TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SweatySpecialist Archive

View 5 posts and 111 comments by SweatySpecialist on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

Do as a poster recommended and get a lot of opinions, the best ones do not always do free consults but will spare you an hour for a few hundred. It’s worth it. Your kind of case puts the crosshairs on you as you’ll be a cash cow for the state (Title IV-D federal matching) if she gets full custody. You only get one chance to get this right, nearly all temporary orders become permanent orders.
/r/Divorce_Men22/05/23 01:08 PM
2

I love to be proven wrong, we only progress positively when we learn. But with that said, NOW and associated entities had a massive advantage because their cause was beneficial to the state and had a substantial Marxist influence. It also led to a near doubling of the workforce and the resulting erosion of the middle class. Our cause is not beneficial to the powers, at least not an in individual level (to them.) Beneficial to society yes, but not the individual up top. We can’t do it without wom…
/r/Divorce_Men02/05/23 10:10 PM
20

So here’s the sad truth: your story is one of tens of thousands, probably tenfold more. Most of those guys go through the same steps (disbelief, anger, working towards change, failure, acceptance or withdrawal). Public opinion is owned by the DV industry. Legal system is owned by lawyers. Politicians are 2/3 of the time a lawyer, and politicians are bought, not convinced. You’re fighting a mountain of Title IV-D federal incentives, corrupted judiciary, and nepotism within the courts. Until the y…
/r/Divorce_Men02/05/23 08:34 AM
-12

Congrats, you won. But looking at your post and your post history I think your kids are the losers. Instead of gloating, how about reaching out and helping the person you spent 16 years with? You both sound like less than stellar humans. Who cares who wanted the divorce? It sounds like you took the playbook most women use and turned it around (which almost never works). Still makes you a shitty person to use it though, male or female.
/r/Divorce_Men01/05/23 11:18 AM
3

The Tin Men IG account is a good example of a left wing pro male outlet. But I think it’s almost like a minority clansman. The ideology of current left wingers is inherently anti-equality. It is all about equity…which has never worked in history and only breeds hate and intolerance. If you look at all the government and corporate edicts the last 2-3 years they are all equity centered and have anti white male or anti Asian bias built in. I just don’t know how anyone can support those policies and…
/r/MensRights11/04/23 09:18 PM
3

It is. Most, if not all, anti-mra/misandrist sentiments come from the woke/left. Not that the right is great in application, but they are not actively attacking men to this degree.
/r/MensRights11/04/23 08:38 PM
1

The author’s prior articles show him as a clear left wing propagandist. Clearly Salon has a spin.
/r/MensRights11/04/23 06:05 PM
5

You must be in CA, not many states left that do lifetime alimony. Hard to believe that’s still a thing. Whether you lose it or not the court can hold you to it if she testifies to an amount. So if she says you have 5 BTC then the judge can say that is evidence enough and stick that amount on your side of the equation. But if you show statements where you purchased it and it shows only 2 bitcoin then you have a much better chance to only be assessed for two. But it really just depends on the judg…
/r/Divorce_Men22/03/23 04:38 AM
12

Brad Pitt has all the resources in the world and he is a weekend visitor.
/r/Divorce_Men17/03/23 10:06 PM
47

Many who feel that way are sitting in jail being slaves to the state in “work release” or other prison labor. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this and has used the “right of the child” doctrine to usurp the father’s rights. The whole child support system needs to be scrapped. It is there for the support of the state, not the child.
/r/MensRights14/03/23 03:28 PM
0

I’m not seeing any details here and I don’t know why you would quit work when you have a death in the family. Especially while on the CS tether. I doubt any attorney would take on this case without a heavy retainer, probably one 10x this guy’s weekly pay. Death or not the world goes round and round, and while time off is fair, quitting is not.
/r/MensRights24/01/23 12:49 AM
2

Welcome to the club, forget everything you may have heard, because on a county level you never know why you’ll run into. Most counties are run by nepotism and if you get an attorney that isn’t well connected then you’re going to be in for a rough ride. Find out which firms the judges used to work for, which ones provide the junior attorneys who serve as referees. The law doesn’t matter in family court, because there is no accountability. Family law appeals go in the trash as do complaints about …
/r/Divorce_Men04/01/23 06:40 PM
1

