Be Excellent To Each Other

Looking at that picture I don't know how anyone can take that bunch seriously. They look like they all get together in a cabin in the woods at weekends and shoot stuff and drink moonshine

One place where men's rights is very lacking is rights and custody in divorce. One of my friends spent the best part of 700K fighting his untrustworthy wife over allegations of child beating and rape.

She had everything from legal aid and the social services where "mums always right" the whole way through.

Everything she accused him off was utter shite, didn't stop the legal aid barristers filling their boots though.

In the end he has full custody of his kids, she gets 2 hours twice a week that has to be supervised as the judge ruled her untrustworthy to be on her own with him. Legal Aid also gave her a bill for a 100K as they finally realised she was wasting time and money.

My mate as done ok and had money to fight it, but he told me when first started the first thing he got through the post was a freeze on him selling or raising any money on his house. For most guys this would be the only place they could fund a custody battle from so its no wonder you get fathers for justice protesting.

I don't understand the particular issue here...? An allegation was made, it was investigated, and then he won the case and got custody of his kids....? So you know it was all lies, why would social services believe either of them straight away? And if there's any doubt, surely it's better to remove the children from potential harm?

Anyone can make false accusations, be crazy and vindictive, not just ex-wives. Justice prevailed.

Most families are set up to be biased in favour of the mother/child relationship. If that situation is considered normal and in the best interests of the child during the marriage, why would the courts change it just because you get divorced...?

Even in happy, normal marriages where both parents work, the mother is the primary care-giver. She makes the meals, she makes and attends appointments, she takes time off when the child is sick, she stops work for the first year or so, she does most of the chores. I know that is not always the situation but it also not always the situation that the mother gets primary custody.

Fathers 4 Justice are MRAs. They do nothing to help their custody battles and just hang off buildings in Batman suits and whinge.

The issue is in a patriarchal society women are seen as the main caregivers while men are the breadwinners, so the courts will heavily favour the mother in most circumstances, even if the father is a much better parent. By striving for equality we can break these gender norms for both men and women - it will help us all!

Justice had no change of prevailing at all if my mate hadn't got £700,000 to pay for it!

Its not justice when the women gets almost limitless legal aid and the man( who is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty ) gets no help at all.

Your friend's case is incredibly rare. While this infographic isn't 100% accurate, it's a decent enough representation (in fact it probably overstates the number of false rape accusations).

He was accused of this after the first set of accusations had started to fall apart (he was accused of beating her and his kids) he was awarded supervised access when it started to become clear they wasn't any truth in any of it.

As the process went on and more of the accusations' were seen as false he asked the court to relax the supervision as he had to have his mother and sister there each time and it was becoming a strain for them

This was granted and then she came out with the rape accusation the next day.

You would have thought that given the false allegations which were disproven in part by endless journals she kept around the house showing that she had mental issues that he would have been given some doubt.

Instead he went back to square one.

You are right is a rare case given the ruling that sees his wife get heavily supervised access 2 hours twice a week.

Very sad for the kids and I still don't know why he didn't see the issues with his wife before it came to this. I new her very well and she was always very nice to spend time with.

I'm sorry, I may be misunderstanding, but are you suggesting her rape allegation shouldn't have been believed from the beginning because she had mental health issues?

I think he is suggesting that the woman shouldn't have been given any more special treatment over the man. Or at least I hope that is what he is saying.

No not at all, but given that they weren't in the first set of allegations and those were proven to be rubbish , you would have thought some questions would have been asked.

The Police were later found to be coaching her and the kids to try and add weight to the rape allegations, in fact his wife said this in open court in front of a judge and that's how it was found to be false.

The judge also had to get a senior police officer up in front of her and tell him to formally remove the charges and bail months after they were found to be false.

The whole process was biased against him as a man (not saying he should have got special treatment over any of the allegations) The Social Services told him that Mum was always right and that's how they were going to work the case. This stance came about as previously they have been so sloppy with a number of domestic cases (doing the opposite) and a number of these has seen the women murdered.

Of course I'm for anything that could save peoples lives, but there was no middle ground just 2 extremes, even long after the judge had ruled on everything the Social Services was trying to get things overturned, they were told to back off by the judge with a threat that she would rule to a degree that would set precedent for legal action against them.

Phew


There's lots of reasons why someone might delay revealing that they been raped, though, and timeliness shouldn't impact upon how seriously a complaint is taken.

Obviously there's a load of other issues in this case, but if this woman had actually been raped and the police hadn't taken it seriously that in itself would be an issue. Such a shame (for the kids) that it was wrapped in the complexities of a custody battle etc.

