When I was ten, I certainly couldn’t have inflicted any damage on an adult that would have particularly bothered them, but I was small for my age, maybe she’s a big girl.

So I can’t really blame the cop for doing this – as the article points out, if he had handcuffed her by force, he could have broken one of her arms or legs. But how the fuck did this household deteriorate to the point where a little girl was physically attacking adults and her bimbo mother considered it appropriate to call the police because she wouldn’t take a bath?

Guess:

The girl’s father, Anthony Medlock, told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that his daughter had emotional problems but that she did not have a weapon and should not have been Tasered.

“My daughter does not deserve to be Tased and be treated like an animal,” said Mr Medlock, who is divorced from the girl’s mother and does not have custody.

This poor troubled child’s mother deprived her of a father. Probably so that she could spread her legs more widely. Without a father to provide stability and discipline, without the normal stable home life that earlier generations took entirely for granted, and with a mother who is obviously completely inept, this child became a delinquent before she was even in her teens. What do you want to bet that the mother has had a parade of boyfriends through the house?

Advertisements

Mancaves

October 26, 2009

I just watched the newest episode of Dexter. Rita just found out that he still has his apartment from before they were married. She and Deb are acting like they just caught him molesting children or stealing from old people or something.

There was an essay at the Spearhead a few days ago about how men need their “caves”, private space of their own, and how most women can’t understand this and insist on intruding. My grandfather died ten years ago and his wife and daughter are still complaining about him retreating to his mancave. It was in his mancave that he did the work that provided for them, but that doesn’t seem to matter. I doubt they even understand that.

Being Dexter, he doesn’t know how to deal with this. Most men these days who haven’t studied Roissy and Mystery et al wouldn’t. He’s responding by trying to supplicate, just what PUAs urge men not to do. Is the message here that women can hold a serial killer by the balls and prevail? Just what the sicko women who fall in love with guys on death row need to be told.

Rita told Dexter to sleep in his apartment that night – not, you know, in the house he bought for her and the kids – and if he wanted to stay married, they were going to have to “do some serious work” on their marriage.

This stupid bimbo has had two disastrous marriages and has spent years struggling to support and care for her children. Now she’s married to a guy who is always there to take care of everything, who is able to support her and her kids in a comfortable fashion for the first time in their lives, who doesn’t hit her or the kids, and she’s pissed because he needs a little bit of time on his own? A man doesn’t have to be a serial killer to need his own space.

I really wanted him to say, “I’m sleeping in the house I paid for tonight. If you have a problem with me keeping my apartment, you can move back into your old three-room house and get a crummy job like the one you had before I married you.”

But of course, he couldn’t, and we all know what the courts would have done if he had tried to hold onto his own property like that.

Links: How Women Behave

September 22, 2009

A few days ago, I got a furious comment from a feminist. After demonstrating her utter lack of basic reading comprehension and dutifully reciting the usual historically inaccurate bull about how feminism has done all kinds of wonderful things for me, she demanded to know how on earth a lesbian could possibly be a misogynist.

Here’s a few clues:

Rich men are better lovers: Women have more orgasms, better sex with wealthy men


Recession: When the money goes, so does the toxic wife
As the recession worsens, a lot of rich men are finding their gold-digging wives are taking to their heels

‘You loser!” screamed Katie, aiming a vase at her husband. “You’ve destroyed my life,” she continued, hurling it. “Just look at my hair, look at my nails! You loser, you jerk, you nobody.”

Katie’s husband, Jack, whose property portfolio disintegrated in the financial crash, had just told his wife that she would have to cut back on her thrice-weekly visits to Nicky Clarke, the nail salon in Harvey Nichols, and the oxygen facials, chemical peels and seaweed wraps at Space NK.

Not only that, but they no longer had the money to pay for an army of bullied Eastern Europeans to wait on her hand and foot.

Worse was to come – the brow-lift would have to be cancelled; her black Amex card would have to be snipped in half; and there was no way, he told her, that he could carry on spending £28,000 a year on Henry’s school fees at Eton.

Chloe, too, would have to leave the marginally cheaper (only £25,000 pa) Wycombe Abbey immediately.

Such was the aggression and verbal and physical abuse that followed that Jack was left with cut lips and blood streaming from a broken nose.

Their eight-year-old child, not yet at boarding school, sat cowering in a corner and dialling 999. When they arrived, they had to restrain Katie forcibly from attacking her husband.

Usually when feminist teachers rape their students, it’s boys, but not always:

Music teacher Helen Goddard jailed for lesbian affair with pupil

A music teacher who had a lesbian affair with a 15-year-old pupil will be allowed to continue to see the girl after she is released from jail.

Despite the parents’ fears that Helen Goddard, 26, will try to rekindle her relationship with their daughter, a judge rejected a prosecution request to ban the teacher from seeing the girl for five years.

Police: Mom strangles newborn

CHEYENNE — A Riverton mother of three young children is being held on a charge of first-degree murder for allegedly strangling her newborn baby shortly after giving birth.

A Fremont County circuit court judge set bail at $500,000 on Friday for 21-year-old Lorene Quist Gines. The judge scheduled a preliminary hearing for Thursday.