Yes, it is all about money after all. If the state didn’t reward them to withhold parenting time it wouldn’t be an issue. You’ll just have to offer more than the state can guarantee, which is generally unlikely.
/r/Divorce_Men11/12/22 02:37 AM
2

Depends on the judge but probably not in your favor. Louisiana appears to be an every other weekend state so anything but will lean on the parish/judge you might get (if you make it to trial). Best advice I can give you is to find an attorney with lots of reviews from male clients. A 20 year attorney with only a few reviews or a 5 star 25+ review attorney with nothing but happy female clients is not going to help you. Next best advice I can give you is to take care of yourself. You’re now in a r…
/r/Divorce_Men15/11/22 10:03 AM
2

You’re playing with fire. Most courts in the US will give her full custody unless she is in jail or dead. You have an amicable situation, you should both focus on helping each other be better parents and not making already rich lawyers and judges even richer.
/r/Divorce_Men29/10/22 12:48 PM
3

This is not true. They impute income all the time and also have workarounds for taxes and self employed that inflate the support numbers. They can also add child care into the mix which can then exceed the take home pay. Depending on the state they are likely to throw you in jail if you do not pay. It’s free labor for the prisons.
/r/Divorce_Men07/10/22 05:15 AM
2

It’s always amicable until it’s not. Wait until that custody order is signed. You’d be amazed how many poor saps thought the same and jumped the gun, only to have the rug pulled. It’s standard operating procedure for family law attorneys.
/r/Divorce_Men04/10/22 03:53 PM
4

Do not move out. In most states you will instantly forfeit the house and lose any chance at reasonable custody. Wire the house for sound I’d you have to, but do not move out without a custody order.
/r/Divorce_Men04/10/22 08:24 AM
12

You have kids, there is no goodbye. Hopefully you can remain civil and use those years together as a foundation for a great relationship.
/r/Divorce_Men02/10/22 02:50 AM
2

Not sure what jurisdiction you’re in but most courts in the US couldn’t care less about your bills/rental contract. They’ll simply award as high of an amount as they can and you’re on your own as to how it gets paid—or go to jail.
/r/Divorce_Men20/08/22 12:49 PM
1

You sound like me years ago. Boundaries are a thing, and slapping you to incite violence is a thing—and as clear of a message as it gets. It’s over, you aren’t fixing this one. She’s broken. Don’t move out, get cameras, record everything. She’s only a phone call away from removing you from the house, then removing the kids and the majority of your assets from you. It really is that easy.
/r/Divorce_Men16/08/22 11:23 AM
2

Post VAWA you need nothing but an accusation. There is no due process in rape cases.
/r/Divorce_Men27/07/22 05:56 PM
4

Some crap advice here IMO. They impute income all the time. It is in the courts interest to impute you as high as possible if they catch wind you were making a high income before, and they will. Don’t forget they are reimbursed by the feds 66 cents on the dollar. 9/10 they will go by your highest earnings and ignore the hypothetical you present losing that high paying job, universally claiming you lowered your income on purpose.
/r/Divorce_Men11/07/22 01:31 AM
1

Understand that you’ll be held in contempt and those who will be doling out the punishment will be the same state government that profits when you pay. There’s a reason some choose to retire in Costa Rica or elsewhere…. AFAIK there is no state to take asylum in the US.
/r/MensRights07/07/22 05:06 PM
11

Excellent post. What many fail to realize is that slavery was never truly abolished in the US. It was either offshored or redressed as child support. As long as Title IV-D is pumping state coffers full of money these injustices will only get worse. And with half the population benefiting from these laws (women) reform will not happen via democracy.
/r/MensRights18/04/22 07:24 PM
6

Nobody on your social media really wants to hear it, and it won’t help you. Best therapy is to talk, in person, to others and those who have yet to get the “full experience” of family law. Every young person you share your story with is potentially one less victim down the road, one less slave for the state.
/r/Divorce_Men08/03/22 04:20 PM
5

You’re under the mistaken assumption that anyone will care about a podcast nor give you any airtime in “the news.” Nobody wants to piss off half their viewers (women) and anger 40% of their advertisers (lawyers). That and the woke mob will go after you, because you must have done something wrong.
/r/Divorce_Men22/02/22 07:42 AM
2