In the unlikely event you're open to learning about the true value of the Men's Rights movement, you can just watch this video without even knowing what it's replying to. Assume it's replying to everything said by the feminist tumblrina who's posted the most intellectually-dishonest bullshit on this thread that I've ever seen, and did so only when he knew I wasn't around to immediately counter it. A very tedious cookie-cutter SJW type that merits no individual response.

There are many other such videos, should you ever choose to truly educate yourselves.

Welcome back, Gnomes!

Not mad actually just laughing

That video is 40 goddamn minutes long, I ain't watching that. Plus she's uggo.

Can we get a tl;dr on the video?

It's all the woman's fault.

Story of my life

Do you think any of us are stupid enough to waste our time watching that?

If I had a pound for everytime some angry white man told me to watch someone I've never heard of shout about teh evul femimmsts for an hour on YouTube I'd be a very rich man indeed.

Mr preferred choice of bread.

Well, I'd assumed EBG had watched it and could give me a summary.

(This was before I saw his epic welcome back post, and realised he doesn't do concise.)

If you really want to delve into the murky world of MRAs, just check out https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill.

You don't need to be a feminist tumblrina to see that they are toxic and very bad for men.

So many of these rabbit holes for folks to fall down if they don't ever bother to check how things actually are or how issues ever relate either to themselves or to people they actually know. Basically just read stuff and then go spouting off about things they really *know* fuck all about.

I'm aware of MRAs just hadn't seen this video specifically.

I find it 'interesting' how MRA people portray feminists and "SJWs" as gullible followers of the establishment, when MRAs themselves are ultra-reactionary conservatives, and it is feminists who are critical of the established order of things. Essentially MRAs construct their identity as that of outsiders and rebels, when they are anything but.

Exactly. It's what I mentioned in the members area. These sorts of people find any kind of criticism of the status quo an affront to them personally, as if rights are a zero-sum game and by giving more to those who are oppressed will somehow take theirs away.

This is why I suggested that RemovedByForce really needs to find his own safe space where his backwards and outdated views will not be challenged in any way.

Someone replaced Dilbert dialogue with the actual written opinions of Scott Adams.
http://mradilbert.tumblr.com/

When it says "best strategy" does it mean, the best one for a man to use, or the best one men have come up with? Because one is an insulting piece of crap, the other is an insulting piece of crap.

I think he means both.

I don't get it. Isn't the pointy haired boss saying it is a bad thing that women are lumped in with hidden and the mentally handicapped when it comes to men's strayagy for dealing with them?

You're missing the point. These are real words that Scott Adams has posted online. Someone has just put them together with his own art.

Basically he's a fuckwit.

So he's saying the stratagies men have come up with to deal with women are disturbingly similar to those they have come up with to deal with children and the mentally disabled?

Yes.

I don't think I have a specific strategy for dealing with the mentally disabled. Or one for dealing with women, for that matter. Children, I mainly adopt the Rincewind manoeuvre.

Surely by saying "disturbingly similar" is he indicating disapproval of this lumping together?

No, he's not.

He frequently claims his posts are just to get a reaction, or are just thought experiments, or are just for a very rational audience, etc etc.

Or possibly he's a dickhead who uses that as a cloak to defend saying dickhead things. Having his dickhead cake and eating it, so to speak.

In hindsight, I now see a number of unpleasant shades of misogyny in his writing from way before he started writing his blog, so I favour the latter explanation.

Ah. I was mis-reading the final frame, somehow.

Sorry completely OT, but all this talk of Dilbert reminded me of this old classic. Yeah, I know it's as old as the hills etc. but LOLZ.

edit - gah, I don't have 'the knack' for embedding youtube videos...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60P1xG32Feo

S. Adams is a reactionary right-libertarian of the "all social inequality is 'natural' and inevitable" ilk, so you are right to come to that conclusion, and I'm not surprised either that Adams has jumped aboard the MRA bandwagon.

type the words youtube and /youtube in square brackets [] and put the 'code' at the end of the URL (typically after the = sign) between them like this but without the spaces

[ youtube ]60P1xG32Feo[ /youtube ]

Thanks Zaphod.

Incidentally whenever I think of Dilbert I always think of Chef Boyardee's take on it.

Watching Reggie Yates extreme UK, Men at War

It is really disturbing, on some of the male views.

Is that serious?

It's a satirical take on what MRAs are attempting to claim, so yes.

I think you have a strategy for dealing with women, it usually involves thrusting a glass of something alcoholic in their hand!

Granted that could just be when I'm around...

That's less of a strategy, more of a survival mechanism.

After failing to game the Hugo Awards two years running, neofascist 'writer' Vox Day tries to do the same to the Goodreads Choice Awards with hilarious results.

https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_p ... all-owe-me