Cathartic link dump

September 3, 2009

Time for some therapeutic male chauvinism, because I’ve encountered much female irrationality today already and am gloomy about the future in a society where these creatures are allowed to meddle in business and government. I don’t see any way to effectively fight feminism; I think it will have to run its course until it has destroyed western civilization completely, then men will have to start over, rebuilding on the rubble.

So, some links. First, another apparent female child-murderer: Woman charged in relation to baby’s death. I wasn’t able to find more recent information on this.

The Top Ten Myths of Divorce

Refutes the usual bullshit used to promote easy divorce.

On to the results of default mother custody and of sluts being allowed to bring their boyfriends into proximity with their children by other fathers:

Fla. mom, boyfriend charged in python strangling

Authorities say the mom of a Florida girl suffocated by a python was charged in the child’s death. Officials say Jaren Ashley Hare and her boyfriend, Charles Jason Darnell, were each charged with manslaughter, third-degree murder and child abuse.

Women’s Boxing Olympic place a victory ‘for justice and equality’

Good grief.

I got bored with Vox Popoli’s blog after about a week, but before that I did go through his archives and find some great posts about feminism and education. Here’s a good one:

FS doesn’t understand that the primary reason a dual income is required is because so many women are working now. This is basic supply and demand. If you double the work force, you halve the price of labor. Two incomes are now needed where one previously sufficed. Now, about thirty percent of women have always worked; the present situation exists because around sixty percent of women now work. Send the 20 million immigrants home and remove the 30 million women from the work force who entered it after 1950 and wage rates will suffice to support single-income families again. We’ll leave the inflation aspect out of this since I don’t think she’s equipped to have that discussion, but every regular VP reader knows why the cost of everything has been going up for the last century. That’s the price of having a central bank to “stabilize” the currency.

I don’t pretend to know what the grand purpose of woman is. But it is a demonstrable fact that when women are given free and full political license, the collective actions of women have reliably had the result of eradicating freedom, destroying economic growth, and demographically murdering the societies in which they live. If you think that’s a reasonable trade-off for three generations of liberated women before everything falls apart and the barbarian patriarchy returns, well, we can certainly agree to disagree.

The Editrix has some excellent posts. She links to this: Mom Gets 99 Years for Cutting Off Son’s Genitals

The cunt was stoned when she did it.

The Editrix remarks: “Do you want to bet how long it will take until they find a “syndrome” that will label her ill, not evil?”

Earlier on the same day that the Editrix made her post, this was published:

Nadal’s case automatically calls to mind that of Otty Sanchez – the mother who mutilated and consumed parts of her newborn son. The father of Otty’s son suggested she be put to death for her crime. The similarities between the two cases are many: Both mothers have a history of drug abuse, both were likely emotionally and psychologically unable to care for their infant sons, both have family members who are quick to demonize them for their actions, yet did not step in and try to get help for these women or their children before it was too late.

The concept of it “taking a village” may seem trite to some, but it is especially true in cases like these where someone is not able to fully control their own thoughts and impulses because of rampant drug use and/or mental illness. The responsibility then falls to their loved ones – or at least their child’s loved ones – to intervene, get them help and, above all, make sure these children are safe.

What Otty and Katherine did was terrible. There’s no doubt about that. But what is most infuriating is that it could have been prevented had someone – anyone – stepped in and said, “You are sick. You can’t care for this child. Let’s get you some help.”

It does not take a “village”. It takes a father.

So, Editrix, the answer to your question is, “About 14 hours ago.”

Don’t Get Married

July 16, 2009

Well, I was going to wait till tomorrow to share this link, but now Roissy’s got me spitting mad (not at him, needless to say)! So here:

Women’s Infidelity

Women’s relationships today follow a very predictable pattern:

*

They push men for commitment
*

They get what they want
*

They lose interest in sex
*

They become attracted to someone else
*

They start cheating
*

They become angry and resentful
*

They begin telling their partners that they need time apart
*

They blame their partners for their behavior…and eventually, after making themselves and everyone around them miserable for an indefinite, but usually, long period of time, they end their relationships or marriages.

And by the way? I have never, not once, cheated on anybody I was with.

Anyway, Roissy linked this:

H. Beatty Chadwick 13 Years in Jail Without Being Charged

One can spend a long time in jail in the U.S. without ever being charged with a crime.

It happened to H. Beatty Chadwick, a former Philadelphia-area lawyer, who has been behind bars for nearly 14 years without being charged. And this didn’t take place in some 3rd world dictatorship or tyrannical government like China or Iran it was done right here in the U.S.

No trial ever took place, Chadwick has never been allowed to face his accuser and no jury ever heard any evidence against him.

In 1994, during his divorce proceedings, a Delaware County judge (yes a county Judge) held Mr. Chadwick in civil contempt for failing to put $2.5 million in a court-controlled account. He says he lost the money in bad investments; his wife’s attorney claimed he had hidden it offshore. In April 1995, Mr. Chadwick was arrested and detained. Nearly 14 years later, Mr. Chadwick, who suffers from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, is still in jail — even after a retired judge was hired to help locate the money, and failed.