I wish the rest of us lived on the same planet as you do.
/r/Divorce_Men06/02/22 04:46 PM
3

Being self employed puts the crosshairs on you. While states differ, expect them to factor in all revenue and disregard most of your expenses. While you’ll likely get credit for things like rent, employees, contractor/accounting fees, anything like retirement, donations, depreciation and capital expenses will be added in towards your income. Remember that the definition of income in support courts is whatever they make it out to be, not what you actually make. So ultimately it depends on your bu…
/r/Divorce_Men28/01/22 12:21 PM
2

Not in the long term.
/r/Divorce_Men17/01/22 03:18 AM
1

That only works if the ex spouse isn’t a pathological human being. For the sociopaths/borderlines this won’t work, mediation will fail and they’ll sabotage 50/50.
/r/Divorce_Men20/11/21 11:16 AM
6

Firstly don’t forget Reddit has a post/comment history, and you have easy to identify information all over this post. You’re in CA. While 50/50 on paper, many fathers get the shaft, especially in LA, Orange, and Sacramento. CA has lifetime alimony as a possibility for marriages over 10 years old. Even if she makes more, if she has majority custody or drops her income, you may end up paying for a long time. So while neither of you can keep the home alone, if she succeeds she will keep the home th…
/r/Divorce_Men20/11/21 12:56 AM
3

That’s just the playbook. They follow the same game plan in many cases. You’re not alone.
/r/MensRights17/11/21 06:42 PM
8

Before you expend resources in federal court understand that current precedent is that federal courts stay out of family law issues. I have not seen a recent successful case (troxell is the last one I’m aware of), and it has been many years now of looking at this process. There was a case that got as far as submitting a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court—but they refused to hear it. Federal court is not going to be the answer, but public awareness and young men saying no to marriage and chi…
/r/MensRights17/11/21 06:41 PM
3

The boys and their families will still be on the hook for child support…
/r/MensRights21/10/21 02:52 AM
5

The issue is she probably doesn’t care about you or is not attracted to you or both. A person like that will probably care even less in a divorce. I’d also watch out for signs of borderline personality disorder or psychopathy. The court loves these people and often will reward them, as you might find out the courts are also full of narcissists and sociopaths. Either way make sure to have a notarized or an attorney drafted custody order before you even consider moving out. Many women are coached …
/r/Divorce_Men16/10/21 07:18 AM
5

Most are busy with their 2-3 jobs paying for CS and alimony…
/r/Divorce_Men16/10/21 07:11 AM
8

This is also what I learned in a multi year legal battle and trying to raise public awareness. Nobody cares. Everyone assumes you did something to deserve it, and the courts have no room for fairness nor compassion when faced with the Title IV-D money making machine. Take care of yourself and do what you must to get by. There’s no fairness and there’s no honor amongst thieves, and they are all thieves.
/r/Divorce_Men08/09/21 12:45 AM
3

Historically men have been a labor pool and a resource for the ruling class. Empowered and educated men are competition, not something they want. When there are too many the usual course of action is war—which clears out the ranks and allows a new, less informed group to rise from the ashes of their fathers. Those who return alive find much less competition for resources, IE baby boomers. History repeats itself over and over again. We foolishly think that technology makes us smarter, instead it …
/r/Divorce_Men04/07/21 03:26 AM
1

Feel free to add; the two pictures I put up have the entire post that was there…maybe it is from one of the other reposts.
/r/MensRights22/06/21 07:24 PM
2

In law, the non-custodial parents have no rights as the rights of the child outweigh the rights of the parent. In law, the mother has the right to terminate the birth, her right to health (and self determination) trumps the right to life of the child (unborn). Some states are now pushing for child support of the fetus. It is pretty clear in my book where society stands on men’s vs women’s rights….
/r/MensRights22/06/21 04:57 PM
1

The whole thing is in the pic.
/r/MensRights22/06/21 04:48 PM
4

Post here and a few other places: https://reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/comments/o4aw93/i_23f_got_pregnant_a_couple_of_months_ago_by_a/
/r/MensRights21/06/21 02:44 PM
1

