filed under: It's a Man's World

Whoever said "it's a man's world" has not been to Family Court. This story from the Huffington Post (link) shows a court run amok, drunk on it own power, blinded by its own policy prejudices, captured by feminist propaganda.  I don't know the particulars of the story, obviously. I don't need to. I have been involved, as too many of us have, with divorce court and family court on occasion. A man walks in the door convicted on all counts. It is not a question of whether he will win... it's a question of how much can he afford to lose. I have had many people tied to the system tell me that a man has no choice. no chance in family court... people who are responsible for enforcing and adjudicating policy. It simply is.

Think I'm overreacting or simply wrong? Consider the following: A man has no say in whether a woman with whom he has had a one night fling and (let's say) the condom broke... he has no say in whether that woman should keep the child or abort, should she become pregnant. Nor should he. A woman has a right to her own body for those nine months of pregnancy. However... should the man not want a child, and the woman decide to keep it, she can sue him for child support and the court can award her part of the man's income for the next eighteen years. And it happens All The Time. So.. no one can tell the woman what to do with her body for nine months, but the court and the woman can tell the man what to do with his body for eighteen years.

Is that just?

Is the court's behavior and the woman's complaint in the linked story just? Does a man who complains about a court and implies without stating outright something about a former relationship owe his conscience to the court and apology to the woman? Especially considering the fact that under a protective order, as in this case, the woman can say whatever she wants about the man and can contact him at will? Protective orders generally don't work both ways and are generally given to the first one to cry foul. o you think the woman didn't say anything at all about the man to her girlfriends? Do you know any women?!

I understand there are two sides (or fourteen sides) to every story. Here the court has said there is only one. The woman's. The man's ability to state his opinion, even if that opinion only tangentially relates to the woman or the court... must be silenced

I know I sound like a crazy person here. Try going to divorce court as a man before you complain. Try going through the court system with a man's junk between your legs. There is an automatic presumption of guilt. How many men get their kids in custody battles? How many women pay alimony? How would you feel about this story if the facts remained exactly the same, but the genders of the party were switched?

filed under: depends on how you look at it, I guess

I'm not a fan of Joe Biden. I find him creepy, stupid, and hypocritical. And often slightly if not outright racist. If he were Republican, he would have been drummed out of town long ago. He gets a pass because he is a Democrat, I think. I'm not a big media conspiracy guy, but I do believe that Joe Biden, with the things he has said and done, would have been murdered by the media years ago if he wasn't a Democrat... Here is a very small and very slight example of one of the things I dislike about Biden -- not criminal or disqualifying, although there has been plenty of that, too -- but just a display of arrogance that I find distasteful... Listen for the last little bit where he says that this is the first time in his life he has had a boss. 

link

Hmmm. Now see... I know there can be different interpretations of what representation means... but I would have thought the people would have been his boss.