There is a website campaigning for this man’s freedom.

Roissy wants to believe that the man has the money hidden and is just being stubborn. I don’t; I think the money doesn’t exist. So he has been jailed for 14 years without a trial for not handing over nonexistent money. Which that tramp has no right to anyway. Thank goodness we are rid of patriarchal marriage!

Here is what I propose in the line of more civilized divorce laws:

1. Divorce should be very difficult to get. As it used to be before feminism.

2. A woman who seeks a divorce – and it’s nearly always the woman who does so – has no right to one cent of alimony or property settlement.

3. If the man seeks the divorce because he can’t stand living with the harpy or because he wants to marry someone else, then alimony or a property settlement are appropriate. If the man seeks the divorce because the tramp has been unfaithful, she has no right to one penny from him.

4. If the wife has been working outside the home while they were married, she has no right to alimony or a property settlement, since clearly she is independent and can take care of herself just like a man can.

5. Unless there is solid proof that this man is a seriously bad guy, i.e. a violent alcoholic or something of that nature, custody of the children should default to the father. A woman who wants to keep her children should have to endure also keeping their father. Click on the “stepfathers” tag to this post to see why. The most dangerous person on earth to a child is “Mommy’s boyfriend”. (Mommy herself comes in second.) Mothers will not hesitate to allow any man who makes their ginas tingle murder their children. Mother custody is pretty much accessory to infanticide. Children need their fathers to protect them from their mothers’ boytoys. And from their mothers.

Couple of good blog posts

May 15, 2009

Two feminist confessions

Roissy on a man who went to Indonesia to avoid paying alimony. You go, dude!

March 6, 2009

First, Roissy has pointed out another reason that mix-and-match families are bad: if a man marries a woman, or shacks up with a woman, who already has some kids, and then has more kids with her, the ones she already had will be bigger than his kids and will beat up on them. One more reason that children belong with their fathers, not their mothers. And that breaking up families and choosing new partners at whim is a bad idea.

Second, here’s a couple of links of interest:

Petite Cops

Why do we have “diminutive” lady cops anyway?

Diminutive Lady Cops And The SPLC

One of the leading decisions in the SPLC’s campaign against common sense was the abolition of “Strength/physical fitness tests and requirements” for police officers in Dothard v. Rawlinson (1977).

The SPLC supported the 5′3″, 115 lb, Dianne Rawlinson in her attempt to become a correctional employee in Alabama:

“At trial, the Law Center argued that the height and weight requirements had no actual relationship to the job requirements, and 33% of women would be excluded from employment as prison guards and state troopers by the statutory height requirements and 22% by the minimum weight requirements.”

How horrifying can it get? I know from personal experience that women cannot effectively police a room full of six-year-olds, and they’re letting them be cops??

Career women make lousy wives.

July 29, 2008

Women M.B.A.s More Likely To Divorce Than Men

Women with M.B.A.s are twice as likely to get divorced or separated as their male counterparts. The picture isn’t much rosier for women with law or medical degrees.

Miss Gold-Digger of 1953

March 11, 2008

For Christmas this year, I got myself a reprint of the very first issue of Playboy, featuring a full-color picture in the otherwise black&white magazine of Marilyn Monroe in the nude.

The first article in the magazine is titled “Miss Gold-Digger of 1953”. It opens by noting that a couple of decades earlier, alimony was mostly confined to millionaires. “Today, with taxes astronomical, both sexes Kinseyfied and all well-oiled millionaires holed up in Texas, alimony has gone democratic. In other words, it can happen to you too, brother.”

There follow a series of complaints about divorce and alimony that are all too familiar. “…supporting an ex-wife is like buying oats for a dead horse. The marriage has ended. The unhappy stag is entitled to none of the privileges of a husband, but he’s expected to pay for them as if he were.”

It’s pointed out that at times, the amount of alimony ordered by the court exceeds the income a man makes.

“The courts aren’t interested in whether a woman is capable of earning her own living. In fact, their decisions discourage any thoughts an ex-missus might have of returning to work. They penalize the girl who is willing to earn her own way by reducing or eliminating her alimony payments. It doesn’t take a very sharp sister to figure it’s a lot easier to stay home afternoons and play Scrabble with the girls and let the ex-hubby pay the bills.”

Another choice quote:

“There’s no denying, eliminating alimony would sharply reduce the legalized prostitution now popular among certain segments of our population. Few sweet-and-lovelies would marry middle-aged playboys if they couldn’t brush them in a year or two and live happily ever after on the alimony checks.”

There follow a few tips for how to avoid alimony, such as leaving the country, which is effective but not always practical. Another tactic is unlikely to be effective in the age of Oprah, but in the 50’s was still viable: men could drag the alimony dispute into court, which would mean the private business of the couple would be exposed to the public eye, back then an unpleasant prospect.

Most disheartening is the first sentence of the final paragraph: “Obviously, however, a man isn’t going to get a really square deal in the divorce courts until the alimony laws of the nation have been completely overhauled.” Well, that was 55 years ago. We’re still waiting for that “complete overhaul”.