When you move out it establishes her as the sole caregiver (as another also pointed out in a comment) which in most jurisdictions essentially seals the rest of the custody case.
/r/Divorce_Men05/06/21 03:30 AM
2

You’ve already made the first mistake—moving out. What is happening is part of a playbook, if you can move back in (and wire yourself for sound with cameras) then that’s probably your best option otherwise she gets to dictate the custody schedule and you will lose all rights to the home if you own it. If you don’t want shared custody and you don’t care about the house then it’s fine, but otherwise there’s going to be little that you can actually get done once you are out of the house.
/r/Divorce_Men04/06/21 07:03 PM
6

It took Brad Pitt millions and 5 years to finally see his kids, half the time. You’re in the same system, she’s following the same playbook. Unfortunately like most you’re going to learn this about two years too late.
/r/Divorce_Men02/06/21 03:17 AM
20

He (they) also was able to afford a private judge which enabled the 6 month trial. When you’re not a multimillionaire all you’ll get is 4-8 hours in most cases, during which the verdict will have already been written beforehand by the judge’s appointees overseeing the case. This is why 50/50 custody should always be the default in cases of two fit parents.
/r/MensRights26/05/21 10:30 PM
23

Little to none. That’s why everyone should take a minute and donate to the NPO (national parents organization) or AFESP who are at the forefront of enacting real change. When you’re caught on the other side of things it’ll be too late.
/r/MensRights26/05/21 10:28 PM
8

Why put yourself in a position where one party can subjugate another? This is what most don’t know about marriage. With the state involved it is a heavy hand that will lean to one party, and that’s an equation I’d rather not partake in again.
/r/Divorce_Men25/05/21 05:03 PM
1

When you look at reviews make sure to look at reviews from male clients. Otherwise it could be an awful lawyer that just takes advantage of the status quo.
/r/Divorce_Men13/05/21 06:56 PM
16

Your story is far more typical that you think, this kind of thing happens to countless others. People justify by assuming you have done something wrong to deserve this. When the only thing you’ve done wrong is choose the wrong partner.
/r/MensRights12/05/21 10:44 PM
2

It is sadly how it is. The rights of the child was used to to strip the noncustodial parents of any rights. So your child (and you’re ex) have a greater right to an in ground swimming pool than you do to life, if your 80 hour workweek kills you then so be it.
/r/Divorce_Men03/05/21 11:18 AM
16

No, he’ll be the one sharing the apartment. She’ll get full custody and rape him for alimony and support, and she has a better than 90% of winning should she decide to go that route. She won’t need a man to take care of her, the state will force her ex husband to take care of her and her new partner.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen02/05/21 11:33 PM
2

They will likely factor it in. Income is income in most states, no matter if from investments or otherwise.
/r/Divorce_Men02/05/21 08:25 PM
11

If that’s the case then the post should be deleted, it lends no credibility to the cause.
/r/MensRights30/04/21 10:56 AM
4

No it didn’t. No consequences and no change in the perception. If the text exchange wasn’t so well documented by the accused he would have been hung. At least the judge looked and properly weighed the evidence, unlike the Depp case.
/r/MensRights24/04/21 08:45 PM
12

Anything that runs counter to narrative on there or 2x is instantly deleted. The bubble is strong.
/r/MensRights23/04/21 10:21 PM
5

Insanity is mostly defined by how many people agree and disagree with you. In that sub the echo chamber makes it seem like this social destruction they are promoting, is in fact, sane. My ex wife must have caught on with this clique of psychopaths, the playbook is just too similar.
/r/AntiFeminists23/04/21 05:24 PM
7

Never again. It can ruin the relationship when one party gets control over another. It removes all accountability and should something happen one day you are left powerless.
/r/Divorce_Men20/04/21 11:00 PM
2

Never will happen. Like no fault divorce, it’s not about the children or equality. Once Title IV-D became law it’s just been about the profits for the state.
/r/MensRights20/04/21 12:24 AM
8

1: do not leave the house. If you do you waive all financial rights to it and give up custody for children. In most states. 2: if your wife had BPD prepare for the worst, courts often reward that kind of behavior and it is difficult to prove in court. They simply don’t care. 3: seek an attorney who has MALE reviews. A 5/5 with all female reviews means they’re just using a cheat code.
/r/Divorce_Men19/04/21 10:01 PM
2

Laws like this are designed to foster litigation and have nothing to do with what people want. Ask yourself the simple question here, who will make fortunes when terrible laws like this go live? Hint hint, the American bar. Medicine has figured out that we’ll pay anything for a little bit more life. Lawyers know that we’ll pay anything for a little bit more freedom.
/r/MensRights14/04/21 02:58 PM
2

Avoid divorcing in the US if you can (or Canada.) in most cases the courts are heavily predisposed against men, might be better to do it elsewhere if you can. Even if things might be cordial now, once the smell of money gets wafted by the attorneys things can suddenly change.
/r/Divorce_Men07/04/21 06:22 AM
3

Check for male reviewers. If you see a five star attorney and all female reviews you know you have a problem.
/r/Divorce_Men25/03/21 03:32 PM
6

Has not helped in the past. Ford and Regan did more to screw men via divorce than most (Clinton did too though) in order to get single mothers off welfare. They care more about the rich not having to pay for welfare then they do about men not being enslaved.
/r/Divorce_Men24/03/21 07:18 AM
1

I read the first part of your con list and that alone is enough. Any relationship where that exists is one that is doomed to fail, and the longer it goes the harder the fall.
/r/Divorce_Men21/02/21 07:58 PM
5

You won’t be the first, look up Patricia Macdonald in Texas, judge who tried jailing the husband when he found out and refused to pay support on a woman he was never legally married to as a result.
/r/Divorce_Men21/01/21 12:03 AM
1

This is a huge problem currently. The privatization of communication channels means that our 1st amendment right to free speech no longer applies, it only applies to public/government and not private companies. Reddit isn’t the first. Twitter “deplatformed” and entire political party, and not an extremist one at that, but the Unity party looking to reform corruption. Facebook will block small outlets it doesn’t agree with. It really is 1984.
/r/MensRights17/10/20 12:59 PM
3

Absolutely not wrong, myself and countless others in the same boat can attest to that, despite getting shitty advice from attorneys who say "it will be fair." It isn't. The second you leave you give up all rights to it in most states. The second you leave is when you become the non-custodial parent, having to prove yourself otherwise in a system that doesn't want you to. Do some get lucky and actually not go through this? Sure. But most end up getting wrecked because the system has an inherent i…
/r/Divorce_Men14/10/20 04:54 PM
1

DO NOT DO THIS. The second you leave the home you give up your rights to it, all equity, and custody of the children if involved.
/r/Divorce_Men14/10/20 03:22 PM
1

Was going to write something but you did a better job.
/r/Divorce_Men30/07/20 01:38 AM
9

The recent developments in CA and NJ have put a big crosshair on everyone IMO.
/r/MensRights29/07/20 01:54 PM
1

Anyone have a link to the back story?
/r/MensRights25/05/20 03:14 AM
2

Right there with you. There are plenty of fish in the sea that haven’t been polluted with the anti-man narrative, they can be hard to find though. I’m glad I found her before becoming too bitter. Boundaries are a nice thing in a relationship, as is some emotional stability.
/r/MensRights24/05/20 07:18 PM
2

In my experience the laws are “optional” for judges, and it all depends on income disparity and how entrenched that particular county is with Title IV-D funds. You can have the best case but the judge can cherry pick what evidence/testimony they label as “credible” and thus it does not matter what you present. Rather than looking at laws I’d recommend looking at the custody percentages for that state/county. That’s a much more realistic indicator as to whether you’re wasting your time or not goi…
/r/Divorce_Men11/05/20 06:33 AM
5

Medium is a women/LGBT friendly site that picks what to publish and what to not publish. Men's issues are not "curated" by their staff IMO.
/r/MensRights10/05/20 06:09 AM
1

Except the ending is profoundly unrealistic (as Kramer vs Kramer). In most of these cases there is no give and no happy ending.
/r/Divorce_Men09/05/20 06:09 PM
-1

While the irony of this is whole situation is beyond measure, the reality is that the republicans have been responsible for the worst of the Title IV-D legislation. Ford started the whole thing. Barry Obama was the only one to have done anything remotely resembling reforming the system, though it was weak and the states mostly just choose to ignore it by imputing unrealistic numbers. Both parties have left fathers and men in the dust, both parties failed to uphold the constitution and allowed th…
/r/MensRights06/05/20 05:35 AM
1

Edited, misspoke on my part!
/r/Divorce_Men02/05/20 05:49 PM
1

Arrears from alimony is treated the same way legally as past due child support, so they might be able take it out of whatever money is due to come your way. But my understanding is the proceeds from the sale of a pre-marital asset should be exempt since it isn't income, but liquidating what you already have. But this varies with each state. On something like this I'd consult an attorney, you might be able to find one that doesn't require a full retainer. Either way I'd definitely fight it.
/r/Divorce_Men02/05/20 05:32 PM
5

Jesus that article is cancer.
/r/MensRights27/04/20 09:38 PM
1

I’d say the odds of this passing are not very high. Cue the women’s rights and domestic violence groups that will trample every politician in support of this bill.
/r/MensRights23/04/20 05:55 PM
1

So Monday is here and I submitted it to r/dataisbeautiful. Firstly it was taken down twice, followed the rules *precisely* and it hopefully will not get taken down, again. But in that time no sooner than it is posted does it get down-voted by a couple of accounts, either my ex is a follower or someone just really does not want this information out there. So there you have it.
/r/MensRights21/04/20 12:49 AM
1

I think as the years go by the less and less likely this becomes possible.
/r/MensRights18/04/20 04:05 AM
2

This kind of nonsense should not be getting published. But hey, #metoo. While we’re at it we should just rip up all the civil rights progress from the last 250 years just in case, you know, rape.
/r/MensRights16/04/20 02:38 PM
1

I figured I would get this question but tried to leave the graph cleaner. This covers anything bought at the food store/walmart kind of place. So that includes occasional clothes, all laundry/cleaning supplies. Also with traveling 30-50% of the time means lots of necessary ordering out.
/r/MensRights15/04/20 10:53 AM
2

Not over a two year period. I have some degrees and so does she. 46k of it was CC debt/loans, not actually income. I also work about 50 hour a week or more. You can make more than than that working the same hours in construction here, even more if its a union job.
/r/MensRights15/04/20 10:51 AM
2

Don't forget the judges and other court officials/attorneys making bank.
/r/MensRights15/04/20 01:43 AM
4

Don't know the details of your case nor where you are and not particularly interested. You blaming this sub, or even relating it to your own case, is entirely baseless and you should probably seek opinions elsewhere. I'm not your dad and he is unlikely to be here. I don't know your situation nor does it matter, whatever beef you have with your father you can deal it with outside of the $78,000 I was extorted out of.
/r/MensRights15/04/20 12:57 AM
3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmI8TtSEz_E I'm putting this video here not to weight the merits of the case nor the strength of his argument, but to see what it looks like to be in family court. Poor Joe is arguing against THREE lawyers. Two on behalf of his wife provided by the state, one from his ex-wife. Your father obviously knew well enough what he was up against. Adequate child support is highly subjective, and children who grow up under parents in these situations are taught from a very …
/r/MensRights15/04/20 12:35 AM
1

The FDS community is probably the largest gathering of borderline psychopaths I've ever stumbled across. I don't think it is anything like the female red pill. TRP seeks to define gender roles in their corners, meaning women and men want different things, and that's OK. Not everyone has to, it is merely discussing the trends. FDS seeks to extort men using the law and shaming. Entirely different and by all means pathological.
/r/MensRights15/04/20 12:26 AM
5

The chart software adds the colors for readability.
/r/MensRights14/04/20 05:49 PM
6

Thanks. The county here feels they are exempt from federal regulations, I am knee deep trying to appeal a $5,000 a month order, hence the arrears.
/r/MensRights14/04/20 02:18 PM
17

http://sankeymatic.com/build/ r/dataisbeautiful will have to wait until Monday when you're allowed to post personal issues, or maybe Thursday when you can do politically motivated data, but definitely!
/r/MensRights14/04/20 01:28 PM
2

The ability to label any job change (other than incarceration) as "voluntary" enables them to ignore a change in circumstances and only raise support UP. The ability to inflate the custodial parents' expenses (excessive child care--sometimes paid to relatives) allows them to tilt the tables overall. The ability for the state to weigh the "child's best interest" over the parents' best interest combined with the ability to arbitrarily state what the best interest is; allows them to dictate who the…
/r/MensRights14/04/20 01:25 PM
1

Don’t tell us, we know you exist. Instead go tell your friends and family, call or better yet make an appointment with your state reps. Tell them our stories of injustice, go to your personal social media and do the same. Join us at the small rallies, and support our YouTube channels and Facebook pages. That’s where we need people. We all already know you’re there. You just need to exercise your power where it matters.
/r/MensRights14/04/20 01:18 AM
36

They get the opposite, included in the default feeds.
/r/MensRights14/04/20 01:07 AM
2

That's a hard one to answer. Five years ago I would have said absolutely, but there is a very real risk that this temporary arrangement will turn permanent. If the state could actually be trusted then yes, the child should stay with the other parent. But the state has blown that trust IMO on many occasions, and thus cannot be trusted to act in the best interest of the child.
/r/MensRights13/04/20 11:13 PM
2

I think all children should be vaccinated. I think there's ways of approaching it that are appropriate. I do not think that CPS taking the children from their parents, then making them pay child support so they can profit via Title IV-D is the right answer. Just like I do not believe a court that literally profits from child support orders should be the one dictating shared custody versus one parent that's *slightly* better in the eyes of the law having full custody, with the other being relegat…
/r/MensRights13/04/20 10:55 PM
3

I have mixed feelings on this. I am in healthcare and I put a stop to visits for a couple of months until it blows over before my ex took it to court (which she did anyway....) While the kids are resilient, my ex has asthmatic lungs and as much as I dislike her currently, I do not want them to lose their mother. Instead I’ll do some overtime so I can take the summer off. But with that said, it should be a decision the parents (plural) make, and not encroached on by the state at the whims of a bi…
/r/MensRights13/04/20 09:15 PM
12

It’s not just you. I’m the most skeptical anti-conspiracy theory person you might meet, only to have found oneself in the midst of an actual conspiracy with family court. I still can’t believe it.
/r/MensRights13/04/20 06:54 PM
210

Sad that this opinion is "unpopular"
/r/MensRights13/04/20 03:14 PM
5

Do not move out of the house, do not tell her you’re leaving, do not assume your lawyer is giving you sound advice. This is the most critical point of the rest of your life, and once you enter the courts everything will be stacked against you. PM if you want some more links on the subject before you get going.
/r/Divorce_Men13/04/20 09:55 AM
3

Was going to comment but you said it all. Only other factor is the financial gain from divorce.
/r/Divorce_Men13/04/20 01:26 AM
1

If she is the high earner you have a chance; the state will still earn money that way. If you are even or you earn more, then your chances are slight at best. This is anywhere.
/r/Divorce_Men10/04/20 10:30 PM
1

I envy you. Myself and countless others I know have been at the opposite end of this shaft. Count your blessings, you may have gotten one of the very few courts that were honest.
/r/Divorce_Men10/04/20 02:38 AM
1

I'd like to know what jurisdiction this is, and what the circumstances are. I've generally only seen this in cases where the woman has a clear documented history (and current) abuse, substance use, or other disqualifying feature. In cases where both parents are on a similar footing I've not seen many cases where the father prevails. But good on you, I wish it was the case more often.
/r/Divorce_Men08/04/20 08:36 PM
3

And yet they get away with it, every day and in most jurisdictions. What a sad state of things.
/r/Divorce_Men05/04/20 08:51 PM
1

This was from data 1979 to 1989, with the current guidelines for support orders I’d wager that number is even higher now. Stay strong!
/r/Divorce_Men03/02/20 11:10 AM
4

Right there with you. Tons of evidence didn’t matter, because her testimony (entirely fabricated) was taken at face value. Now I pay far more than you and have to defend myself to the children on a regular basis. It is a sad, sad state of affairs, and the media has entirely turned a blind eye to it.
/r/MensRights16/05/19 12:07 PM
1

Same in our county here. If you are male the odds are that you are guilty until proven innocent, female and you get a pass. Speak up, do not just accept the status quo.
/r/MensRights22/02/19 11:47 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter