TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Judge Judy Gets It

drajgreen

May 24, 2017
27063 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://i.imgur.com/4HEiCQL.gifv
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Judge Judy Gets It
Author

drajgreen

Upvotes 27063
Comments 1156
Date May 24, 2017 11:14 AM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/6d1h12/judge_judy_gets_it/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/judge-judy-gets-it.1071823
https://theredarchive.com/post/1071823

Comments

[–]Badgerz92 4048 points4049 points4050 points 9 years ago (483 children) | Copy Link

She's advocated for father's rights before too and has said that the family courts are unfairly biased against fathers.

[–]MaunaLoona 1534 points1535 points1536 points 9 years ago (200 children) | Copy Link

And she knows just how biased family courts can be. She was a family court judge.

[–]brucethehoon 817 points818 points819 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She RAN the family court in NYC for many years. As much as I don't care for Ed Koch, he made a damn good choice in choosing her for supervising judge.

[–]Oz70NYC 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-151 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She was mine and was nothing like her PR bullshit. I hope she gets the most painful cancer possible. I wish the absolute worst future for her.
I have real experience, face to face with her evil demon face.
If a serial child killer comes out and says they have turned around and now want everyone to know that they love children dearly, who would believe them?
Every time her name comes up here, it is a slap in the face of real men like me, in the real world, remembering how evil she really is in word and ACTION.
She is my least favorite person in history. She kept me from my child, literally in a mocking derisive manner. A vermin scumbag cunt.

[–]dj-sws227 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You gonna elaborate or just spout unsubstantiated hate? I have no particular feelings towards Judge Judy but without any sort of context you just sound like a dude making stuff up to push a weird agenda.

[–]gwarsh4185 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm wondering if it has to do anything with his username

"Not a crackhead officer".

[–]notacrackheadofficer-40 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Family court. NY state. 1980s. How could anyone doubt me? I guess TV is a truth wiping wonderland of fantasy.

[–]koobstylz88 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

We don't doubt she was your judge, we doubt that it was unfair. You seem like a fucking loon who shouldn't ever be around children.

[–]Krypticreptiles37 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

He goes and says it happened in 91 and in the 80s. His whole comment history is him repeating the same thing never showing any peice of evidence.

[–]maniclurker43 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's not even that he's not presenting evidence... it's that the dude's just not even presenting a story. No elaboration whatsoever.

[–]Krypticreptiles30 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

He does tell the story you just had to go to the link he keeps posting. It looks like he went to court then started yelling calling everyone a man hating bitch. It's possible it really happened but the more he talks about it the more it looks like he deserved to lose.

[–]Narwhail0r17 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That part in his story is what got me. First off if you want to win a case, you probably shouldn't cuss out the judges and lawyers. He still wonders after all these years why he lost and anyone with common sense can see why.

[–]koobstylz1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What a loser.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-19 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Family court. NY state. 1980s.
You say it was fair.
How ignorant can you be?

[–]PM_ME_UR_NIGWARDS24 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I find it hard to believe that you have this big of a grudge, and haven't gone to appeals.

Your post history also makes the story clearly not credible.

Anyone can go through and see that for themselves. IF you wanna bash a judge, by all means go ahead. But do so while providing sound evidence.

You have done none of that and just expect people to take your clearly broken word for what it is.... Well I will. Your story is full of holes and anger.

You don't see clearly. You are bias and your words and connotation in which you use them show that. Grow the fuck up and either quit lying or realize you didn't have the money, job, or living situation to keep your kid. That's not the judges fault. That's yours dude. Get fucking real.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

My child is 30. Did you forget the time period in which she was a family court torture executioner of evil?
My post history is awesome.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/
You seem out to get me, and up for an endless string of personal attack insults.
You have feminist shaming tactics from tumblr coming out of your ears and asshole.

[–]_megitsune_13 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I mean... You can't even get when it happened straight why should anyone believe your baseless accusations, especially when you won't give any reasoning beyond "reeeeeeeee family court in 80s(or maybe 90s, fuck knows) in new York" for your hate.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You need to find a TV worship subreddit. This is mensrights

[–]Byroms4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

And you are the reason people think of the mrm as a hate group. So lets assume you are right and everything happened as you say it did, so what if she now says something different for cash? The important thing is, that she is now advocating for the rights of fathers. People can change, clearly you can't let go of the past. Would you rather have no advocates? Do you want your story to be repeated over and over again? Do you want this topic to be forgotten and not be spoken about?

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There is no ''movement'' and you shit on your own parade by claiming one exists.
Ha ha, I will post diatribes about the serial child abuser Judge Judy, every time someone posts her TV blather.

[–]_megitsune_1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You realise if you just gave literally a single example of how you were boned over by Judy (assuming that you're not full of shit) this sub in particular would rally behind you?

The fact that you can't get your story straight and are just blasting off tweaks of the same comment make you seem, at best, just wrong and/or delusional.

How about I call you a child abuser and say that's why you lost the kid? I mean, I've got the same amount of evidence as you're running with, more actually because you admitted you lost custody through legal channels, with a judge otherwise known to be reputable and impartial

[–]Byroms1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes all thise people advocating for Mens Rights and calling thenselves Mens Rights Activists are totally not a movement. /s

So from what I can see is that you probably hit on Judge Judy and she rejected your advances.

[–]Zorcmsr56 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So because he doesn't believe your clearly fabricated nonsense hes a feminist (which is the worst possible thing you could be in your mind)? You're fucked in the head.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]Zorcmsr54 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yea you've copy and pasted that to every reply. You've never said what she did to you, what the circumstances were. All you keep proving is that you don't deserve to be around your kids, and I for one am VERY happy you do not have custody.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You want my entire history of family court documents posted, notarized and certified or something?
You are mad that you got fooled by an anti-man cunt who acts nice for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Would you be a feminist commentator for 40 million dollars a year?
I know you would, and so would I.
I would be a left winger, a right winger, you name it, for that kind of money. I'd try to attract men and women to my show, with bullshit designed to put more money in my pocket, if I were a TV star.
She literally makes up bullshit and gets paid.

[–]koobstylz10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Your delusional rants make you look like a fucking loser who should never be around children. I'm not saying anything about Judy. I'm saying you seem like an asshole and, based on your rants here, no judge in the world would give you custody.

But sure. Blame Judy. I can see how that would make you feel better about yourself, since you think you're not the problem, it's everybody else.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You worship the TV and insult people who you say are bad for insulting child torturers.
You knee jerked into a judge jury and executioner role, having no moral compass.

[–]koobstylz15 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Wow. You're actually insane.

I explicitly said I'm not saying anything about Judy. I have no opinion on her.

I have an opinion on you. You seem like a fucking loser who should never be around children. Judy's opinion of you did not influence my opinion, that opinion was only formed by the things you have said and how insane you seem.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]tasmanian1016 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No. You don't get to be the victim in this.

Holy fuck dude, you've got a giant victim complex.

You come onto reddit and bitch about judge judy with no context. Then you provide context. Yet all of it is along the lines of, "SHES A MAN HATING BITCH" "I CALLED HER A MAN HATING BITCH AND SHE DIDNT CAVE IN TO MY WANTS"

Like fuck dude. Think about how you acted in court. Yes there was a bias against you. But you literally got so pissed in court you called the judge and lawyers out.

Do you think thats acceptable behavior? Do you really think the only reason you lost was because they hate men? Could it have anything to do with them being trained to analyze people. And those who are emotionally unstable EG calling the judge a bitch shouldn't have custody?

If you can't see the role you played in your demise. The fact you played into and confirmed their bias that some men are emotionally unstable and unfit to be parts, further feeding the anti man bias?

Then you've got some much bigger problems...

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]tasmanian1014 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Got it.

Your likely borderline personality disorder with a giant victim complex.

Must be an interesting world to live in. How is it having people despise you because you piss them off and then blame your problems on them. How often do you get into heated interaction. Spoiler, normal people might get into a few heated situations over years. I'm betting your at the once a month level. You probably brake check people who cut you off and then try and get out of your car to fight them.

"I called you a man hating bitch and you didn't give me custody."

WAAAAAH.

You shoulda tried calling her mom a gold digging whore too. Im sure that would have helped.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You were not there and got the order of detailed events all wrong.

[–]tasmanian1014 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's a judges duty to sniff out bullshit and analyze people. If you were mad enough at the end to call her a bitch. Then there was obvious changes in your tone and demeanor during the trial.

A family court judge literally has to judge you and predict how you will be raising that kid. If you are getting pissed off in court, you likely will get pissed off at home. A judge will not favor an angry and potentially abusive parent over one who paints them self as calm, collected, and caring.

A bias only paints the outline of someone. Your actions fill it in. Had you not confirmed her bias you may of had a different result.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You have no context to speak about my 30 year old case with her as the presiding cunt.

[–]koobstylz3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How can you say that when i, twice, explicitly said I have no opinion on judge Judy. I haven't seen her show in over a decade.

Literally my only opinion on her is that she is overpaid.

You have done excellent mental gymnastics to avoid any and all personal responsibly.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You have no knowledge or context to say anything.

[–]CoolMouthHat19 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

how could anyone doubt me

Because you haven't cited any proof or even told a convincing story, you've only wished a terrible future on someone for reasons we can't see. It's easy to say fuck her she took my child away from me but that's not the whole picture is it? We have no context for your life at the time, your behavior in court and how your ex and kid even felt about you. Your vitriol is centered around poor me, but outsiders can't see why. Were you forbidden from seeing your child at all because that seems really unreasonable even for family court in the 80s.

[–]CyberDagger9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How could anyone doubt me?

That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

You should know better than to expect people to "listen and believe" here of all places.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]maniclurker11 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

None of your comments here, nor in that post, actually elaborate on anything.

You're a fucking sperg. If JJ really kept you from your kids, then maybe it was for good reason.

[–]VicisSubsisto8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

As a fucking sperg I demand that you take back that comparison.

[–]maniclurker4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Sorry, sorry. Retracted.

[–]hoaobrook732 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Found the Canadian

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]maniclurker5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You can't blame us for your spergy behavior. Do you also where a tinfoil hat?

[–]CountDodo9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

All that proves is you've been angrily shouting the same nonsense for years, it doesn't prove anything you've said is true.

[–]dmantakae1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What is the reason the judge said you weren't able to get weekend custody? You keep ranting how she was a bitch and blah blah blah but what was main reason why the mother took back weekends, and the court said that you can't have them back?

Drugs? Alcohol? etc? Anger management problems?

It seems like there's a lot to the story that you're not telling. That's why everyone is giving you shit.

[–]HQR32 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I guess TV is a truth wiping wonderland of fantasy.

Jacqueline Suzanne once called TV the "love machine." It spews bullshit and makes you swear it's filet mignon. Apparently, even MRAs are not immune to its trance.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank you. It's easily the most disturbing thread in the history of the sub. She affected thousands and thousands of people horribly, off camera, and puts on a ''nice lady'' act for cash, on camera.

[–]HangOnVoltaire1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

/r/thathappened

[–]toomuchdamnicecream0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Haha. Right?

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Everyone came here to literally worship a TV star.
And now I shit in everyone's TV goddess cornflakes. Reality ruined the whole TV brainwash load of laundry, staining it with ink infused faeces.
I may as well take another opportunity to wish cancer on Judge Judy. There are never too many of those wishes.

[–]indigonights4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ok this guy is clearly fucking crazy. Glad they took ur kid away. Sheesh

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Feminist shaming tactic from tumblr

[–]indigonights1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Feminist shaming tactics.

[–]indigonights1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tumblr shaming tatics

[–]indigonights1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tactical shaming tumblr tactics.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If TV had a penis, many of you commenters would be electrocuting yourselves in the back of the throat.

[–]indigonights1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tactical shaming shamer

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Drooling TV brainwashed popstar fanboy

[–]indigonights1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tactical tumblr shamer

[–]toomuchdamnicecream1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"From medium to medium, the real is volatilized, becoming an allegory of death. But it is also, in a sense, reinforced through its own destruction. It becomes reality for its own sake, the fetishism of the lost object: no longer the object of representation, but the ecstasy of denial and of its own ritual extermination: the hyperreal....

The hyperreal ... manages to efface even this contradiction between the real and the imaginary. Unreality no longer resides in the dream or fantasy, or in the beyond, but in the real's hallucinatory resemblance to itself,"

_J.B.

[–]tacitus2349 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I looked through some of your comment history and you seem like a truly toxic person. I'm having a hard time believing that she was "evil" to such an outstanding citizen.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You launch into heartless and sadistic personal attacks, with a superiority complex, issuing forth from your TV infected head, with no regard for reality.

[–]FallenNagger21 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hmm, says the one wishing cancer on anybody and everybody. You need some help man.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If your child was taken from you, by a mocking and grinning asshole, you'd wish nice things for them. Right.

[–]bamburito10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You can surely see how you're acting isn't exactly painting you in a positive light right? I refuse to believe anyone can be that blind. Sorry for what you've had to deal with but venting over reddit like a douche with a guide to adjectives isn't the way to go about doing anything. Just makes you seem like a prick.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Insult insult triggered triggered lashing out, need to vent anger, so fucking angry ....
That was you

[–]bamburito11 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Venting apparently means something different where I am from. Lashing out too. Oh and triggered. Wait...and angry.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Have someone take your kid from you because mommy suddenly stopped drinking and demanded her back, after years of a child becoming bonded to her non drinking, non drug using dad. ''The child should naturally be with the mother'' after she abandoned her, as I gave her a wonderful TV free first few years of great parenting. Then she got forced into her mom's alcohol and cocaine hellhole nightmare. I watched my child suffer and change. Fuck Judge Judy. She should get cancer. Maybe this can happen to you and your daughter, anb then maybe we can talk about anger and openly wishing cancer on Judge Cunt Judy.
I've seen movies where people murder the kidnappers of children in all sorts of ways. I'm just wishing cancer on her. I think I'm being quite nice to the child abusing bitch.
She's a cunt, and fuck anyone approving of anything she says for $$$ and ignoring what she DID to people, by the thousands. Evil personified.
No one here but me is a witness to her real life actions.

[–]ChipsHanden1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, you are the sole person on the planet who knows THE TRUTH about INTERGALACTIC SHAPESHIFTING CHILD MOLESTER JUDGE JUDY. Did I mention shes good friends with CHILD RAPIST BILL CLINTON?!?! She may parade herself as a bastion of justice, but did you know in the 80's while heading up the Family Courts of NYC, she handed out MULTIPLE DECISIONS that indirectly caused ALL THE FROGS ON LONG ISLAND TO TURN GAY?!?!

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You have no knowledge of her history in the court system and are seriously triggered because you have been fooled by a TV star.

[–]infomercial_102 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Can you please elaborate on how she fucked you over or no? Im gonna say no because your just spewing bullshit that you have no evidence​ for.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You want 30 year old certified actual court documents sent by certified mail to the mods. Got it.

[–]infomercial_100 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No I want some elaboration of what happened not Court logs actual words from you.

[–]ChipsHanden0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Stop saying triggered, I'm not some fat white girl on Tumblr. I'm merely drawing comparisons to your rantings and ravings with those of alt-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, because that's who you sound like.

[–]FallenNagger1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Haha I was the child taken, but when my brother and I were teenagers we were able to ask the court for equal time with both parents.

Shit worked out, and I don't have any ill wish against the courts who were obviously still stuck in the bias of a previous time when they first decided.

[–]flyingwolf11 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ah I see. If you acted like this I am other surprised you lost custody.

Have a coke and a smile and chill the fuck out homey.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/
You don't care about what happened to my child. Duly noted.

[–]flyingwolf13 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah, according to that you had an angry expletive laden outburst in court and acted like a child.

Gee I wonder why you didn't get what you want sport.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nice judge jury and executioner take on something you know nothing about. There were years of court battles. Over MY CHILD.
People get angry when assholes hurt their children.
You know nothing about my time with her, or when or where I or she said anything in real context.
I know her well. You do not at all.

[–]flyingwolf2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

We know only what you have told us and only how you have acted here.

And based on how you act here, my assumption stands of you being a douchebag.

[–]tacitus237 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm not really sure what you're saying as it's not a complete sentence. Honestly someone like you probably shouldn't have kids. Judge Judy seemed to have done the right thing.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]tacitus2311 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You still can't write a complete sentence. Are you a non-native English speaker? I'd feel bad for making fun of you if you were. Either way, learn some basic grammar and people might take you seriously.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

TV worshipping zombie

[–]yellownumberfive11 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's still not a complete sentence, lmao.

[–]tacitus232 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Sure.

[–]DGDEAGLE1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Calling you toxic is not a personal attack. Not once in this entire thread have you put together a coherent sentence that didn't include 'feminist' 'tumblr' or hoping another human being gets cancer.

I don't even wish cancer on the pathetic shitbag that you are. Yes <sup>that</sup>^ IS a personal attack.

Cancer robbed me of some of the best people I've ever known. You wouldn't wish it on anyone if you had one iota of human decency left in you.

Do the world a favor and wash your mouth out with buckshot

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I wish cancer on Judy. You are free to make up some more poetry about unrelated things.
Why are you breathing air? Do you know who used to breathe air? Charles Manson AND Hitler.
BTW, death robs everyone of everyone they ever knew, all the time, without exception. I suggest shaking your fist at the sky for reprisal.
I will now wish cancer on Cunt Judy again, for good measure.
I have no idea about what that has to do with people you knew. Oh well, I guess I'll shrug at my own lack of understanding the connection.
Yay for your right to launch attacks like a helicopter. pew pew pew

[–]jmcwalk46 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why is this full insult without any reasoning?

[–]Zorcmsr59 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hes a fucking crazy person, pay him no mind

[–]notacrackheadofficer5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]PM_ME_XBOX_MONEYCODE42 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh no! Was she mean to you because you were being a dipshit?

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]f0me29 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

how many hyperboles and insults does it take to create a believable story?

[–]Mangalz17 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well the insults certainly made it believable that a family court trial would likely not go his way.

Assuming he actually had one.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Family court. NY state. 1980s. How could anyone doubt me? I guess TV is a truth wiping wonderland of fantasy.

[–]SideTraKd11 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How could anyone doubt me?

Because you're long on hyperbole, and short on specifics..?

Yeah, that's pretty much why we doubt you.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No one here but me is a witness to her real life actions.
You want my court documents from the 80s, published here with no redactions, and proof of my name and address.. Got it.

[–]SideTraKd6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

ok.

send em

[–]DontPromoteIgnorance6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You want people to have blind faith in the word of somebody intentionally presenting themselves as a deranged lunatic and a crackhead. Maybe calm down and sober up a bit.

[–]Rekees23 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There's an AMA waiting to break out of this comment...

[–]ramenbreak9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Specially if every response would sound like an angry copypasta

[–]FeierInMeinHose6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]indigonights2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

<sup>lmaooooo</sup>

[–]BRUTAL_DENGUE_FEVER15 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

'It was that fucking bitch judge's fault I didn't do shit'

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Family court. NY state. 1980s. How could anyone doubt me? I guess TV is a truth wiping wonderland of fantasy.

[–]infinitezero814 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If you are wondering why you are being heavily downvoted is because you literally just spewed diarrhea (You're problem) out of your mouth without using a tissue (The context) to wipe it off.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Suck it.

[–]jamesandthetinypea8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank god she didn't give you custody. You are a complete mess.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Feminist shaming tactic from tumblr

[–]NefariousPurpose2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

His user name is has James in it.

[–]Darwins_Pointed_Stik13 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Said "notacrackheadofficer".......

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What is your non-TV worshipping experience with her, in the real world?
You seem to have literally nothing to go on but statements written by Judge Judy's PR team, looking for higher TV show ratings, and nothing else.

[–]Not_Just_Any_Lurker10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What do you know, my whole perspective of her is turned around because of your eloquent speech which includes sources, fair criticism and unbiased logic. You even included your hearing for us to review.

Not.

My mother watches her shows all the time and I'll sit with her through them. Judge Judith Shendlin is generally fair in her findings. Rarely does she act on any of her biases, unless it's an unusually disruptive party. The route to winning with her is just shutting the fuck up and only presenting facts. Usually you'll win. You probably showed obvious contempt or were obnoxious in her court, and she ruled against you, if you even had her preside over you at all and you aren't full of the horseshit you seem to be composed of. I say this as someone who isn't really even a fan.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tv worshipping zombie

[–]Nessie_eats_everyone12 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Instead of defending yourself and setting the record straight you insult your criticisers.

I wonder why you lost custody of your child?

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Non stop personal attacks towards me are now increasing.
Nice support system the sub has, regarding TV over reality.
Everyone bow to the fake goddess of TV.

[–]Nessie_eats_everyone6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh no!

I wonder what it must feel like to personally attacked?

Hmm, lets ask judge Judy!!

We don't just defend people who are in the wrong because they are male. This sub is for equal rights not defend men because they can't do anything wrong

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I know Judge Judy, and you do not.
I have a serious history with her and you have no real life context to draw on.
How is that TV worshipping cult going? All bow and pray to Goddess Judge Judy, the men's rights false champion of word, and men's rights real enemy, as regards real life actions in the really real world of really real reality actions .

[–]Up_North1810 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So still absent of any explanation

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Shouldn't you be worshipping TV stars?

[–]Up_North186 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

lol I honestly don't give a shit about Judge Judy, but me and everyone else are waiting for you to actually give an explanation of what you're talking about.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge Judy spent over 20 years in New York City’s family court system. Throughout her tenure, she earned a reputation for being blunt, impatient, and tough-talking. “I can’t stand stupid, and I can’t stand slow.”
impatient.
''A swift decision-maker with no tolerance for lame excuses'' http://www.aafny.org/pdf/development/jj-sheindlinbio.pdf
http://www.aafny.org/pdf/development/jj-sheindlinbio.pdf
You all only get to see how she acts on camera, not prosecuting juveniles in Manhattan or denying fathers' rights in Carmel.
She talks, for money, and this sub has now flushed itself down the drain by worshipping her PR bullshit, written by a team of scriptwriters, for money.
http://www.nopactalent.com/speaker/judge-judy.php
No man or juvenile who ever stood in fron of her in a court would say one nice thing about her.

[–]tasmanian10110 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You seem like the kinda guy to call your babies momma a "dumb whore" in court and go into some rant about how she fucked around on you. Only to realize the judge doesn't give a fuck, and see's you as emotionally unstable/abusive and awarded custody to the mother.

[–]Gnomish810 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Not quite. He called the judge a "Man hating bitch" and was then surprised when he didn't get his way... Don't get me wrong, I get being emotional, but damn, if you're not able to keep that in check in court, of course you're not going to get what you want! He's lucky he wasn't held in contempt...

[–]tasmanian1016 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I know right.

I'm going to get progessivly more angry as court goes on. I know it's literally the judges job to observe, and learn about who these people are then make a best judgement decision in the childs best interest. But fuck her man hating ass, I bet if I call her a man hating bitch she will realize her bias against me

And he's surprised she awarded custody to the calm, collected mom who presented a great image in court just like her lawyer said.

Instead of the bitter woman hating man that literally proved himself emotionally unstable. Custody was given to the calm collected, mom who cared enough to get a lawyer.

[–]indigonights3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Glad he got his kid taken away. If a adult is too stupid to learn how to control their emotions in front of a job, i doubt they would be a good parent.

[–]tasmanian1011 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I know right.

I'm going to get progessivly more angry as court goes on. I know it's literally the judges job to observe, and learn about who these people are then make a best judgement decision in the childs best interest. But fuck her man hating ass, I bet if I call her a man hating bitch she will realize her bias against me

And he's surprised she awarded custody to the calm, collected mom who presented a great image in court just like her lawyer said.

Instead of the bitter woman hating man that literally proved himself emotionally unstable. Custody was given to the mom who cared enough to get a lawyer.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are lashing out blindly with made up nonsense, out to cause as much verbal injury as possible. Duly noted.

[–]tasmanian10111 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Lol. And the teapot calls the kettle black.

I tried to be nice to her, and state my and my daughter's case. She got more excessively nasty than before. I finally snapped, after an hour, and told her, and every other lawyer in the room what I thought of them. I individually called them man hating bitch, one by one.

That's not how court works. You don't get to become emotionally unstable infront of the judge and call everyone names, AND get custody of your daughter.

She doesn't hate all men, she hates YOU. And if you were in my court room with your bullshit excuses about custody and your general demeanor which reeks bitter woman hating man, I'd dislike you too. You are lucky she didn't charge you with contempt of court.

You take your medicine and you shut the fuck up. You follow your custody plan and you collect evidence that will help. And then you refile for joint custody.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]zxzCLOCKWORKzxz8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm gonna guess, and I'm no man of the law per se, but I think you didn't get your kid because you are a crazy person mr. Notacrackheadodfficer.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Mensrights is just overflowing with tumblr feminist shaming tactics today. All bow to TV stars looking to make cash with ratings and speaking events.

[–]koobstylz5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Get therapy.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Feminist shaming tactic from tumblr

[–]Mac44917 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah, I don't believe you.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

4 years ago. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]Mac44918 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I still don't believe you but from various responses you've given in this thread and that one, and having a glance through your history...maybe it was for the best. You seem a tad unhinged.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]AZBeer907 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why do you keep repeating the same nonsensical line over and over again? Maybe you are in fact a crackhead, dispute your witty user name. Someone who harbors this much anger from something that was over 25 years ago is not a stable individual. No doubt this was a major event and issue in your life but you only have one life to live till your dust in the dirt. Move on with your life, crackhead. Your daughter is in her 20s so you can have any amount of involvement in her life that you want.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You mad

[–]AZBeer907 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nope. At the end of this comment I will live the rest of my life without giving you one spec of thought. But you sure as shit sound mad. Unsolicited advice from an internet stranger you'll never meet, either move on with your life and leave the anger behind or at the very least become literate enough that your pouty arguments come off more articulate than those of a middleschooler whose popsical fell on the floor.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The more insults people spew at me, the more goddess like she becomes. Enjoy your TV worshippijg brainwash life. Expect my angry diatribes every time someone posts anything about Judge Judy the serial child abuser.

[–]Keetek6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Full story, please.

[–]notacrackheadofficer6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/
That was 4 years ago. I react every time I see her worshipped like a goddess here by the TV brainwashed zombies, fapping to the glowing screen of ''truth''.

[–]Wiseguy30011 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Edit. I am too busy just now to do this properly. I am also too disgusted to carry on. I will step aside, and allow men's rights to crown their new queen. Fuck it. The hive mind wins, by forfeit.

I'm sorry but when you admit this in your AMA, that doesn't do wonders for your credibility.

What it does actually do is reveal yourself to be a bitter, angry, spiteful individual whom has now taken this resentment on fully. Let it drive your attitude and conduct.

Nobody is crowning Judge Judy a queen. They are showing solidarity in her support for equal custody.

So I challenge you: If you have something that will change minds here, present it. Don't link to an AMA you admit was done shoddily because you couldn't keep control of your emotions and rage.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]Wiseguy3007 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

SQUAWK Judge jury and executioner SQUAWK out to hurt SQUAWK vengeance SQUAWK TV goddess worship SQUAWK Polly want a cracker Whistle

Seriously, please stop spamming the same response over and over again.

EDIT: I also noticed this in your AMA:

I'm going to get progessivly more angry as court goes on. I know it's literally the judges job to observe, and learn about who these people are then make a best judgement decision in the childs best interest. But fuck her man hating ass, I bet if I call her a man hating bitch she will realize her bias against me

So you intended to come at the judge with your rage ablaze and be your own worst enemy in a court of law.

Yeah, I can't help but wonder what might have influenced the proceedings to conclude in such a way /s

[–]RedSugarPill-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Lol, this comment reminds me of my favorite song, "Holiday in Cambodia" by the Dead Kennedys.

"So, you've been to school for a year or two, and you know you've seen it all..."

Anyway, I hope you're enjoying your easy, sheltered life, wise guy.

[–]Wiseguy3002 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh and just who might you be, coming in here so suddenly and lending endorsement to rage-filled, incoherent rambling with no specifics whatsoever? One of his "Bussom Buddies" always out to defend him?

[–]Keetek2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thanks for responding, I'll read through that.

[–]aviciiavbdeadpunk4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

on the spot ama?

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Been there, got dismissed. https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/
No one in this sub believes that a family court/Juvenile delinquent judge from 1980s NY state could be anything but a goddess of angelic purity and perfection. The TV said so, as the TV soap washed all intelligence away.
Real men with real experiences in her real family court system are dismissed in favor of literal TV worship.

[–]Flatline3342 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Because you're not proving anything. Provide some evidence to back up your claim.

[–]estbgti3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

well...

[–]Jjmcgrayy3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What the fuck are you talking about.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You don't care.

[–]SideTraKd3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If a serial child killer comes out and says they have turned around and now want everyone to know that they love children dearly, who would believe them?

Yeah... I feel like you need to back that shit up...

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You want my court documents from the 80s, published here with no redactions, and proof of my name and address.. Got it.

[–]sapperRichter3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I bet you're a piece of shit and don't want to admit it.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The more insults people spew at me, the more goddess like she becomes. Enjoy your TV worshippijg brainwash life. Expect my angry diatribes every time someone posts anything about Judge Judy the serial child abuser.

[–]Sewer_Rat-Neat_Sewer5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It has everything to do with you, and nothing to do with her. We're talking about you and how you're acting. Not her.

Pay attention.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Shes a cunt and deserves my and thousands of others' anger.

[–]Sewer_Rat-Neat_Sewer4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Troll.

[–]HQR32 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

NO LIE BROTHER! In the 80s/90s, I was heavily involved in the most active fathers' rights organization in NYC (maybe the nation). This bitch was the scourge of fathers' rights. On TV she's snarky, on the bench she was just downright mean. Fathers trembled in her courtroom. Biased is too weak a term; she was more like a misandrous hangin-judge. She did countless men, she did me, she even fucked over the president of the organization.

Maybe she's mellowed--with money,age, money, fame, and, of course, money; but I suspect this newfound religion is just an act. If we accept her as some kind of icon, we're no different from the masses that passively swallow any and all of the media's gender lies.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank you. The TV worship here today is disappointing as fuck.
Only a few men here in this thread know the real story, and about 99% of people here seem to be dismissing our claims.
Somehow, people think family court in NY, under her, was a romp in the daisies. It's as if national glue sniffing day passed us by without our noticing it.

[–]Furbyrage1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

By the way you talk it sounds like youre a piece of shit and thats why she kept you from your kid.

[–]HangOnVoltaire1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah! My experience = everyone's experience!

Also, she is my least favorite person in history? Interesting perspective. Maybe you don't deserve your kids, you vermin scumbag cunt.

[–]RedSugarPill0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't doubt you. The family court system is luciferian trash, and it is hell on earth. The state hates families and wants to own all life on this planet. The state is the biggest threat to strong families.

If all these downvoting deniers paid attention (perhaps if they asked their friends what Truly happens in family court), they wouldn't be so goddam fucking stupid.

It pains me to see 'free' people enjoying their state-sponsored bondage.

Rants aside, I hope you have been able to heal your relationship with your children. God bless.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hi. Whoa a nice person in this thread of trash. Hello.
My daughter and I have the best relationship I could ever hope for, thanks. She makes great money, enjoys her job and life, and thanks me for it, all the time, and makes a point of telling me she does not thank her mom the way she does me.
Her mom is still a Jerry Garcia worshipping alcoholic pill gobbler, and I am a terrific, cultured person who is known as very funny and well read when you don't take my kids from me and cause me to wish cancer on you. That makes me hate someone... you know... fucking with my lovely daughter? That brings out a permanent grudge kind of thing when someone fucks with your kid. Judge Judy fucked with my kid. I hope she gets cancer, once again, for cancer wishing clarity.
It's a simple train of logic, to me. Mess with someone's kid: get cancer wished upon you.
She's the worst person I ever met, who directly did bad things to me and my kid. People here don't seem to get that part.
Imagine a juvenile detention facility in 1984 in Manhattan? shudder
Imagine how many mentally ill, abused children were further abused under her ''care''?

[–]RedSugarPill-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Those children who were stolen from their families, by the state, get abused by their state 'caregivers'. Child protective services is full of child molesters. Good on you for caring enough for your child to disallow the state from destroying her life. These are tough times, but your daughter is lucky to have at least one Truly Loving and Caring parent.

Much love and respect..

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank you. Love and respect to you.
Most people here have no idea what it was like in the 80s.
My daughter ended up being the one to tell me about the internet world of men's rights activists.

[–]RedSugarPill2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The problem with men's rights is that it's another limited (i.e., misguided & erroneous) sphere of consciousness--and untruth.

Men's rights is another flavor of "my rights". As a human species, we need to evolve beyond 'his', 'her', 'their' rights, and return to the inherent Birth Rights granted to us by Natural Law.

We are in the midst of the New Dark Age, but I believe the planet is slowly waking up to rediscovering Natural Law.

In the mean time, we have to keep trying to enlighten the laggards and the unbegun, which is why I visit these forums.

Unfortunately, I was just banned from r/twoxchromosomes, but I was surprised it took them that long to ban me, lol!

Anyway, here's to the Truth--Let it shine upon everyone, so that Humanity may return to its rightful home in the Garden of Eden.

God bless you and your family

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank you. Cheers

[–]broodmetal0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well judging from your comment I am sure you are a great father and most likely an even better husband/boyfriend...

[–]HoundDogs 9 years ago* [recovered] (12 children) | Copy Link

She's a good spokesperson. There has to be more people standing up for this issue than just fathers who have had the tragic mishap of going through a divorce and lost custody of their children.

[–]bexmex 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

There was a divorce lawyer on /r/bestof/ a few weeks back talking about this... his argument was that its actually a bit of a myth that courts grant women custody most of the time. What typically happens (90%) is that both parents agree before it gets to court what the custody arrangement will be, and the courts usually spend their time banging out financial stuff.

In the situation where custody is contested, its like Judge Judy says: its 50/50 who deserves custody. If a man can present evidence that the woman is unfit, he has a good chance of winning custody.

The problem is that the older judges (typically conservative men) think its woman's work to raise kids, and side with the mom more often than they should. The younger judges (women and moderate men) consider raising kids to be a mutual responsibility, and are much more likely to believe the father that the mother is unfit.

Counterintuitively, it looks like you're better off with a young female judge than an older male judge if you want custody of your kids...

EDIT: found it!

https://np.reddit.com/r/MensLib/comments/67xa50/why_does_custody_leave_favor_women_is_it_because/dgu35xq/

[–]HoundDogs 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yea, I have a friend with a vicious ex wife and he managed to get a fair deal in his custody arrangement. I do think the tide is turning. However, there is still a considerable amount of anti-male sentiment in the family court system. I don't want men to have an advantage, I want both kids to see both biological parents as much as possible as long as both are fit to care for them.

[–]GitEmSteveDave 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

She's a good spokesperson.

On some things, and I say that as a fan. Her view of Pitbulls is antiquated and I have heard her state that they have jaws that lock and other such mis-information. I agree with her when some idiot lets a dog that "doesn't get along with other animals" play with a strangers kid, and surprise, surprise, it bites, and she calls them idiots, but sometimes a case comes in with two dogs and she sides with the non-pitbull side more because she intimates they are more violence prone.

[–]sd4c 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I've owned dozens of dogs, played with or worked with hundreds. Many sizes and breeds. Owners from all walks of life. And with my own eyes I've only seen two dogs, ever, attack children. Both were pitbulls.

This wouldn't be a problem of any real importance except for whatever retarded political reasons, there are many places you can legally bring an attack-grade dog but are not allowed to carry a pistol (for example, parks and schools). Rendering a parent of small children defenseless against a pair of mauling pits (or other breed).

So until the 2nd amendment is properly restored, breed restrictions make perfect sense, to me.

[–]GitEmSteveDave 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I've only ever seen one dog attack multiple children, and that dog was a Husky, it attacked the children of both a family friend and a member of my family. I also had an Ex who took in a rescue husky which within a few months, killed her cat, whom she had had since she was a child.

[–]Daemonicus 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I also had an Ex who took in a rescue husky which within a few months, killed her cat, whom she had had since she was a child.

That's her own fault.

[–]NovaeDeArx 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Whoa now. As the owner of a very sweet, nurturing and wonderful husky that I would and have trusted babies with, I still would not trust just any husky with pets or children.

They, as a breed, have an incredibly strong prey drive. Combine that with the fact that they are a working breed where an aggressive attitude is selected for by some breeders (especially for sled dog breeders; I'm from Alaska and some sled dogs are stone cold motherfuckers) and I certainly wouldn't just say that any husky off the street is 100% safe.

They're great dogs, but you always need to know the characteristics and particular idiosyncrasies of your breeds if you want to bring dogs into your home, especially if you're not getting them as puppies.

So to summarize, you're not wrong, but you are being an asshole.

[–]Daemonicus 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So to summarize, you're not wrong, but you are being an asshole.

She should have done her research before she adopted a particular breed. My sympathy is with the cat in this scenario.

Seriously. Far too many people treat pets as if they're toys. I will not apologize for saying that she was the cause of her cat's death, and it wasn't the Husky's fault.

[–]GitEmSteveDave1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How about the puppy I mentioned first? It was bought from a breeder, and raised with another grown dog, who was as gentle as gentle could be, and also multiple cats. Still bit one family friends kid twice so the kid was terrified of it. The second was a family members kid, and she was a nurse, so it had to be reported because she brought the child to the ER.

[–]Uber_Nick 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Both were pitbulls

You should take your study to /r/askscience and have it peer reviewed

[–]sd4c 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No need:

"A five-year review of dog-bite injuries from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, published in 2009 in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, found that almost 51 percent of the attacks were from pit bulls, almost 9 percent were from Rottweilers and 6 percent were from mixes of those two breeds.

In other words, a whopping two-thirds of the hospital's dog-attack injuries involved just two breeds, pit bulls and Rottweilers.

Other studies confirm these statistics: A 15-year study published in 2009 in the American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology revealed that pit bulls, Rottweilers and German shepherds were responsible for the majority of fatal dog attacks in the state of Kentucky."

[–]MrTittyFingers 175 points176 points177 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She's seen so much shit, you cannot bullshit Judge Judy

[–]rubbarz 100 points101 points102 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

She deserves the $28 million she gets a year. She is awesome.

[–]koick 193 points194 points195 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

It's $47 million per year. She's actually the TOP grossing TV personality (by far).

I roll my eyes when she bitches about sending her grandkids through college. Listen lady, that single episode you just filmed is enough to easily afford an entire 4 year run.

[–]rubbarz 60 points61 points62 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

She could just make a scholarship for her grandkids then use that as a tax write off.

[–]koick 38 points39 points40 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She's a lawyer and so probably already has (although she certainly doesn't need the "break").

[–]myne 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just buy a college.

[–]IAmErinGray 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

If your donations are earmarked for a specific person, you cannot write them off.

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But, if they just happen to be the only person who fits the scholarship criteria...

[–]IAmErinGray 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sounds like you're advocating for tax fraud/tax evasion.

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sounds like I'm advocating following the law to the letter in a way that reduces your tax bill as much as possible.

[–]kitty_bean 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's probably not about being able to afford it. They aren't entitled to her money. Having to pay for something often helps you to appreciate the value of it.

[–]PruneBrothers 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I love this stat about her income: She gets $900,000 per day that she works on the show!

They tape the show two or three days every other week with each taping day resulting in about a week's worth of new cases. With a couple longer breaks throughout the year, in total they tape the show only 52 days a year. Not sure if she thinks of it that way or if it is even legitimate to think of it that way, but $900k per workday just blows my mind. Got that off both the TV Show's and her Wikipedia page.

[–]koick1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think it's a terrible statistic, she's not deserving of that kind of scratch. She makes in a few hours what most of us take over a decade to earn.

[–]errone0us1 point 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Consider millions of people are actively giving their time (ad money) to watch her.

[–]AFlyingNun 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She's got her good qualities, but she's also got some bad ones. Her commentary about money has often been a bad point for me.

Another thing I never liked about her is how harsh she can be with the unemployed. She always seems heavily biased against people without a job or with small time jobs (even remember one story where she seemed hostile towards a guy who was a welder and implied he probably doesn't make enough, when wtf welders actually earn quite well), and I've always been disgusted by that mindset. Seems lacking in empathy for those that may truly be going through a rough patch (not doubting she's seen plenty of deadbeats though, just saying don't judge by job alone), plus I know my dad is so obsessed with the job title he has that he'd willingly screw over his own child or his own brother if it meant advancing his social status. (yes he did both lol)

[–]koick 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree: in her mind unemployed instantly equals deadbeat.

[–]tracenator03 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Honestly, I don't think anyone in existence deserves that kind of money. That's more than you'd ever need in a lifetime.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile 189 points190 points191 points 9 years ago (44 children) | Copy Link

I would be Judge Judy's personal assistant/slave anytime. I love how she thinks.

[–]web69 9 years ago* [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

M'lady

[–]banana_slammock 83 points84 points85 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

M'Judge

[–]MisterBlu86 points 9 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

M'Honor

[–]fcbx347 57 points58 points59 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

tips wig

[–]B_mod 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There's nothing in this comment chain that I don't like.

[–]thesirblondie 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My Honor

[–]haha_supadupa 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

M`HODOR

[–]boogeym4n 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The villagers are leaving, sire.

[–]koick 93 points94 points95 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

She knows how to read people, seems mostly fair, and cuts to the chase, but her default mode seems to be rude and disrespectful.

[–]clownschooldropout 146 points147 points148 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Rude and disrespectful gets the ratings, and she knows that.

[–]koick 39 points40 points41 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That's true, but I think it's her natural demeanor (at least at "work") more than it's an act she's putting on just for ratings.

[–]sweetdarkarmy 96 points97 points98 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

After dealing with the public as a judge for that many years I would be curt too.

[–]Battybuddy 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think you almost HAVE to be that curt to even last that long. XD

[–]gammer1149 points 9 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

I had an uncle that produced her show and he said she was exactly the same on and off camera.

[–]33a5t1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

At least she's consistent

[–]NeurotoxEVE 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

as the most paid tv personality to date, I believe. She makes a lot of dough.

[–]katchaa 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nonsense. I'm rude and disrespectful to my wife all the time, and my kids refuse to even look at me.

[–]LoveCandiceSwanepoel 54 points55 points56 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Well to be fair what we see as rude and disrespectful is fairly common in New York. I was taken aback being from the south how blunt and unfiltered everyone there is. But that's just how they are, it's not like they're trying to be assholes it's just the culture.

[–]trahloc 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

it's not like they're trying to be assholes it's just the culture.

So they're cultured assholes? :D

[–]TOO_DAMN_FAT 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Worse than overly cultured cheese.

[–]punchgroin 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it's actually refreshing that everyone just airs out their shit. As long as you aren't making a new Yorker late for something, I've found them to be remarkably friendly and approachable. Watching a ball game with new Yorkers is a blast.

[–]Battybuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I think the New York attitude is based on everyone having somewhere they need to be NOW! they got no time to futz around. Judge Judy isn't futzing around in any of her cases.

[–]LoveCandiceSwanepoel 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Hmm but people I met were from New York State out in the boonies and they're the exact same way. They have nowhere to be at anytime yet they act the same. It's just a northern thing, doesn't really have anything to do with time as far as I could tell.

[–]Battybuddy1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You don't know if they have anywhere to be... XD might be a cultural difference thing as I've had and visited family both in the north and south, and having somewhere to be is expressed differently. I'm a north westerner, so I have my own thing.

[–]PM_ME_ANKLES_MLADY 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I met her at a wedding and she was very friendly, so I'm assuming the TV thing is just a persona for the show.

[–]BigAl265 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It may come across as rude, but she's just got no time for people's bullshit. After all the time she's been a judge and all the shit she's seen and heard, she does not suffer fools.

Her quite here is just awesome, she's the spokes person fathers need and deserve.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok I suppose you won't get much of an argument from me there.

[–]Smokeya 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

but her default mode seems to be rude and disrespectful.

I find i agree with everything she says 99% of the time, but cant stand her due to that. Hell i think we would be great friends based on just sharing a lot of the same ideas and values but the moment she raises her voice it just drives me nuts even though i totally agree with why shes chewing someone out. Its like shes right but shes wrong at the same time when she does that.

[–]koick 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree with you (although I wouldn't say 99%). I find it incredibly inappropriate for a judge to act the way she does. The courthouse should be a place of mutual respect. They are not there to kiss her feet, and she should have more honor in allowing the folks before her to present themselves before she goes off rolling her eyes, pointing fingers and snapping at people.

(I do know it's a TV show, but my point still stands since her judgements are essentially the same as going to a "real" court).

[–]Smokeya 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Honestly i think some of the people deserve to be treated the way she treats them. However ive also seen her just being bitchy at people who really just need a better explanation and didnt deserve the way they were treated.

Some people need a wake up call and i think she does a service by giving them a attitude they likely will remember for a while at least. Just not everyone deserves it and like you said the kissing her feet thing thats for sure when im like wth Judy? Not sure how many times ive heard "IM TALKING" when someone is just trying to respond with more information but shes going off on a bit of a tangent (which most of the time is something that needed to be said but its just a terrible way to do it).

[–]wtfareyousayingm8 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As a judge, you have to develop that disposition. It's not rude or disrespectful, it's her knowing through years of practising law that you can't get the facts of a case if you just let people go on with their story. Nor can you waste the time of the court letting someone drone on and on about unrelated topics.

To keep the story straight and judge the case properly, you need answers to questions. Not a story, not some unrelated bullshit, not an opinion. Judge asks specific question, judge requires specific answer.

On top of that you have to maintain an atmosphere of respect towards yourself as the judge so that people don't try to pull one over on you.

And lastly you WANT to put pressure on the people there, especially if you suspect someone is lying. Most people are bad at lying, and when put under strict pressure and questioning their story will start to break down and they will show signs of nervousness.

[–]NerdyWeightLifter 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judgmental even ...

[–]Moinseur_Garnier 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Excuse me?

[–]Wraeclast_Exile 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

hah!

[–]Ruggsii 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nice username

[–]loissemuter 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy is known for her tough talk. She also sees through excuses and bull puck.

[–]LewdRudeJude1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She seems like she'd be into that.

[–]pterofactyl7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She's apparently a really warm lady. She'd probably enjoy him as a friend more

[–]cheers_grills7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

OP gets friendzoned even in his fantasies.

[–]ForcedSexWithPlants1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

He's a fuck boi that doesn't even get fucked

[–]ColeSloth-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think she often forms hard opinions about things that you can tell she doesn't fully grasp. She's a little too full of herself.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ok, I suppose you're right there.

[–]Ryuksapple84 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

My respect for Judy just sky rocketed today. The look on the face of that mom says it all. Give me a fucking break, how can you ever be a good parent by keeping your child away from the father? Triggered

[–]wonderlandtrip 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I love how shocked she looks. You made a kid with him, now live with it. If you dont like him, maybe you shouldnt have had his child.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (104 children) | Copy Link

You guys should move to Sweden. We do half of the parenting here and joint custody is assumed by the divorce papers.

[–]EtherMan 48 points49 points50 points 9 years ago (60 children) | Copy Link

Up until the mother doesn't want to do that custody arrangement, and voila, mother has sole custody. Joint custody happens in 97% of the cases of married couples, but it's also 94% of the cases in the US, or 88% for unmarried couples in Sweden, and I can't find the statistics for the same in the US. So the vast majority of the cases, the parents are adult enough to actually be able to work together for the best of the children, regardless if it's Sweden or the US, though Sweden is somewhat better it seems at making joint custody work. But looking at just the cases where they for whatever reason can't do that, the outlook is grim indeed, because it's less than half a percent where the father has sole custody... less than HALF A FUCKING PERCENT, where in the US, it's about 4%. So US is, as abysmally bad as it is, still actually more fair on who gets sole custody, than Sweden is.

[–]Source_or_gtfo 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"Joint custody" in legal terms doesn't mean what it does to most people in common language. It can mean as little as a right to access to information about the child. Even "joint physical custody" just means the child spending time with both parents according to a court-appointed schedule.

[–]theBrineySeaMan 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So my Nephews live with my brother in Virginia during School, but they come back and live with their mother in New Mexico for June and July. There's no court order in effect, so what is the legal definition for this arrangement?

[–]MaxJohnson15 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can't fight the reddit 'Scandinavian countries do everything better' circle jerk.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think the lack of antagonistic divorce culture in Sweden will lead to the lack of sole custody for men.

[–]EtherMan2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You mean except that the number isn't all that different from the US on that? If the couples can work together in joint custody, great. If they can't, well that's when we're within the context of the discussion. And as I pointed out, Sweden is RIDICULOUSLY biased against men for sole custody. If mother wants sole custody, they get it.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm sorry, can you walk me through these numbers again, I don't understand why low sole custody for men means than men have less rights? What makes you think that men here are being deprived of custody that they want?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I didn't say less rights. I said the courts were heavily biased. And seriously... You don't think it's bias when men have custody in less than half a percent of the cases? You think that it's somehow that men don't want their kids that's responsible for that kind of discrepancy?

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Courts don't preside over divorces in Sweden in any meaningful way unless there is a dispute. Lawyers are involved never. How do you know these numbers are due to men losing disputes rather than men voluntarily not taking sole custody because they opt for joint instead?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So you actually believe that less than half a percent of male parents actually want to care for their kids? You're a friggin retard if you actually believe that...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No, they want to care for the kids in joint custody. Men here do 50% of the parenting when parents are together, why would that change if they were apart? People don't move around here much for jobs so divorced couples are likely to be living in the same city close or each other.

What's the data on Swedish contested custody where the courts refuse the father access and give it to the mother. That's the data you need to pass judgement.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No, they want to care for the kids in joint custody. Men here do 50% of the parenting when parents are together, why would that change if they were apart? People don't move around here much for jobs so divorced couples are likely to be living in the same city close or each other.

Right. And those cases make up for 97% of married couples, or 88% of unmarried couples, out of the whole, as I pointed out already... Of the 3%, and 12% remaining, STILL, only less than half a percent of fathers have sole custody. The rest, are exclusive the mother... That's still AT BEST, more than 6 to 1 discrepancy... If looking at only the best case comparison there. Well SCB don't actually have more precise statistic than "less than half a percent", so for best, we're assuming that less than half a percent, means 0.49%. And we're restricting it to just the married couples specifically because they manage to cooperate better. If looking at best case for unmarried couples, it's at BEST a 24 to 1 discrepancy... You're a total loonie if you actually believe, than 23 out of 24 fathers, don't want to care for their own children... And that is a BEST CASE... And we can't even calculate a worst case because they don't measure more precise than full integer percentages...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

And to be clear you are assuming in those cases that it goes before a judge and the judge finds in favour of the mother? What's your evidence?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

And thus we're back to that your argument boils down to a claim that 23 out of 24 fathers don't want to care for their child and I say you're a fucking lunatic if you actually believe that...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Without the data it's impossible to know. All I know (as a divorcee in Sweden with several friends who are divorced or who have divorced parents) Divorces are never contested here. That tiny percentage could just be conservative muslims (of which there are many in Sweden) who chose not to take custody.

I don't have an agenda aside from knowing the truth. I came to this thread from r/all not men's rights.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

All I know (as a divorcee in Sweden with several friends who are divorced or who have divorced parents) Divorces are never contested here.

Divorces? We're not talking about divorces, we're talking about child custody...

That tiny percentage could just be conservative muslims (of which there are many in Sweden) who chose not to take custody.

Wtf? How racist can you be? Wow... Just wow...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm simply postulating other potential reasons for this data other than 'judges are biased towards men' because as a resident here I think that notion is complete bullshit. The culture here is 3000% more supportive of men taking care of kids than the USA. Look up 'pappaledighet'

Sorry for using the term 'divorce' when I actually meant 'dissolution of legal partnerships'. In Sweden if you live together you are considered married by law and must register your separation if you chose to do so including child custody. Oh hey look another reason why the data might not be 'judges are biased towards men'.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm simply postulating other potential reasons for this data other than 'judges are biased towards men' because as a resident here I think that notion is complete bullshit. The culture here is 3000% more supportive of men taking care of kids than the USA. Look up 'pappaledighet'

That's just pure BS. I'm sorry but it is. Sweden is very supportive of fathers taking care of kids... AS LONG AS that father is accompanied by a mother. If you're by yourself, you're considered to be the scum of the earth...

Sorry for using the term 'divorce' when I actually meant 'dissolution of legal partnerships'.

Still not what we're talking about... The discussion is about custody, not divorce or dissolution of legal partnerships. Custody, nothing else.

In Sweden if you live together you are considered married by law and must register your separation if you chose to do so including child custody.

Not true. You only have to register who takes the kids. You don't have to register your dissolution. Especially considering you don't even have to register your partnership in the first place either.

Oh hey look another reason why the data might not be 'judges are biased towards men'.

Err... What? You have presented nothing that explains the 1 to 24 discrepancy or the 1 to 6.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You need supporting evidence for the 'scum of the earth' and the lack of need to dissolve a civil partnership.

Here's the form to dissolve the latter.

http://www.domstol.se/Publikationer/Blanketter/Andra_sprak/DV_169_eng.doc

I did offer a potential reason for the discrepancy. You rejected both of them with 'you are a looney' and 'you area racist'.

Why are you so angry. Maybe provide a hit of backstory?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You need supporting evidence for the 'scum of the earth'

What part of the ONE TO FUCKING TWENTY FOUR AT BEST is it you do not understand? Are you seriously THAT fucking bad at first grade math?

and the lack of need to dissolve a civil partnership.

Now you're mixing up the words there. A civil partnership is a specific meaning from what you used earlier. A civil partnership, is a registered partnership and that does indeed need to be filed that it has ended. You previously claimed it was needed for "divorce or dissolution of legal partnerships", for which it is NOT true, and I pointed out why, because they don't need to be registered in the first place so there's not necessarily anything to unregister. I'm in a legal partnership with my wife, and I also happen to be married to her. But those are two completely separate things. A legal partnership, just means that it's two consenting adults in some form of relationship, and applies from when you start dating... Do you think you need to register something if you decide to not go on that second date with someone you just met?

I did offer a potential reason for the discrepancy. You rejected both of them with 'you are a looney' and 'you area racist'.

Yep. You're definitely a lunatic if you ACTUALLY believe that 23 out of 24 fathers don't want to take care of their kids... That's just the facts. You can disagree all you want, but you and I both know that it's just not true... As for your muslim comment that conservative muslims don't want their kids, well now you're still adding the above and we're still on that you're still claiming that 23 out of 24 fathers don't want to care for their own kid and we both know that's just plain absurd, but you're also attaching that to being about muslims, which makes you a racist as well. So yep, as long as you hold those two beliefs, you are indeed a racist and a lunatic.

Why are you so angry. Maybe provide a hit of backstory?

Why do you interpret any sort of disagreement as anyone being angry? That actually tells a lot about you that you think that...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's the swearing and caps that makes you come across as angry. Maybe I should rephrase. Why do you swear and use caps when I'm not? What's the backstory?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's called emphasis. Something I use since you seem to have trouble grasping exactly what the problem is...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

When people disagree with you you swear and talk in all caps. Why do you do that if you aren't angry?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Again, it's called emphasis...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What's the backstory on why you use caps and swearing for emphasis when talking to a stranger on the internet and they 'have troubles grasping exactly what the problem is' (otherwise known as 'disagreeing')?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You having trouble grasping where the problem is, isn't disagreement. You having trouble grasping where the problem is, is you having trouble grasping where the problem is...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nope, you need to provide evidence that what you are suggesting is the problem actually is the problem. This is what reasonable discussion is, not swearing and all-capping people who question whether your assumption is correct.

Find me evidence that your interpretation of the data (that the men who aren't getting sole custody in Sweden are finding themselves in that situation because judges consider them the 'scum of the earth', rather than because men are choosing not to take custody by choice) is correct.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nope, you need to provide evidence that what you are suggesting is the problem actually is the problem. This is what reasonable discussion is, not swearing and all-capping people who question whether your assumption is correct.

No. The first thing we have to establish is that you understand WHAT the problem is... THEN we can go on to look at WHY that problem is. You have yet to even acknowledge that there IS a problem, let alone WHAT that problem is...

Find me evidence that your interpretation of the data (that the men who aren't getting sole custody in Sweden are finding themselves in that situation because judges consider them the 'scum of the earth', rather than because men are choosing not to take custody by choice) is correct.

That's simply not what I said... You fail first grade reading comprehension...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't understand why those statistics are a 'problem' so rather than 'emphasise' why not use your powers of persuasion to explain?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So you don't see a problem with a best case scenario of 1 to 24. Right. There's no way to explain that other than that you're a lunatic...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Again, insults. This isn't how you debate. Show me evidence that your assumption is correct.

I can assure you I'm not a 'lunatic' - I have no mental illness. That's just a get out for the fact you have no evidence to support your assumption.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yep... Definitely going to call a lunatic a lunatic. And again there is no evidence that can be presented to show that that is a problem. You're doing the equivalent of requesting evidence that paying only 4 cent to one person, and a dollar to someone else, for the same work is a problem (no not a reference to the wage gap stuff)... Once you've accepted that a 1 to 24 difference IS a problem, we can begin discussing evidence for the what and why of it, but that cannot even begin until you understand that there even is a problem with that situation. And the inherent problem of a 1 to 24 difference is something even 3 year olds understand and if you don't believe me, try giving a pair of 3 year old twins ice cream. 1 scoop to one of them, 24 scoops to another and look at their reactions. And someone claiming to be a grown up, that cannot understand that same thing, means your mental ability is less than that of a three year old, for at the very least, that specific area of understanding...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There's a simple way of finding out if the data you found is problematic.

You find out in what proportion of the instances where women take sole custody in Sweden the father contested it, it went to court and despite the father's protestations the judge found in favor of sole custody for the mother. This is your 'scum of the earth' hypothesis.

Your analogies are not good. Ice cream and money are things that people like and have basically no downside to taking. Taking care of kids is fucking hard work, often not rewarding at all and not everyone wants to do it. Men chose not to be around a lot more than people chose not to collect wages or eat free ice cream.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You find out in what proportion of the instances where women take sole custody in Sweden the father contested it, it went to court and despite the father's protestations the judge found in favor of sole custody for the mother. This is your 'scum of the earth' hypothesis.

So you're claiming that a 1 to 24 is only a problem, if it's contested... How do you then know that fathers are neglecting to contest based on the futility? And even if that was the case,, you don't find it to be a problem then that 23 out of 24 fathers are not disputing sole custody to the mother? See this is why you're a raving lunatic... Because your argument really does boil down to a claim that 23 out of 24 fathers don't actually want to care for their child... And that's completely and utterly ABSURD.

Your analogies are not good. Ice cream and money are things that people like and have basically no downside to taking. Taking care of kids is fucking hard work, often not rewarding at all and not everyone wants to do it. Men chose not to be around a lot more than people chose not to collect wages or eat free ice cream.

BULLSHIT. Total and utter BULLSHIT. I also wasn't comparing kids to ice cream... You failed first grade reading comprehension... again... You're not exactly making a good case for yourself that you really do have a mental ability beyond that of a 2 year old...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So you're claiming that a 1 to 24 is only a problem, if it's contested... Nope, you are claiming this data can be extrapolated to mean that 'Sweden' considers men who want to parent alone 'the scum of the earth'. I'm yet to see any evidence for that.

How do you then know that fathers are neglecting to contest based on the futility?

Because the culture here is very supportive of fathers rearing children. As you will know from your extensive research into Swedish parenting culture, fathers are encouraged by the state from from taking sole parenting responsibility while the mother works in the pappaledighet system.

you don't find it to be a problem then that 23 out of 24 fathers are not disputing sole custody to the mother?

Why do you assume that legal custody status infers who is actually doing child care? Maybe these fathers don't care about the legal status, they are unmarried (so the mother automatically gets custody), they separate, he takes care of the kid 50/50 but never bothers to take legal custody because it doesn't matter?

To me the definition of lunacy might be someone that looks at this data and infers that 'Sweden' considers sole parenting fathers 'the scum of the earth'.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Because the culture here is very supportive of fathers rearing children. As you will know from your extensive research into Swedish parenting culture, fathers are encouraged by the state from from taking sole parenting responsibility while the mother works in the pappaledighet system.

And again you're on the next step already... You have not even acknowledged the first step and until you do, there can be no discussion about the next step. I'm well aware of how "pappaledighet" works, and I'm sorry but it's simply not relevant to the discussion.

Why do you assume that legal custody status infers who is actually doing child care?

Because when filing for custody, you SWEAR UNDER OATH, that they are the one caring for the child. In a sole custody case, there is 1 and ONLY 1 caretaker for the child. At best, a father in such a case has visitation rights, but in no way are they allowed to care for the child... Heck they're not even legally freely able to friggin put clothes on the child because that's then an external gift with all the tax implications that are involved in that.

Maybe these fathers don't care about the legal status, they are unmarried (so the mother automatically gets custody), they separate, he takes care of the kid 50/50 but never bothers to take legal custody because it doesn't matter?

Ah yes, because fraud involving who the caretaker of your child is such a reasonable explanation. Do you understand that both parents WOULD GO TO JAIL FOR THAT? No parent in their right mind would ever even consider that even remotely to be an option. And no, the mother does not automatically get custody if they are unmarried. You haven't even got the basics of custody right... If they are unmarried, then mother is at birth, ASKED if she wants to register someone as the father or not. If she declines, she can at any point do so. If they separate prior to any such registration, then, and ONLY THEN, does she have sole custody as a default. Not automatic, just default. If they break up now, and he still has 50% of the custody, but she still has not registered him as a father, nor register that he has shared custody... That's legally what's known as fraud against the state, and has a minimum of 3 month in jail. In your example, the neglect of the filing isn't malicious, so at least your children won't be taken from you, but they will be living with relatives during your stay behind bars... Just don't do that. While chances of being found out are relatively low, no sane parent is going to take the risks of that, and no sane parent isn't going to actually not even going to read up on that this is what they have to do... That you claim to have gone through this, and not know about it... just confirms that you are indeed a lunatic.

To me the definition of lunacy might be someone that looks at this data and infers that 'Sweden' considers sole parenting fathers 'the scum of the earth'.

I didn't say that Sweden as a country does... Read again.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Vad är svensk ordet för 'fraud against the state'?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Bedrägeri mot staten.

Crimes in Sweden are split in 3 categories. Crime against the state, crime against an individual, or crime against the public. All crimes are in one or more of the categories. Fraud can be in all three depending on who exactly is the target of the fraud.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Heck they're not even legally freely able to friggin put clothes on the child because that's then an external gift with all the tax implications that are involved in that.

Hmmmm. Which specific Swedish tax are you talking about?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That depends exactly where you and your child lives. Just because Sweden has done away with the direct tax on gifts, doesn't mean that all other countries have, nor does it mean that there are no taxes involved in giving things. It all depends on how much you give, what you give and so on. Depending on amount and how often, and how old the child is, it can even be considered an employment.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

We are talking about Sweden. Gåvoskatt was abolished in 2005.

I'm not sure you are qualified to talk about Sweden. I think you are talking about the US and pretending these laws also apply to Sweden.

We are only talking about Sweden.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I JUST said we don't have the direct tax anymore... That doesn't mean you can give anything, or any amount for whatever reason you want and have it be free of tax. That's not how it works. Your employer could just simply claim that your wage is a gift if that was true. But I'm sorry but that's just simply not how that works.

And no, I'm not talking about the US.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Did you know there are only 5 positive results in the whole internet for

barnomsorg "Bedrägeri mot staten."

and 50k results for

child custody "fraud against the state"

Are you sure you are talking about Sweden?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm quite sure yes... Using the number of google results as indicative of anything is just hilariously ignorant...

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Not really. It just proves you are US based and using US terminology in the argument (about Sweden) with no knowledge of Swedish law. It's embarrassing.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Except I'm not... While I am a US citizen, I have not been living there steadily for over 40 years now. And yup, I know nothing of Swedish law. I was just a criminal defense lawyer here for years before switching to civil proceedings... But I know nothing... You're absolutely hilariously ignorant.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yep. So knowledgeable about Swedish law you talked about 'external gift' tax here! Classic.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Wait, you actually thought "external gift" was a reference to a legal concept? No. We're not in a court here. I'm simply using terminology to confer a meaning, in this case, a gift to someone that is not part of your own economy.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You said it would be subject to tax implications! And you couldn't find any data on wether those cases were contested or not! Not fooling anyone!

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You said it would be subject to tax implications!

And indeed it is.

And you couldn't find any data on wether those cases were contested or not!

What cases? You haven't even acknowledged there even is a problem with a 1 to 24 difference which is the first step. I have never said that I would have any problems finding if those cases where contested or not, that's easy enough just looking at their data... But until the question of if it's a problem or not is settled, it's irrelevant to discuss why the situation is what it is.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tell me the tax implications of me buying my kid clothes in Sweden if we are separated! Can't wait!

When you are being the big grown up advocat do you shout at people and call them loonies if they don't agree with your interpretation of data? :D

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Tell me the tax implications of me buying my kid clothes in Sweden if we are separated! Can't wait!

It's not YOUR kid if you have no registered custody. It's someone ELSE's kid. As for what the tax implications are, again, it depends on the amount, why, and where. It's not as simple as just saying it's clothes, therefor tax exempt.

When you are being the big grown up advocat do you shout at people and call them loonies if they don't agree with your interpretation of data? :D

Advocat? Yea you're a kid... You're not the adult you claimed to be. While it doesn't matter to me what age you are, that you're obviously not telling the truth is... I have no interest in discussing anything with someone who's lying about their age.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You can give any amount of money or items of value to anyone in Sweden irrespective of the relationship with no tax implications as long as there is no services offered in return. If there are services offered in return the person receiving would either have to register it as income on their declaration or if they were an employee of the giver the giver would need to pay social charges at 32% and the receiver income tax at a percentage defined by their 'tax table'. I'm a CEO running a technology business here in Sweden so I'm very familiar with tax law here. You, on the other hand are a fake! Why don't you head off and do some studying of 'external tax' laws!! :D

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You can give any amount of money or items of value to anyone in Sweden irrespective of the relationship with no tax implications as long as there is no services offered in return.

Simply not true, sorry. That's not what the abolishing of the tax on gifts actually meant.

I'm a CEO running a technology business here in Sweden

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Oh that's just adorable. The kid thinks he's a CEO now too.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Are you in Stockholm? Wanna meet up for a coffee? I'm on Södermalm 9-5 most days.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I would never divulge anything like that on an online forum that connects to this nickname. Just not going to happen.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So you are a fake!! Thought we could grab a coffee, man to man. Or maybe you aren't a man or in Sweden?

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hahaha. Dude. The time where you could get others to do things just by claiming they're fake or afraid if they don't, is over when you leave kindergarten. Enjoy that time while it lasts, but it's not gonna work on anyone older.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Got it. Fake. American person pretending to know stuff about Sweden on Reddit.

[–]EtherMan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's so adorable to see you squirm.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nothing more squirmy than a supposedly grown man (lol) noping out of a face to face meeting. There's a coffee place on the ground floor of the food hall at medis, opposite the kebab place. Anytime next week, office hours. Tell me the time!

[–]Badgerz92 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

American MRAs have been trying to make that happen since the 70s, but feminists have been fighting against us the whole time. We're finally starting to make progress now that feminism is losing it's influence and more people are supporting MRAs

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's feminism that has created this equality in Sweden.

[–]Badgerz922 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Really? That's surprising, because in the US it's definitely feminism that has prevented this equality. We would have had it a long time ago if not for feminists fighting against it.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why? Taking care of kids means you can't work at all or less. If you force the kids on the mother she can't work. Why would feminists want the guys to have an easy life with no childcare?

[–]bufedad2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why would feminists want the guys to have an easy life with no childcare?

I'd explain it to you, but why not just read their own opinion on the matter.

National Organization for Women

NOW ACTION ALERT ON "FATHERS' RIGHTS"

WHEREAS organizations advocating "fathers' rights," whose members consist of non-custodial parents, their attorneys and their allies, are a growing force in our country; and

WHEREAS the objectives of these groups are to increase restrictions and limits on custodial parents' rights and to decrease child support obligations of non-custodial parents by using the abuse of power in order to control in the same fashion as do batterers; and

WHEREAS these groups are fulfilling their objectives by forming political alliances with conservative Republican legislators and others and by working for the adoption of legislation such as presumption of joint custody, penalties for "false reporting" of domestic and child abuse and mediation instead of court hearings; and

WHEREAS the success of these groups will be harmful to all women but especially harmful to battered and abused women and children; and

WHEREAS the efforts of well-financed "fathers' rights" groups are expanding from a few states into many more, sharing research and tactics state by state; and

WHEREAS many judges and attorneys are still biased against women and fathers are awarded custody 70% of the time when they seek it per the Association of Child Enforcement Support (ACES);

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the National Organization for Women (NOW) begin a national alert to inform members about these "fathers' rights" groups and their objectives through articles in the National Now Times (NNT); and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as a part of this alert, NOW establish a clearinghouse for related information by sharing with NOW state and local Chapters the available means to challenge such groups, including the current research on custody and support, sample legislation, expert witnesses, and work done by NOW and other groups in states where "fathers' rights" groups have been active; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NOW encourage state and local Chapters to conduct and coordinate divorce/custody court watch projects to facilitate removal of biased judges; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that NOW report to the 1997 National Conference on the status and result of this national alert whereupon its continuation or expansion will be considered.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Feminists concerns are that the rights of the mother (near total control of the child) are reduced and the child support is reduced if custody is shared. This is negative for women, and men are evil, so this must be their true intent.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't see any reasoning against stopping men taking care of kids. I see action against other political groups. Do you have any specific information from US feminists about why they feel women should be doing most the parenting? Seems contradictory to feminism as I know it here in socialist, feminist Northern Europe.

[–]bufedad2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't see any reasoning against stopping men taking care of kids. I see action against other political groups.

They aren't trying to stop men from getting equal custody, they are just fighting those that are trying to help men get equal custody.

That's really the argument you are going with?

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why are they fighting those people trying to get equal custody? Is it because those groups are also involved in other issues?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

WHEREAS the success of these groups will be harmful to all women but especially harmful to battered and abused women and children; and

Apparently, fathers getting equal access to their kids Is harmful to women

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Is it because those groups are also involved in other issues?

You need to prove that they are specifically talking about ONLY child custody here and not the other stated aims of Men's Rights groups.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I provided you with their own words. I don't have to prove they aren't talking about things they didn't say. I don't have to prove a negative. I'd you think they are talking about something else, be my guest and support your belief with evidence.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

But the words are talking about everything that Men's Rights groups are working on, not just custody - so it doesn't support your argument at all.

Nevermind that no feminist would fight for a woman parenting while the man works. That's like suggesting communists are fighting for private ownership of industry.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No, it talks about what the father's rights group trying to get equal custody.

They are convinced that the only reason a man could want custody is to hurt the mother

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Where does it say that they are convinced of that? Or is there some other source you have for that.

All I'm seeing is feminist groups not liking men's rights groups in general, which seems reasonable. Vice versa also true.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

WHEREAS the objectives of these groups are to increase restrictions and limits on custodial parents' rights and to decrease child support obligations of non-custodial parents by using the abuse of power in order to control in the same fashion as do batterers; and

It's like you didn't even bother to read it.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Of course I read it.

WHEREAS the objectives of these groups are to increase restrictions and limits on custodial parents' rights

What specifically are they referring to here? I see no mention of fathers or granting fathers custody, I see non-gendered language about any parent who has custody.

and to decrease child support obligations of non-custodial parents

This is not relevant to the discussion.

Find me a section or other quote where a feminist group says they prefer the mother to take care of kids and the men to work

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What specifically are they referring to here? I see no mention of fathers or granting fathers custody, I see non-gendered language about any parent who has custody.

They are referring to the fact that granting shared custody to two parents puts restrictions and limits on the mother's rights. If you take 100% and make that 50%, then that is restricted and limited.

This is not relevant to the discussion.

and how is that not relevant to the discussion? Sharing custody reduces the child support paid to the mother. That's not acceptable and is harmful to women.

Find me a section or other quote where a feminist group says they prefer the mother to take care of kids and the men to work

Since no one has made that claim anywhere, why would I do that?

The claim is that feminists are fighting against equality in custody. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have presented you with evidence they are fighting against equality in custody. You don't seem to care, as long as you, like them, can find a way to justify it.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm sorry you are making inferences from this written statement that I'm not able to make. If you can find more clear supporting evidence for you claim that feminist groups want women to stay at home with the kids and men to work, please share them.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What inferences am I making?

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The inference that "WHEREAS the objectives of these groups are to increase restrictions and limits on custodial parents' rights" is specifically referring to fathers increasing restrictions on the rights of mothers.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The inference that "WHEREAS the objectives of these groups are to increase restrictions and limits on custodial parents' rights" is specifically referring to fathers increasing restrictions on the rights of mothers.

In a statement from the National Organization for Women against Fathers' Rights Groups.

You think it's an inference to say that they are talking about fathers (the objectives of these groups... in a statement against Fathers' Rights groups) increasing the rights of mothers (which would be the other parent).

What other possible interpretation of that do you believe exists?

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why don't they use the term 'mother' rather than 'custodial parent'?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why don't they use the term 'mother' rather than 'custodial parent'?

Why are you asking me?

I asked you a question you seem to be ignoring... what other interpretations would there be?

Are you saying that you believe that NOW is acting in the interest of custodial parents, regardless of gender?

If that were the case, this would be a problem for custodial parents, not women (and not especially battered women).

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm just looking at the text by itself, considering you've offered no other supporting information or context.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Le'ts look at the text by itself.

WHEREAS organizations advocating "fathers' rights," whose members consist of non-custodial parents, their attorneys and their allies, are a growing force in our country; and

The father's rights groups are the non-custodial parents. Right there in the text itself (had you read it... you wouldn't have had to have it pointed out).

WHEREAS the objectives of these groups are to increase restrictions and limits on custodial parents' rights and to decrease child support obligations of non-custodial parents by using the abuse of power in order to control in the same fashion as do batterers; and

WHEREAS the success of these groups will be harmful to all women but especially harmful to battered and abused women and children; and

The detriment of these actions will be harmful to women (i.e. the custodial parents).

But, I get that you're trolling at this point. So, there's your evidence. Deny it if you want. That's fine. That's what we've come to accept from feminists.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why don't they refer directly to fathers and mothers? What's your theory?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Truly, at this point, you're trolling. Which is fine, because it means you already know

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I really don't know why they would call out gender if they are a political movement about gender. It makes me think they aren't about gender.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Trolls gotta troll

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I know the truth of the matter doesn't really concern you much, but here... read this particular link

https://web.archive.org/web/20050129095244/http://www.now.org/nnt/03-97/father.html

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's about forced joint custody, not preventing fathers from getting sole custody.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's about default shared custody.

No one is talking about getting father's sole custody.

No one wants father's to force mothers out of their kids lives.

Father's rights group are pushing for shared custody, not sole custody.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why are men's rights groups not fighting for more fathers having sole custody?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why are men's rights groups not fighting for more fathers having sole custody?

Because that's not equality.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So to be clear, men's rights activists want every single separate couple to share both parenting and work 50/50?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So to be clear, men's rights activists want every single separate couple to share both parenting and work 50/50?

More or less

Courts are free to adjust if one parent is unfit.

And parents are free to adjust if they agree something else is better.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ok, so men's rights activists fight really hard in circumstances where the man wants sole custody?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ok, so men's rights activists fight really hard in circumstances where the man wants sole custody?

We don't advocate sole custody, unless one parent is unfit, or both parents are agreed.

[–]Badgerz921 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why?

American feminists hate men, and therefore hate fathers.

Why would feminists want the guys to have an easy life with no childcare?

I guess work and careers are different in Sweden. Being the breadwinner in the US means long hours at a stressful job, while being left out of your children's lives. Women don't want that. Men don't either, but women expect men to be the breadwinner. After divorce, the mother doesn't have to work because the alimony and child support laws feminists put in place force the man to continue being the breadwinner after divorce, while the mother is allowed to take care of her children.

[–]Dagobert_The_Second1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Can you share with me some statements from feminist groups where they say they don't want women to work and they'd rather they'd stay at home and take care of the kids? This is contrary to any form of feminism I've ever heard of.

[–]untildeath 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nice, my ex got the children and has opted to "homeschool" them. Now they are poisoned to hated me and are completely unprepared for adult life. I wish this sentiment was present when I was getting my divorce.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-35 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She was my family court judge, trumpeted her male hatred, and fucked over hundreds of dads like me.
If Kissinger says he's for world peace, does everyone applaud?
She is an evil cunt and I hope very bad painful ailments wrack her life.
Hundreds of single dads fucked over by her agree.
And then she said some lies on TV and you all applaud.
My least favorite thing about this sub is the Judge Judy worship. She is literally the worst enemy to men's rights here, and thousands upvote her blah blah. Her actions were abhorrent and pure evil, ramped up to medusa meets triple headed satan. Her words are nothing compared to the torture she doled out personally, yelling in MY face, directly, from 10 feet away, fucking me over about time with my daughter.
I cannot imagine hating anyone more than the cunt who sided with my kid'sdrunken mom, no matter what.
Fuck judge judy in the ass with barbed wire wrapped red hot pokers.
Judge judy is an evil evil cunt. Nothing more.
''But she said something on TV, to boost her ratings, and look good, like her PR manager told her to.'' does not negate the fact that she revelled in torture, dancing merrily on the stomped hearts of children and fathers.
She is a sadistic torture expert, out to hurt others for fun, grinning maniacly as she applies the screws.
MY memories are real. The rest of you watched a TV show for reference.
I know her personally, was personally tortured by her, she weilded evil lording power over my innocent child, directly and personally, and I have called her a man hating bitch, right out in court.
''Oh my but the TV made her look good, cuz she said things <gasp>''
Fuck her.
Anyone who keeps supporting her lies is not my friend at all.

[–]ATiBright97 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"and I have called her a man hating bitch, right out in court."

You gave a very good impression in court I imagine. How could she not award you custody with how reasonable and respectful you sound.

I'm not saying your lying, but your post history suggests you do drugs, so sounds like a lose lose situation for the kid.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-31 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I hope someone else gets cancer now, too! I am wishing for it.
Guess who that might be?
It's someone in this sub. Someone who just responded to me.
I won't name names, but see if you can guess.
I smoke cannabis, due to a seizure condition that is abated by cannabis.
I am openly anti alcohol and anti all other drugs in my 8 years of commenting.
So you openly lied about ''drugs'' to try and discredit me, as I talked about my real life experiences with a known child torturer.
You seem black hearted and unfeeling, and out to mock those who were tortured by a cunt bitch fake TV star.
Don't forget about my cancer wish for an unnamed user here.
Trust the TV over real people.

[–]TheRealHanBrolo40 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oi. Fuck off with this stupid shit you're spouting. Whether or not it's medical you're still using drugs. I've seen children be taken because a parent was on prescription opioids they had to have for pain management.

As for you wishing cancer on somebody? I'm surprised anyone ever tolerated you long enough to get them pregnant you toxic piece of filth. That's even if this story is true. Millions suffer through that shit every goddamn day and you wanna sit there and say that shit? Go fuck yourself with a cactus dude.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Personal attack number 202. based on TV goddess worship.

[–]CyberDagger12 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Based on you being a proper cunt. Your first implession was bad, your following impressions even worse. Sometimes, even accounting for biases, awarding custody to the mother is the right choice. Seems like yours was one of those cases. Women don't have a monopoly on being shitty people.

[–]Papa_Gamble4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think this guy might have a monopoly on being a shitty person. P.S. do less drugs and the law might take you more seriously.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]CyberDagger5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I've never watched Judge Judy, I'm not even American. There's no TV worship to be had there. You're just a cunt, is all.

[–]Papa_Gamble2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nailed it.

[–]TheRealHanBrolo3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If you had any semblance of reading comprehension you would notice I didn't mention her once in my post. At all. I was directing it at you

[–]notacrackheadofficer-3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]torinato34 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're discrediting yourself by say all this hateful shit. you're not giving any context and i honestly just think you're a troll.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't give a shit about your evil scolding about things you literally know nothing about. You know her from your TV worship.
''''Day after day in my courtroom, I saw what happened to women who didn't use their heads,'' she said. In a recent interview in the law offices of Adam B. Levy along with Gregory Sheindlin and Richard L. Maher here, she said: ''I worry about women who defer to men to the point of losing sight of who they are. There is a learned helplessness on the part of husbands and children, so you do everything yourself. Eventually, unless you're Mother Theresa, you're going to explode.''''
''''A woman has to really evaluate before she comes to a boiling point how willing she is to defer in the home in order to keep peace,'' she said. Speaking of the woman who watches sports with her husband even if she is not interested just because he wants her company, she said: ''She's an idiot. Period. I wouldn't sit with my husband while he's watching boxing or football. I'm not a puppy.'' ''
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/11/nyregion/to-judge-judy-standing-tall-equals-respect.html
What a cunt. I know her, so I know.
4 year old EVIDENCE:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/
You have never met her and know nothing about her.
''Judy Sheindlin’s rise to fame began with a long profile written about her in the LA Times. In the article, reporter Josh Gelin introduced the world to the character now beloved by millions of fans of Judge Judy.

Gelin described Sheindlin as a “tart, tough talking judge” who told him, “I can't stand stupid, and I can't stand slow.” Judge Sheindlin took over the questioning of witnesses when lawyers proceeded too slowly and bullied lawyers so much that one report noted that “attorneys beg her to simply listen to them.”

The only pauses in Sheindlin’s courtroom came when she told jokes, sounding “more like a stand-up comic than a judge.”

The butt of those jokes were often litigants who Sheindlin felt wasted her time or made excuses—a phenomenon captured by Gelin in this memorable exchange: .... Sheindlin has said that she always worried the press would describe her as a monster during her tenure as a judge. ''
https://priceonomics.com/the-hypocrisy-of-judge-judy/
I openly describe her as a monster.
No one could possibly describe NYC juvenile offenders being treated fairly at all in the 60s. She was in charge of that torture scheme of horror.
''The people who come into my office and the offices of other family law practitioners are often facing the most traumatic event or at least one of the most traumatic they have ever experienced. Most have never been in a courtroom before. They are uncertain of the future and where this chapter of their lives when closed, will land them. Do they deserve a Judge Judy? Do they deserve to have their dignity torn away? Even where a spouse engages in contemptuous action, does debasement do justice in place of clear, unequivocal sanction administered by a judge who commands respect through intellect and strength of judicial purpose? I think not. ''
http://blogs.lawyers.com/attorney/family-law/injustice-for-all-the-ongoing-offensiveness-of-judge-judyism-4258/
This whole thread is TV zombie brainwash lies, except for me talking about this cunt, who I know personally, and have been personally tortured by.
Now you go back to fapping to TV stars.

[–]Beardedsambo14 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're weird, man.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]Papa_Gamble4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Never go full retard.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]Totherphoenix11 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I feel sorry for your children.

[–]Charizard_Allday8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Apparently his daughter is in her 20s. With any luck she's cut this psychopath out of her life.

Like, how you checked that dude's history? Guy lives in a marshmallow castle on fantasy planet.

[–]CyberDagger2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm not. Being taken away from a parent this unhinged can only do them good.

[–]Totherphoenix2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Not if the alternative was an alleged alcoholic :(

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]Totherphoenix3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You misunderstand. I feel sorry for your children for having a father like you...

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You seem very mad and hateful.
Lashing out and windmilling your arms at the world, in furious livid streams of vibrating tension tremors.

[–]Totherphoenix2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ok

[–]tasmanian10110 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The butt of those jokes were often litigants who Sheindlin felt wasted her time or made excuses

So you read this and still think the only reason is she's a man hater.

It didn't possible dawn on you that you bullshited and made excuses and wasted her time. And that pissed her off?

Weed is a drug. Even if for medical uses, it is still a drug that produces smoke and judges despise the idea of second hand marijuana smoke. Your excuses will only make it worse.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]gonnasyphiherpaids5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Dude, I read your links. They say nothing about any bias in custody cases, for one. They call her attitude into question, and take shots at her for reimbursing those who have a judgement against them on the show. Her advice to women in the nytimes article is good advice, not man-hating rhetoric. I'm sorry you lost time with your daughter but you've really shown nothing that makes me believe that might have been a failure of justice.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You worship a lying TV goddess, who has destroyed the lives of many children.
Shall I list juvenile detention details from her reign of terror?
Shall we have a look at who she really is, outside of PR teams planning ways to get her higher ratings?
''Judge Judy Booking Agent Information

Contact Celebrity Talent Promotions now at 1-888-752-3532 to book Judge Judy for a guest appearance, motivational keynote speech, grand opening, autograph signing, product announcement, employee gathering, endorsement or speaking engagement....''
http://www.celebritytalentpromotions.com/speaker/judge-judy.php
With a team of script writer$$$$$$. 6 digits of $$$$$$ per engagement, I'm sure.
If you are unaware of custody and visitation disparities in the 80s and 90s in NY, I am starting to wonder what subreddit I am in.
http://www.backlash.com/content/gender/1995/1-jan95/page14a.html
Scroll to read what this high level attorney has to say about the 90s in NY.
http://www.fathersrightsnys.com/About_Us.aspx
The Yale Law Journal
Foundling Fathers: (Non-)Marriage and Parental Rights in the Age of Equality
Scroll a little more than halfway down this amazing paper to...
IV. avoiding equality: feminism and fatherhood in the supreme court, 1980-89
http://www.yalelawjournal.org/article/foundling-fathers
That's the best history of fathers' rights ever put together, bar none.
They say it was a literal nightmare for men in the 80s at the Yale Law Journal, written by lawyers. But it's all anecdotal and impossible to believe that cunt judge judy was in on the game. Ok right.
''Conclusion

The unwed fathers cases receive little attention from constitutional scholars, and they are often relegated to a footnote in the history of sex equality law despite a significant (albeit small) body of feminist scholarship that critically engages them. In part, this neglect reflects how the Court framed these cases as questions of due process, rather than equal protection, and as contests between nonmarital fathers and prospective stepfathers, rather than as questions of sex and marital status equality vis-à-vis mothers and divorced fathers.

Integrating the unwed fathers cases into the larger history of equality jurisprudence helps to illuminate the nature of the law’s limitations. Since the 1970s, scholars have observed that the Justices have misconstrued sex differences as “natural” or “biological” rather than socially constructed and essentially malleable. As a result, the Court has often been unwilling to see men and women as “similarly situated” for the purposes of equal protection analysis.''
Yale Law Journal. Lawyers with Yale law degrees and whatnot.
....
More history: ''DeCrow also championed men’s rights as fathers, arguing for a “rebuttable presumption” of shared custody after divorce. She worked with the Fathers’ Rights Association of New York State and joined the board of the Children’s Rights Council, a pro-joint custody group. More recently, she was on the board of Leading Women for Shared Parenting. (In an ironic twist, one of her fellow LW4SP board members was her old nemesis Phyllis Schlafly, whom DeCrow frequently debated on college campuses in the 1980s and 1990s.)''
....''In a 1984 Father’s Day column, DeCrow described a conversation with a client, a divorced mother of three who was having childcare troubles because of an unusual work schedule: “‘What about the father?’ I asked. ‘Is he willing to take them during those hours?’ ‘Their father?’ she exclaimed. ‘That’s just what he wants!’” ...
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/the-now-president-who-became-a-mens-rights-activist/372742/
How do you think I know about this stuff, huh?
I've been at this since the 80s! When men were treated like garbage except for California.
''DeCrow herself was increasingly at odds with the organization she had once led, though she never broke with it. By the mid-1990s, NOW was openly hostile to the fathers’-rights movement, arguing that women were the real victims of bias in family courts.''

[–]gonnasyphiherpaids4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So your argument is that since she worked in the legal profession in the 80s and 90s, she contributed to the bias that existed at that time? Sorry, that's not good enough for me. I don't know what DeCrow has to do with your point either. Full disclosure: I Ctrl-F'd for Judy's name and passed on the article when I saw it didn't mention her)

If you wanted to convince me of anything you could talk about your case some more. What reasons did she give for siding with the mother? Otherwise at least show me evidence of a pattern of bias or a quote from her that goes against what she said in the gif. You may have "known her personally" but you're still just one voice, and from the way you've conducted yourself I can't give your anecdote much benefit of the doubt.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The more insults people spew at me, the more goddess like she becomes. Enjoy your TV worshippijg brainwash life. Expect my angry diatribes every time someone posts anything about Judge Judy the serial child abuser.

[–]gonnasyphiherpaids0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You refuse to give any detail that would support your point and instead go on your self-indulgent "diatribe" (read: rant). I don't expect to see your opinions on her again though. They'll be downvoted to the bottom just like they were here because you can't support them.

[–]MakeUpAnything19 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

r/insanepeoplereddit

[–]shawarma_law4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah that guy seriously sounds nuts.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So Judy torturing children for years is not insane?

[–]Papa_Gamble5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Goddamn you're everywhere in this thread, spread like the cancer you've been wishing on everyone else in here!

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]albino_creeper18 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No judge should ever let the mentally handicapped to such a vast degree as yourself ever have custody. Good on the judge.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Personal attack number 201, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]albino_creeper3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't care about judge Judy lol, just your psychotic rambling

[–]sthchrth17 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank god you didn't get the custody.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This sub has gone full TV brainwashing.
Everyone who had her as a real family court judge deserves mocking from this sub, apparently.
Hey, the TV is on! Better wash your brain in the goddesss light of Judy, the TV star. <gasp>

[–]Gerden16 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You seem really unstable. She made the right choice.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Another personal attack. A judge jury and executioner vigilante mob, defending a TV star who has personally tortured children..

[–]CyberDagger6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

personally tortured children..

Okay, now I'm convinced you're a troll.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]Gerden2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, there is just no end to your self-inflicted persecution on the internet.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Mensrights is just overflowing with tumblr feminist shaming tactics today. All bow to TV stars looking to make cash with ratings and speaking events.

[–]Sackbanditxx10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You expect anyone to believe a thing you say when you act like a 4 year old?

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]ATiBright1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are a very wholesome individual. I wouldn't wish cancer upon the person I dislike the most. Here you are wishing it upon a random stranger on reddit. Good luck in life, sorry about your seizure condition, but that doesn't give you the right to act like an asshole. Your comments in general give off a very "I'm better than you" vibe.

[–]Zexal42Gamer17 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Jeez, what'd she even do?

[–]LoLjoux53 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Sounds like she didn't give a man with clear anger issues full custody, and, surprise surprise, he got angry

[–]notacrackheadofficer-6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No single dad ever got more than every other weekend under her watch, for starters.
She was the most anti-man government official in the history of family courts.
That was the real world. TV is not the real world. TV acting by a demon does not make them nice or good, when they have a history of literal torture of children and parents.

[–]Sewer_Rat-Neat_Sewer22 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You need fucking help.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Personal attack number 200, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]Sewer_Rat-Neat_Sewer12 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No, that's based on what you've said in this thread.

And I'm actually serious.

[–]notacrackheadofficer2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You seem out to get people, and have a list of complexes denying you access to objective reality. TV worship is your main problem.

[–]Sewer_Rat-Neat_Sewer6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What the fuck are you even talking about?

All I said is that I honestly think you need to go and get some help.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]Sewer_Rat-Neat_Sewer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well you're probably just trolling.. but.. either way you're a fucking nutcase.

I'm glad you don't have your children. And I hope you die alone.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]TimHZRD10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Saying you need help isn't a personal attack. The way you are treating people is a serious thing, and if you are not trolling you need to get professional help.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ignorant shaming tactic learned from tumblr.
Always go for TV over reality. You'll fit in with the popular crowd.

[–]xeronymau56 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're insane and don't deserve custody of your kids. She definitely made the right choice with you. This is based solely on the way you present yourself in this thread (not TV worship). FYI, I don't watch TV or browse social media (especially not tumblr) at all, and have never once watched Judge Judy. Now, just try to pull your "based on TV worship" bullshit on me, I'll just laugh at the irony.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]xeronymau52 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I hear if you copy paste that enough times you'll find true love.

You didn't even read the comment, further solidifying my point. You need serious help.

[–]TwistedD850 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There's no shame in getting help. None of us but you and those in the court room know what happened for sure, but if you're being serious about all of this and not trolling it's not healthy to be this angry for this long, for you or those around you. Even just talking to the right person, if nothing else, can help.

[–]RsHavik6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Is this a copypasta?

[–]guntabon4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It is now

[–]CyberDagger1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Family court. NY state. 1980s. How could anyone doubt me? I guess TV is a truth wiping wonderland of fantasy.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zwk1b/judge_judy_was_my_family_court_judge_ama/

[–]9outof10experts3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, with how sanely, calmly and rationally you present yourself, I can't begin to imagine why court went badly for you /s

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Judge jury and executioner, out to hurt with a vengeance, based on TV goddess worship.

[–]scribbledoll2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Medusa meets triple headed satan is my new favorite insult.

But seriously.... hope you feel better.

[–]notacrackheadofficer-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I feel better every time I wish painful cancer on Judge Judy.
Hey, you better get back to the TV, you might miss an important worshipping session of zombie brainwashing.

[–]jnnx0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

But how do you REALLY feel?

[–]MaunaLoona-8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I believe you, man. Wikipedia says she has a reputation for being tough from her family court days. There's no way she would have gotten that reputation if she was tough on women (aka fair). In this context tough means she screwed men even worse than other judges.

[–]notacrackheadofficer0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Family court. NY state. 1980s.
How could anyone doubt me?
I guess TV is a truth wiping wonderland of fantasy.

[–]Average_Home_Boy-10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Keep speaking fuck the hive mind

[–]notacrackheadofficer-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Thank you. I met a man i the family court waiting area, whose wife left him 15 years before , with their two kids. He searched the country for the whole time, aching to see his kids.
I met him when his estranged wife, out of the blue, filed for child support.
He owed 15 years worth, NOW, or his life was fucked. I met him several times there, with his new SO. Judge Judy fucked that man's life up big time, and would not listen to him or his new SO.
They were financially ruined, and the SO was extremely disturbed at how cold hearted and openly mean and mocking Judge Judy was to a man devestated by not seeing his own kids in 15 years.
EVERYONE knows that men were super fucked over her entire reign in the NYS family court system. Her's was a reign of abject terror.
Then she said things written by a PR team to boost ratings.
I wish I could yell through a megaphone for 48 hours nonstop at everyone in this sub about real things she did, to counter her 10 second PR posturing.
She was in charge of family TORTURE, and did it in the sick and twisted grinning manner of a sadistic psychopath out to hurt others for kicks.
NO I did NOT exaggerate.
She is the lying cunt rat cockroach shitpile cunt, exaggerating, and making up lies to cover her evil and wicked past of heartless mayhem. A family wrecker. A person who spits in the face of a crying child.
.

[–]Jwillis941 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Eh, I quite like her.

[–]notacrackheadofficer1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You like TV. Big deal.

[–]housea1994 9 years ago [recovered] (52 children) | Copy Link

Crazy to think the best way for a man to get justice just might be to go on Judge Judy!

[–]mainfingertopwise 9 years ago* [recovered] (20 children) | Copy Link

On one hand, she's daytime TV. But on the other hand, her whole "thing" is no nonsense. Could probably do a lot worse than Judge Judy.

[–]AssAssIn46 214 points215 points216 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She also sends a good message about how court cases should be dealt with which does get a fair amount of attention if it's something major. For that reason alone I'm fine with it even if it's just a daytime reality TV show. It does a lot of good even if it's just to seem good.

[–]hustl3tree5 114 points115 points116 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm never gonna knock her because it's not scripted my friend was on there. He got paid for his time and was like a vacation but it was a real case no made up drama and she's fair like everyone else says

[–]dicaparly 57 points58 points59 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The only difference between her as a judge before the show and now is that she isnt a "judge" so much as an "arbitrator" now. She still has her license and certifications, and her experience as a judge.

[–]AmazingMarv 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Isn't she a small claims judge? Why is she deciding a custody battle?

[–]robot_nixon 71 points72 points73 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I haven't seen this episode, but I'm going to guess she was suing him for pain and suffering for taking the child away from her to spend time with him (or something equally as dumb), and judge Judy is shutting her down.

[–]AmazingMarv 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I would love to see the original video.

[–]1950sGuy 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's a video of a tv screen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLIYoHejsl8

thanks /u/ThatEnglishKid

[–]Lolzzergrush 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy only does claims of $5k or less so the mom in the post is probably claiming he owes her money. She'd need some sort of documentation so it's prob for daycare or a car/rent something like that

[–]AmazingMarv-4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I would love to see the original video. It just really looks like generic Judge Judy with a caption right out of MRA fantasy land.

[–]RageXY3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Her lips are pretty easy to read, have you tried google?

[–]iproginger3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Here's the video with sound.

[–]AmazingMarv2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well there you go. Thank you.

[–]FUCK_YEAH_BASKETBALL 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She's not a judge at all. She's an arbitrator/mediator.

[–]SithAlpaca 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She's technically a mediator.

[–]NeurotoxEVE 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

she's an arbitrator

[–]Skydiver860 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

she isn't even a small claims judge either(at least in the show she isn't). She's just a mediator. The judgement she makes isn't technically judgement at all considering the people are paid for their time and the winner gets paid if they get a judgement but from the show not the defendant.

[–]diegoshredderx 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

yeah, you don't want to go to a nonsense judge

[–]Im_Tiny_Rick1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yeah, like Maury.

[–][deleted] 9 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Boon_Retsam 51 points52 points53 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy for next SC Justice?

[–]macthefire 62 points63 points64 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

You could do a hell of a lot worse.

[–]BlueSignRedLight 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I mean, we just did.

[–]FirstGameFreak 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Gorsuch was unanimously confirmed by Democrats for his federal judge position, before he was attempted to be obstructed from the Supreme Court by those same Democrats simply because he was Trump's nominee and they were upset by the Garland affair. He is an outstandingly qualified moderate and was the pick most hoped for by Democrats among Trump's options. Attempts to block him from office are classical obstructionism, and Republicans putting him in the position over their objections was done repeatedly with other appointed federal official confirmations by Democrats during Republican obstructionism.

[–]QuestionsEverythang-15 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm guessing your comment is controversial because some people didn't get your joke or t_d is downvoting any and every anti-trump references in any sub

[–]Jjmcgrayy31 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's controversial because the Supreme Court nominee was approved by both sides.

So this comment is just anti Trump bullshit that doesn't even make sense.

Not to mention there are plenty of subs dedicated to Trump hate. Take that shit to one of them.

[–]QuestionsEverythang-4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh I thought he was making a joke about having a reality-tv star in government and "we could do a lot worse" was referring to Trump. I may have misread the intentions of his joke.

[–]ametalshard-7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

there are plenty of subs dedicated to Trump hate. Take that shit to one of them.

Nah, any sub will do fine

[–]BlueSignRedLight-9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The nominee was ramrodded through based on a supermajority. Fuck off with that "both sides" shit.

[–]DicklePill23 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

After being voted in unanimously by both sides previously. Including votes from people like Obama Hillary and Bernie Sanders. The reason why he didn't pass was purely political.

[–]Jjmcgrayy9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Someone has been cherry picking news age cues they watch.

Go check again. Both sides were cool with him. But FYI. I am gonna block you cause you've proven to be quite ignorant and I know you won't look.

[–]BlueSignRedLight-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"lalalala nope I don't hear you, I'm right you're wrong."

K.

Edit: For anyone wondering if what the troll above said is true, no it's not. Support for him as a bench judge in 2006 isn't even slightly close to supporting him for SC now, with his true colors showing.

[–]skankhunt_4016 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It isn't T_D. It is clearly the Russians. White House Officials who requested anonymity have confirmed this to me.

[–]PicklepumTheCrow0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

/s?

[–]LewdRudeJude1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well fuck, if trump can be president...

[–]superprez 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Isn't she also the highest paid woman on TV ?

[–]koick 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Judy is actually the TOP grossing TV personality (by far!), earning $47 million per year. I roll my eyes when she bitches about sending her grandkids through college. Listen lady, that single episode you just filmed is enough to easily afford an entire 4 year run.

[–]superprez 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Lol, I couldn't afford to send any kids through college let alone grandkids as well !

[–]koick1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think it's hard for us to imagine what it would be like to earn $45 million each year. On average, that's $123,000 each and every day (working or not!). It's a mind boggling amount of money. You'd think she'd be one of the lest stressed out people on earth.

[–]superprez1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It takes me 5 years to earn what she does in a fucking day.

[–]billytheid-46 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Lol... actually believes in reality tv

Edit: if you really believe Judge Judy has any legal authority then god help you if you ever get into legal trouble... have you ever heard of Judge Drinky? Drinking game I played with legal profession friends in which you drink every time that woman says or does something which would get her censured or have an attorney demand recusal... you get drunk fast. God these MRA subs are hilarious.

[–]Roulette8888863 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I mean, whatever you think of her, she is a legit judge at the end of the day.

[–]Throwaway1234653211 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Not on the show she isn't though.

[–]xuan13543 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She's actually a real judge

[–]russelln10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

To be fair, she isn't one in her show. She's an arbitrator. Her career before the show as a judge however shows that she knows her shit.

[–]brianj19922 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This is all real man. I know that couple and live near both of them. The story (if you look into it) is all true. And I know lots of people that have been on this show. No facts are edited at all.

[–]livingdead191 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Honestly she's pretty good damn based from what I've seen. She doesn't fall for bullshit and doesn't seem to have many biases - being on TV and constantly scrutinized would probably keep your legal decisions authentic.

[–]Robster4911 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Real cases. Real people.

Judge Judy!

[–]rymo500 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

http://i.imgur.com/WF0kn1l.gif Perfect gif for me.

[–]Teskje 1095 points1096 points1097 points 9 years ago (227 children) | Copy Link

The idea of having a child with a women, and then having that child taken away terrifies me.

[–]Man-n-Stars 130 points131 points132 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

It should. In an article from the Guardian, 51% of men who don't have custody are not allowed regular, every other weekend..etc visits with the kids.

"... only 49% say that contact is regular (i.e. on weekends and during school holidays)"

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/nov/20/non-resident-dads-relationship-children

[–]VaderDidNoWrong 31 points32 points33 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

I mean, some of that 51% invariably has cause not to be allowed that. My father only got supervised visitation because he was a crack-addict and alcoholic and eventually he just gave up on visitation. Broadly sweeping up all 51% as mistreated fathers is disingenuous.

[–]Magmas 71 points72 points73 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

And generalising them as not is equally disingenuous. Really, we need more precise statistics before we can really judge anything.

[–]VaderDidNoWrong 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I agree, but I wasn't generalizing. I said "some of that 51% invariably has cause not to be allowed that."

I was being critical of his generalization, not implying my father was the type of father that is the majority of that 51%

[–]Magmas 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry. I didn't mean to imply your own generalisation. Just saying it can go both ways.

[–]PacMoron 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah let's keep downvoting him for this reasonable response!

[–]legion327 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That shit genuinely irritates me. I only upvote/downvote based on the merit of an argument. I don't have to agree with the viewpoint to admit the argument has merit or contributes to the conversation.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What he said is...

About half of all fathers get visitation.

Of that half half of them actually see their kids regularly.

So your argument doesn't add up. If they were bad people, they wouldn't have been awarded visitation rights.

Chances are, they were awarded rights, the mom is not adhering to the agreement, and the courts aren't doing a thing about it.

[–]VaderDidNoWrong 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If they were bad people, they wouldn't have been awarded visitation rights.

My father was an abusive drug addict who initially had unsupervised visitation, my mother later successfully fought for supervised visitation after a PI caught my father bringing me to a drug deal.

Bad people get visitation, my father is an example of that.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bad people get visitation, my father is an example of that.

Yeah, bad people get visitation, are you claiming that half of all fathers who get visitation are bad people?

[–]DirHR-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Please don't start a fuckin' sentence with 'I mean'.

[–]VaderDidNoWrong4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I mean, that's just your opinion man.

[–]DirHR-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Usually people say 'I mean' to clarify something they previously said. Starting a post with it without referencing something said previously is a new but stupid trend. Do you think it's cool and edgy?

[–]VaderDidNoWrong2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nope, I apparently just have a tendency to use the phrase 'wrong."

[–]murt 636 points637 points638 points 9 years ago (94 children) | Copy Link

If women were being thrown out on the streets and denied access to their children at the rate it is happening to men in the U.S. there would be a revolution overnight. Neither men nor women would accept that situation.

[–]zombiehive 9 years ago [recovered] (86 children) | Copy Link

If you read your history, that is exactly what used to happen. Women being able to take custody of their children is a relatively new phenomenon.

Edit: English law pre-19th century granted custody rights automatically to the father.

[–]moldyxorange 222 points223 points224 points 9 years ago* (36 children) | Copy Link

Idk why you're getting downvoted. Do you guys really think that women had any say in where their kids went before they even got the right to vote? Lol

e: Should have edited this earlier, but I was proved wrong. Women did have a say, but only starting in 1873 because of the Tender Years Doctrine. Thanks /u/all-round-good-egg

[–]NatMe 49 points50 points51 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, based on the responses history needs to be taught better in schools. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." And all that.

[–]all-round-good-egg 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

What about basic arithmetic? It's pointless teaching history if somebody can't look at two dates and tell which one comes before/after the other.

[–]xiofar1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's possible to teach many things at once.

The only students that don't learn are lazy kids that use school only to socialize. I've yet to meet a person that actually wanted to learn but couldn't.

It is up to the student to learn instead of just socializing. It is up to each student's parents to make sure their kids are doing what they're supposed to in class.

[–]NatMe1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Did I say anything about not teaching "basic arithmetic" or any other subject? Good god. I just think that history should be taught and valued more.

[–]all-round-good-egg1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You accused people of not being aware of history, when in fact - as subsequent information resulting in moldyxorange's gracious edit demonstrates - you should not have done so. Apologies for the snarkiness, which was relative date awareness related.

[–]NatMe1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

k

[–]Ninety9Balloons 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

But If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.

[–]BeholdTheHair1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

r/KenM is leaking again.

[–]piar 9 years ago* [recovered] (10 children) | Copy Link

In America, when women got the right to vote, so did at least 5 million men who previously did not have that right.

Edit: The relevant point I'm making is that details like this in history are often ignored or misunderstood, and that also likely applies to "having a say where their kids went."

[–]Bittysweens 36 points37 points38 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Irrelevant to this specific conversation.

[–]all-round-good-egg 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

piar is responding to moldyxorange there. All men being able to vote is a relatively recent phenomenon itself and very relevant in terms of moldyxorange's comment. In the UK the ordinary man could only vote in 1918, after 4 years of gruelling warfare. All women got the vote in 1928.

So the logic used by moldyxorange can be broadly applied to men. And 1928 minus 1839 or 1873 does not result in a negative number.

[–]Bittysweens 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This has nothing to do with the conversation. Someone said "imagine a world where men got custody first." Someone else said "that was what the world was like before women gained more rights." How is "some men didn't have the right to vote either" a relevant comment to that discussion...?

[–][deleted] 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]asdlkn83012 points 9 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Having and exercising the right to vote vs who got to choose custody of a child seem like two different things, are they not?

Also, if both father and mother lacked a say, then who did judges side with more often in custody cases?

[–]myInnerMars 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you guys really think that women had any say in where their kids went before they even got the right to vote?

Having and exercising the right to vote vs who got to choose custody of a child seem like two different things, are they not?

Perfect response

[–]all-round-good-egg 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Having and exercising the right to vote vs who got to choose custody of a child seem like two different things, are they not?

Of course, and piar wasn't the one who brought voting into the discussion - he is just responding.

Also, if both father and mother lacked a say, then who did judges side with more often in custody cases?

Lacking a vote is not lacking a say. I don't know who judges sided with more going on 200 years ago.

[–]wonkywilla 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Let's not forget divorce and custody battles weren't exactly a thing 200 years ago, or anything like it is now.

Couldn't afford your kids? Send them off to a farm to work, put them in an orphanage, or give them to someone you knew.

Didn't want your wife? Accuse her of adultery and throw her out or institutionalize her.

[–]the_unseen_one 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, and women did not and still did not have to sign up for the draft. So women got that "right" (actually a privilege for men since we have to EARN it by signing away our lives) without any of the cost, like most feminist victories. Always the positive stuff, none of the burden.

[–]the_unseen_one 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

It used to be that men had ownership of the children because he had sole responsibility for the children. The women had zero responsibility to support the family or children, and all income and property she acquired was solely hers. Moreso, men had to pay the taxes on their wives income.

It used to be that since men had all the responsibility for the family and children he also had all the rights to them. Now men still have all the responsibility, and none of the rights.

And as for the "women couldn't vote" deal, women also did not have to sign up for the draft. They never paid the price to vote, so they didn't get the reward. It's a simple concept, yet nobody ever seems to take beef with the idea that women would ever have to buy their rights with their lives like men do. Now women have those rights, and still hold no responsibility. At no point in history have women had the short end of the stick, it used to be balanced to her responsibilities. Fucking revisionist history is the worst thing feminism has spawned.

/u/zombiehive, this is for you too.

[–]zombiehive0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I agree. Revisionist history is terrible. You seem to be great at it.

[–]the_unseen_one1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What did I revise? Everything I said is factual.

[–]zombiehive1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"At no point in history have women had the short end of the stick."

You can be pro-men's rights and still know for a fact that statement is fucking false.

[–]the_unseen_one2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, they had it shitty. They'd have to work 8-12 hours a day maintaining the home and raising kids. It was hard, repetitive labor, and they frequently didn't have many rights.

Men had more rights, and were expected to risk injury and death in service of the family. If any threats came about, he would be the first line of defence, and die if need be to protect his woman and children.

Seems like a balanced trade off if you're being honest with yourself. Neither was better. One had low risk, low reward, one had high risk, high reward, and at the end of the day, the woman would probably live. There's a very good reason that during our formative years of the species, one man reproduced for every sixteen women. Men have been disposable from day one, so it's only right that you are rewarded for that, right?

[–]moldyxorange-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What world do you live in where men still have all the responsibility for the family and children? Women hold no responsibility? Are you retarded?

[–]the_unseen_one3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If men can't afford to support their kids, they get thrown in prison. If women can't, they get government aid and support.

Men have zero choice in birth or abortion, and zero outs based off of the woman's CHOICE. She can choose to keep or get rid of the child, and he is forced to hold the responsibility to support them regardless of what he wants. A woman can absolve herself of parental responsibility at any time, and a man can not unless the mother allows him to.

Legally, women have zero responsibility for their children.

[–]NatMe-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think that he is, in fact, retarded.

[–]all-round-good-egg1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Actually that's exactly the case.

[–]moldyxorange6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

http://i.imgur.com/DpQ9YJl.jpg

e: No, but really, at least give me a reason why you think it is the case. I'd like to hear your logic on this.

[–]all-round-good-egg5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Do you guys really think that women had any say in where their kids went before they even got the right to vote?

Look up the Tender Years Doctrine. All women in the UK could vote in 1928, 10 short years after all men could (although men had to fight in WWI here to get suffrage for the ordinary man on the table (the suffragettes were only interested in women, a bit like feminists today)). So women had a say since 1839 in England and maternal custody was actually presumed since 1873.

Did the ordinary man not have any legal rights before 1918 because he couldn't vote?

[–]moldyxorange5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Okay, I had never heard of the Tender Years Doctrine before, so thank you. That said, in the scope of human history, would you not agree that 1839/73 is still a very recent development?

And I see your point concerning your last question. I think we're in agreement here.

[–]all-round-good-egg3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, I would agree with that. I don't know what year the law assuming paternal custody was enacted though, it would be safe to assume that it was a relatively short blink of the eye away too. I'd be interested if anybody had a date for that.

[–]piar3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Okay, I had never heard of the Tender Years Doctrine before, so thank you.

It's always heartwarming when people debate in good faith and are willing to accept evidence. Thanks for being one of the good ones /u/moldyxorange!

I'd be interested if anybody had a date for that.

I did a bit of digging and found this article which seems to cover quite a bit of the historical context.

[–]moldyxorange1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Haha np. It frustrates me when people stick to their guns despite contrary scientific evidence. Really just comes down to which one you value more: knowledge, or your ego.

[–]jago810 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Idk why you're getting downvoted.

Are you aware of the sub you are on? You just went against the narrative of women have too much power in the world...

[–]moldyxorange2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Haha. I'm just here from /r/all. I don't really think this sub has that kind of narrative though; some people may think so, but as a whole I think most people here are smart enough not to think along those lines.

[–]deten 28 points29 points30 points 9 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

If women were being thrown out on the streets and denied access to their children at the rate it is happening to men in the U.S. there would be a revolution overnight. Neither men nor women would accept that situation.

If you read your history, that is exactly what used to happen. Women being able to take custody of their children is a relatively new phenomenon.

I am not saying you're wrong, I am genuinly interested, can you support this?

[–]zombiehive 9 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

You could just Google "mother custody rights history" and you will find info better than a paraphrased reddit comment that can't go into nuances. But basically, until the 19th century, English law granted custody automatically to the father. It wasn't until women were granted property rights that they were able to stake a claim to their children.

[–]deten 27 points28 points29 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Oddly enough the first thing that comes up when searching for this is:

  • The tender years doctrine is a legal principle in family law since the late nineteenth century. In common law, it presumes that during a child's "tender" years (generally regarded as the age of four and under), the mother should have custody of the child. The doctrine often arises in divorce proceedings.

I am not saying your wrong, I truthfully don't know and want to know! This might be a good example of how the way we search for things can come up with very varied results and confirmation bias can start playing a role. I really don't want that to happen. Let me ask, is this a belief you have based on evidence or is it something you have just heard before?

[–]zombiehive 9 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Please click on "History" under the summary for that wiki article because it literally proceeds to go on and state that English Law gave custody to fathers until the 19th century.

"Historically, English family law gave custody of the children to the father after a divorce. Until the 19th century, the women had few individual rights and obligations, most being derived through their fathers or husbands."

So, you actually fell into confirmation bias when you stopped reading after it said what you wanted.

[–]deten 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

English Law gave custody to fathers until the 19th century

Got it. This seems different than your original claim. Above you agreed that...

women were being thrown out on the streets and denied access to their children at the rate that is happening to men in the U.S.

and

Women being able to take custody of their children is a relatively new phenomenon.

Now you're seem to be focusing more specifically on English Law. But English law is only a portion of the world (and varied through time itself). I know for a fact that we can find scenarios where men were treated unfairly, and other scenarios where women were treated unfairly. I am not arguing that isn't the case (i'm not really arguing anything, I just want to know the truth because I like believing true things).

Which is part of the reason I asked for what led you to this belief.

All to say, I think I am convinced that point is true that from some point up until the 19th century english law gave custody to fathers. I am not convinced that the original point you made is true, which is listed above: That women were being thrown out into the streets and denied access to their children at a rate that is happening to men in the US, or that women being able to take custody of their children is a relatively new phenomenon.

Maybe you can elaborate on what you actually believe, because I wonder if we're just having a misunderstanding...

[–]cypherspaceagain 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

US law is fundamentally based on English law. If it was the case in English law, it was also the case in US law until it was specifically changed.

The second bit, you have misread. They were quoting the previous poster. The rate of being thrown out or whatever is not the issue under discussion, but the automatic granting of rights to mothers; the bit that says "relatively new phenomenon" means "in the last hundred years" rather than in the previous thousand (ish) under English law.

In other words, the semantic niggles are unimportant, the poster is basically correct.

[–]MrBlackz1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This deten guy is absolutely slaughtering you haha

[–]emberfly 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

I'm not a history buff; can you tell me when in history this happened?

[–]Gentlescholar_AMA 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

1700s-1800s.

So you have to remember that this is going to be an English thing, because of course England was the first European country to allow divorce and that was in the mid-1500s. Which would have still been taboo... jeez, into the 1800s. And totally unacceptable on the continent until a similar time.

So this history is really a history of around the enlightenment era, which is the period of the utmost oppression of women maybe anywhere on Earth at any time; including saudi arabia today.

Women became seen as stupid, prone to fits, needy, failing to produce anything worthwhile, etc. And reading literature from the period it's incredible what women were told to do.

A woman worried 90% about her appearance. That was what a woman was for: reproduction and not being a burden on her husband beyond necessary. This is why during this period women get these insanely elaborate costumes that take hours to put on and are so bad for your health, things to make your waist look incredibly slim, hoops to exaggerate the hips, layers upon layers of fabric and undergarments, you get the picture.

You might be imagining a black and white photo right now; you're almost there. That's 1800s after things had toned down. 1700s was even more extreme.

so, because of this, it was understood that of course women were unfit to be parents. Women were incompetent grown children themselves, except also prone to fainting, hysteria, fits, panics, and so on. Plus, she couldn't work except as a maid, nanny, or other servant, and it was unfitting for a child to be running around in a rich person's house belonging to one of the servants.

Prior to this period (when divorce was illegal mind you), restrictions on women were not nearly so severe. You can read in English literature from 1500's and before that women could work in most jobs although it might be a little odd, and men seemed to fall more deeply and fully in love with women than just seeking an heir factory.

[–]emberfly 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Where is the part about women being denied access to their kids and being thrown out onto the street?

[–]Gentlescholar_AMA 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

A woman could be denied access to her kids if the husband felt like denying her access. She had no power of her own during the period. And since she couldn't work, where do you think she lived?

Keep in mind: divorces were rare, and social graces were important. The husband would need some kind of evidence that his wife was hysterical or something to get a divorce in the first place. Perhaps that she cheated, something like that. In which case, yeah he would argue that she shouldn't be around the children.

[–]DirHR 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

So not as easy as it is now for women to do it to men. I dare say that society has always been more accepting of homeless men than homeless women.

[–]Source_or_gtfo1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Each divorce back then required it's own individual act of parliament. It was nothing like the scale we see now.

[–]sunsmoon 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is the time of Coverture (which was loosed up around the time of the Market Revolution in the US). Coverture is when a woman loses her legal identity after marriage - all property she owned prior to marriage belongs to her husband, she cannot enter into contracts of any kind, she couldn't go to school. She couldn't even attempt to seek a divorce because it would require her husband to agree to it and "sign off," since her legal standing is entirely the husbands domain.

Coverture lost some of its appeal in the US during the Civil War because so many men were away from the home. Even then, the women in charge of the home were Deputy Husbands, highlighting that in order to enter contracts, buy/sell property, manage a business, etc, one had to be a husband (and therefore, male) to do it effectively. The letters between soldiers and their wives during that era is very interesting!

Post Civil War we go straight into True Womanhood and Self-Made Manhood, which along with loosening the noose of coverture, put the home (including children) in the domain of women and the outside world as the domain of men.

[–]Hero_764 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

, because of this, it was understood that of course women were unfit to be parents. Women were incompetent grown children themselves, except also prone to fainting, hysteria, fits, panics, and so on.

Surely this is not true, as women were typically the primary caregivers back then?

I thought it had to do with the fact that the father had financial responsibility for the child.

[–]Gentlescholar_AMA1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

For a period, even womens competence as caregivers was questioned.

[–]Hero_7641 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Do you have any sources on this? I'm just curious.

[–]Gentlescholar_AMA1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, my sources are just years of college, but wikipedia of the history of divorce is a good resource.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

So this history is really a history of around the enlightenment era, which is the period of the utmost oppression of women maybe anywhere on Earth at any time; including saudi arabia today.

As opposed to men who were forced to fight and die for their country at the time.

Let's not begin the discussion on debtor's prisons. I mean, men were the only ones allowed to support the family and take on debt. The responsibility was theirs. If they screwed up, lost their job, lost their limb, couldn't work for whatever reason... they went to prison.

[–]Gentlescholar_AMA1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That wasn't the subject of discussion, we were discussing divorce and custody

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That wasn't the subject of discussion, we were discussing divorce and custody

Nice sidestep.

[–]Gentlescholar_AMA1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How is that a sidestep? If we were discussing gender during the enlightenment I would have discussed that. We werent. We were discussing marriage and custody.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You were the one that brought up women in that time period being oppressed. Then when your error is pointed out, you sidestep away from it.

[–]Gentlescholar_AMA1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Because the discussion was about divorce.

[–]marauderp1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yet you brought up a whole host of other things that had nothing to do with divorce as if they were somehow relevant to the discussion.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes. And then you called women oppressed.

[–]Sciencetor2-4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You mean people can LIE on the internet?

[–]DirHR 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

....and it was changed. What's your point?

[–]getintheVandell 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

The point is equality, and to be mindful of the painful history of suffering women had to go endure for literally centuries. Women's suffrage and equality is a recent phenomenon, so of course they're going to fight tooth and nail to keep it, as they should.

Ideally, we'd all just join hands and talk reasonably about what each other need. But that's just not American culture.

[–]DirHR 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Oh yes, how easy it is to forget about the suffering of women since we are not constantly reminded by everyone except MRA's and MGTOW's that women are the primary victims of everything and have always been and will always be.

[–]getintheVandell 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Being mindful doesn't mean allowing yourself to be walked over. It's about showing empathy, so that maybe we can cooperate.

[–]DirHR 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Right whatever fella. You go sympathize with women like the rest of the world, I am not trying to stop you.

[–]getintheVandell 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

If I may ask, what's your end goal? What would be ideal for you to achieve, if we could live in a world of your design?

[–]DirHR 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

That people are treated equally regardless of gender or race. However we currently put women on a pedestal and I think we need to do less of that and spend more time worrying about men problems than we currently do. I also think we need to stop living in the past. For example, most of us have not ever oppressed women nor have we owned slaves but it's forever thrown in our face as a way to silence us and keep us on the narrow path of man/white = evil and oppressor and woman/non white = good and oppressed

[–]getintheVandell3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Do you believe that people are shaped by their environments?

(I'm only asking questions to determine where you stand on topics, to see where we agree and/or disagree and then better pose my personal arguments/beliefs.)

[–]DirHR2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't believe I wish to be interrogated.

[–]getintheVandell3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You posed a question to everyone in this thread. I came by and answered it with my personal philosophy. You chose, instead of asking me questions about what I believed, to come to the assumption that I'm all about white guilt (which I'm not).

Instead of making assumptions about you, I chose to ask what you believe and why you believe it, in an honest attempt to be charitable to your argument and let you present it in the best way possible.

By refusing to answer, you've closed off any further discussion on my end, and I have no choice but to disregard your opinion. Have a great day. ♥

[–]DirHR2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I didn't mean to imply that you have any opinion on white guilt, I threw race in because it's a hot topic these days. I do think you have a degree of male guilt though.

Oh and you asked what my end goal for the world is, I answered. I don't want to answer 20 questions while you try to guide me toward your point of view.

[–]getintheVandell3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The summation of my opinion is:

• People are inherently shaped by their environments, leading to predictability in decision making, which is backed up by leading statistics on how certain classes of people react to certain situations. People do not have agency, but rather, we have brains that let us believe we have it.

• History does not resolve itself within a few generations: i.e. racism on black people in America has had dramatic effects on how their culture has been shaped, and has limited their opportunity in the current day. It takes multiple generations for a class of people to get out of a rut of economic disadvantage, so my belief is that we can improve the situation for them (to the average) through targeted policymaking.

• I do not feel "white guilt". I feel that society is better if people's disadvantages are minimised, rather than simply waved away as their own individual choices. Since I believe that all people are predictable and not some kind of creature that is able to make perfect choices no matter the circumstances, then it's easy to believe that groups of people have more or less opportunity for success when compared to other groups of people, based upon their environments.

• Individual opinion isn't as important as fact and statistics. I do not tend to give credence to anecdotal and unsourced opinions. If you talk to an individual, you can lead them into saying almost anything to fuel your narrative. But if you take an unbiased look at large groups of people, you can learn a lot more.

[–]DirHR2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

When I want to change something, I change it from that moment forward. I do not say 'well, I have smoked for many years so maybe it's really impossible to change'. I don't let the past hold me back from making current changes. People who want to cling to the past and avoid just treating people equally from this moment forward are really the problem.

Example: Fathers are treated as second class citizens in family courts. - 'Well, it wasn't always that way so just suck it up for a while longer and then once women feel more equal then we can start helping men.' That BS isn't helpful in any way and I am sorry if I have no tolerance for it.

[–]getintheVandell2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

When I want to change something, I change it from that moment forward. I do not say 'well, I have smoked for many years so maybe it's really impossible to change'. I don't let the past hold me back from making current changes. People who want to cling to the past and avoid just treating people equally from this moment forward are really the problem.

I understand you believe you made a choice, but my opinion is that, in reality, you did not. The cons of continuing smoking outweighed the pros, and you did not come to that decision to stop because it just randomly occurred to you. You were influenced by reports and advertising that said it was bad, friends and family who think it's disgusting, and the deterioration of personal health linked with smoking.

[–]DirHR2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's an interesting take on choices, even if I don't agree.

[–]Dodger944 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That was when women couldn't earn and therefore couldn't care for a child.

[–]Frijid 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, so society nerfed men too hard. Interesting!

Maybe next patch we'll get that buff so the genders are balanced again.

[–]Source_or_gtfo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's worth pointing out that divorce was extremely rare back then.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

If anything happened to women people freak. That's why when shit happens they plaster women all over headlines.

Like those girls kidnapped in Africa. You know all the boys were killed right?

Hell. Even self created problems are a big deal when it comes to women. Women complain that it'd hard to find a good man cause they never date down and it's hard to find a educated professional to marry.

And suddenly people are looking into this shit as a serious issue.

It is what it is man.

[–]GenocideSolution1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

to be fair you can't rescue dead boys. You can rescue sex slaves and eventually return them to productive society with enough therapy.

[–]Jjmcgrayy1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Wasn't even talking g about a rescue.

I was talking about if those boys turned out to be girls, it there would be international coverage and an enormous outcry.

Way to miss my point.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

to be fair you can't rescue dead boys.

The 10000 kidnapped boys of Boko Haram

You can rescue kidnapped boys.

It's just that no one gives a fuck about males. 3% of the kidnapping victims are female? We must launch an international campaign to get them back! the other 97%? Oh.. they're male.

[–]bexpat-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Chibok was a girls school...

[–]Jjmcgrayy12 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Did I say the boys went to the same school?

What I said was many boys were caught up in that whole mess and have been killed, but no one even talks about them.

And now you are here acting like they don't Mather and never existed. Way to prove a point.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.mediaite.com/online/why-did-kidnapping-girls-but-not-burning-boys-alive-wake-media-up-to-boko-haram/amp/

.

.

.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/toysoldier.wordpress.com/2016/08/16/boko-haram-kidnapped-10000-boys-and-the-world-remained-silent/amp/

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Boko Haram kidnapped over 10,000 boys.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-kidnapped-boys-of-boko-haram-1471013062

No, they didn't kidnap them from a girls' school. They kidnapped them from everywhere else.

[–]bulltank 9 years ago [recovered] (11 children) | Copy Link

Going through that. I have 50/50 custody... but I still lost my daughter half the time because she left. It's a terrible feeling. I miss her every day she is not with me, it doesn't get easier.

[–]Shanguerrilla 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

You're saying you have your daughter exactly half the time? That's how I am with my son. It is simultaneously AWESOME! SO, SO SO AWESOME! To go from an unhealthy, toxic house and fucked marriage that I still 'had' my son and watched him more than 50% of the time before... but I was so limited in my relationship with him during the marriage-- To now it being just he and I and we can bond and let our guard down and relax.

Yet I still find myself feeling like a wind-up toy that only is 'alive' when my son is here. I feel so empty, like my heart gets ripped out, every time I drop him off and every night he isn't sleeping in my home. And that is with complete 50/50, I honestly cannot fathom how men get through worse custody arrangements.

[–]bulltank 9 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

The problem was, is the relationship wasn't toxic on my side. I loved our relationship... the problem was me.

I have 2 other kids with a different person, but I have them 100% of the time. At the time, she was too sick and unwell to take care of them, so I've had them 100% forever.

So every 2nd week, my family is ripped apart for a week. One of my kids is just missing. Our routines change, things are different. Can't get a balance going. It's so hard sometimes.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

deleted What is this?

[–]NatMe 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How so?

[–]bulltank1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

True.

[–]hadriker 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

My son is a teenager now but her mother and i split when he was around 3 years old. She has always had full custody and I have always paid child support and this was one of the main reasons for it. We wanted them to have a stable "home" and didn't want to be shipping back and forth between mine and her place every week.

We settled supervision ourselves. unless the ex had something planned i could pretty much see the kids whenever i wanted, keep him for the weekend, etc etc. I was still able to feel like a father. You will miss things. Its just a side effect of being separated, but in the end I still believe I made the right decision. I have a great relationship with my teenaged son

I am lucky enough to have an ex who wanted what was best for the kids and has never used them against me or kept them from seeing me even when things got heated between us. We were able to salvage a friendship out of the marriage which has helped tremendously in that respect as well.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We wanted them to have a stable "home" and didn't want to be shipping back and forth between mine and her place every week.

Great, then the kids can live with me. Otherwise, we'll have to work out 50/50 like adults so that it's not disruptive to them.

[–]theBrineySeaMan 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There's an episode of Louie like this. He mentions how he sucks when he doesn't have his daughters and doesn't do anything but Jerk off and sleep.

[–]Emory_Badly_drawn5 points 9 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Getting ready to deal with this. Unmarried parents, mother doesn't understand I have every right to our son as she does. It's fucking infuriating. Even 50/50 custody would be better than what I have now, which is none and am completely at her whim as to when I even get to see my son.

[–]bulltank2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Piece of advice for you.

This isn't about you vs your ex. This is about you wanting to be there for your son and be an equal parent. This is about doing what is right for your son.

There were times when my ex made this about her vs me. It's shitty, but don't back down.

Make sure you have a clean place to live with a bedroom for your son, food, and a salary that can manage taking care of the two of you. Spend any and all time your ex lets you spend with your son right now.

Every time you ask to see him or talk to him, write it down in a book. Write down what her response is, and when you got to talk or see him in relation to when you asked. Keep all that information down.

There will be times where you will feel like the right choice is just to submit to what they are asking. But don't. Be fair, fight for a legit 50/50 split (this includes holidays, special events, etc). Be flexible and willing to exchange days when you need to.

Just do what you truly feel is right for your son, and don't give up.

[–]russizm 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My lawyer calls it the golden uterus affect.

[–]quackquackoopz 63 points64 points65 points 9 years ago (66 children) | Copy Link

Terrified now? Just wait until you're a father.

(not to dissuade you from fatherhood, it's the most enriching, enlightening, and yes chaotic and tiring ongoing experience you will ever have)

[–]corbeeZ 31 points32 points33 points 9 years ago (44 children) | Copy Link

id love to be a father someday but i never will be. not in this lifetime i guess.

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 28 points29 points30 points 9 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

Not to be one of those "never say never" folks, but it's not as bad as you might think. If you find the right woman to be your life partner and carry your children.

It's not a bad idea to hold off on having kids until we see how the next 10-15 years of global turmoil shake out. Hell, I often wish I'd held off a while longer for the benefit of my kids. But the fact that my wife and I have miraculously created new little humans together is the greatest joy in my life.

It goes without saying but I'll say anyway that the first ~3 years of our firstborn were nightmarish, but, when our second one came around, it was like riding a bike.

Keep an open mind, is all I'm suggesting, you never know what paths life will lead you down

[–]corbeeZ 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

thanks for that. totally agree about the whole trajectory of the future thing. my problem is my future, its goin nowhere fast and im just naturally a fuck up

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 51 points52 points53 points 9 years ago* (24 children) | Copy Link

Dude, me too. Me too.

Keep this a secret between you and me, but before I met my wife I was obese, smoked weed all day every day, worked a dead end job with no possible career path, and had no goals or ambitions besides getting high and getting Taco Bell.

That old hackneyed phrase "it's just a phase" exists because it's true. You're in a funk. It won't last forever. I won't recommend any bullshit like a "therapist" or medication because that shit doesn't work, I'll just suggest that one day you'll wake up wanting more from life than what you have now.

And then you'll grab life by the balls and take the world by storm. When the time comes to put aside your childish ways, you will do so. It's in your blood, it's in your genes, it's in your soul.

No homo, I believe in you, and hear this shit hard: when it's time for you to make your move, you'll make it. Please PM me anytime in the future if you're feeling extra blue

Edit: u/Hollen88 made the important point that my personal experience might not be your personal experience. Please explore all your options, including therapy and medication. Please work toward finding whatever works for you

[–]corbeeZ 26 points27 points28 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

wow.. fuck man, thanks again. You just helped me begin today on a good path. You're a treasure dude. I appreciate it.

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

You're the fuckin treasure homie. You're the diamond in the rough. I'm the one just going through the motions doing the best I can moment by moment.

A little pressure this way or that way and you'll shine bright like a diamond. Like a diamond in the sky.

You're the one who put your true self out there in this community not knowing what the response might be. Hopefully you'll remember from this experience you have roughly ~3.5 billion allies across the world who have a similar take on life as you

Stay golden and stay classy. You're gonna be a fuckin star someday soon

[–]LordKhurush 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

r/wholesomememes

[–]Regono 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This whole exchange was so fucking sweet I got teary eyed.

[–]DirtieHarry 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Hopefully you'll remember from this experience you have roughly ~3.5 billion allies across the world who have a similar take on life as you

Very true. I think most people generally feel the same way. Lots of self doubt in the world.

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

At the end of the day we're another day older. That's the long story short

[–]Captain__Qwark 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Man, I'm just saving this thread for any down moment I have, like this last year in general. You're an example to follow in like and a golden person :)

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm just a regular guy, but I really appreciate the compliment. Please PM me anytime you're feeling down or just want to chat

[–]Hollen88 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I can't agree with the therapist/medication argument. That's dangerous to tell someone who might be deppressed, deppresion is often a death sentence. I didn't have to take meds for very long, but they did help. I was pretty wrecked when my ex decided I don't get any custody rights. He's probably like you said just in a funk. So I don't disagree with most of what you said.

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You're absolutely right, I should not have used such definitive language against modern psychology/psychiatry. I'll edit my comment to reflect the broader perspective.

Anywhere a man can get help that works these days is a valid place for a man to get help. I personally have found "therapy" to be an elaborate Ponzi scheme but I straight up just should not have suggested that it wasn't an option for anyone struggling.

Also, as an aside, please take some small solace in that your crazy ex is out of your life and you had nothing to do with how little you get to see your kid. You can honestly tell them when they call as a teenager and ask "the question" that you did the best you could.

[–]Alt-Right_IsAlright 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Brother! I have found you!

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Mein bruder! How exciting!

Wie geht es dir!

[–]Hollen88 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's no problem man, I was hoping to not come off as a butthead. I'm glad she is gone, and I can't wait till he gets old enough to want to see me. He has autism and that's one of her excuses for me not being able to see him. Hopefully he's as high functioning as I'm thinking he is. Who knows though, she doesn't really tell me anything anymore.

[–]inxile7 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thanks man. I needed to hear this also.

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're your own king, brother

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/92f3df97-4ee2-449c-94cf-d345e3fa68b5

[–]fendenkrell 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Mad respect duder. This is exactly the stage I think I'm at. I am wanting more out of life now.

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Brother go to the gym as often as you can. It's that straightforward.

2000 years ago Socrates knew "No man has the right to be an amateur in the matter of physical training. It is a shame for a man to grow old without seeing the beauty and strength of which his body is capable."

Be proud of yourself and you will then take pride in everything you do. Don't waste anymore of your mortal time on this Earth as a flabby useless degenerate.

It sucks I have to explicitly state that I am not echoing r/theredpill, but in all seriousness there is no greater tragedy than never knowing the limits of your physical capability. Just fucking do it. Be who you want to be.

There's no rule that says the man you were a minute ago has to be the man you are a minute from now. It's your life, live it how you choose to live it

[–]fendenkrell 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

yep! Ive been working on those good habits. I was going strong a year ago and fell out of it. Im right back on the horse though.

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ride 'em cowboy, keep in touch anytime if you need a touchstone for your journey.

Congratulations for putting in the necessary effort

[–]BeholdTheHair 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm 31 and finally started going to the gym with a buddy about three months ago. It's one of the best decisions I've ever made. I feel great and several people have told me I look like I've lost weight (I haven't, but my gut has shrunk a bit from fat being converted into muscle). I don't see so much physical improvement in myself yet, but I do have visible biceps for probably the first time in my life.

I know r/theredpill isn't especially popular here (or at least it doesn't seem so) but they still make some damn solid points with regard to personal improvement and the emphasis they place on lifting and getting into shape is easily the best among them. Even if you're like me and don't necessarily intend to go whole hog with dietary fitness, it's difficult to overstate the benefits of simply hitting the gym two or three times a week.

[–]quackquackoopz 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just fucking do it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXsQAXx_ao0

[–]Lemon_Dungeon 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

How old were you?

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I met my wife when I was 23 and we got married when I was 25.

But don't pay attention to that; pay attention to this: If you're younger than 30 years old, your entire young adult life is still ahead of you.

And hypothetically you've gone full fuckin retard if you think you're donezo just because of this setback or that setback. Life is experiencing setbacks.

That old trite saying about "fish in the sea" is our God's honest truth. Go about your business, take care of yourself, and you are practically guaranteed to find the fish that's right for you

[–]Zabole 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I have to disagree with u saying that therapists and medication dont work. It can work for a group of people same as it has worked for me.

[–]quackquackoopz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

my problem is my future, its goin nowhere fast and im just naturally a fuck up

What would you like your life/yourself to be like this time next year? In 3 years time? 5 years? 10 years?

[–]m3n00bz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow dude what happened to you?

[–]SarahC 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

There's a good chance of global instability due to crop failures.... with a slight hint of WW3 in the next 10 years. Such as India and Pakistan fighting over the dwindling water supply of their rivers. We can't stop those drying up - the heating that's doing that is already "locked in".

Having a child now is much more likely to see them enter the worst global situations we've ever known.

[–]skeeter1234 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sarah Connor?

[–]SarahC 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A much more "Homely" one, and a lot older. =)

[–]quackquackoopz 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Apparently the ice caps are melting and there will be more co2 in the air. We're all good on the water front.

Isn't India more likely to hit up Nepal regarding water supplies? That juicy Tibetan plateau too...

[–]the_unseen_one 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The ice caps are melting into the ocean. Desal is not only very expensive and inefficient, but also really fucks up your coastlines and kills a lot of marine life that people eat.

It's likely that would be very cost prohibitive to do. Even if they did do it, the price of the water would ensure that most people couldn't afford it.

[–]SarahC1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, there's that too!

[–]TheAltRightIsAlright0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Go back to r/collapse, female! This is a safe space for men!

lol Sarah you already know we agree completely now is far from the opportune moment to add more sapient biomass to our already overcrowded biosphere

[–]the_unseen_one0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

All this boils down to is "Find a woman you trust. Load a revolver with three bullets and spin it closed. Tell her that if she pulls the trigger, she'll get monthly payments and a house from you in perpetuity. Then hand her the gun.

If you picked a good woman, she won't pull the trigger! And even if she does, maybe you'll luck out and you won't have your brains blown out!"

This is terrible fucking advice for any man. Until we see real, concrete legal changes in regards to marriage, divorce, alimony, child custody, and father's rights, you'd have to be a Grade A Dipshit to think it's anything but insanity.

[–]nocivo 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Get money and buy a kid like Cristiano Ronaldo. Surrogate mother with donated eggs so that both woman can't have any legal power over the kid

[–]ChromeWeasel 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Don't let the people who hate you win. There's a lot of movement in the US to make fatherhood so intimidating that men won't bother to have children. Not all of that is intentional. Lots of media shoved down your throat just wants you to believe kids make your life suck, or they are so hard that it's not worth it.

Unless you're absolutely against having kids, go find a nice woman somewhere and start a family. You've got a limited window of time to do it. Kids are cool. Families are cool. Fathers raising their own kids are cool. Don't fall for the lure of the media that you're a fuckup just like every TV dad who gets bullied by his TV wife.

If you don't have nice women in your area then travel. Foreign women are awesome. American women can be awesome too, but it can vary in certain areas. If your area sucks, take some trips and meet new people.

Don't let the people who hate you win. Live the life you want to, not the life hateful people are trying to impress onto you.

[–]apathetic_lemur 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

just make sure you follow the rules before travelling to meet women

[–]DonaldIsABellend 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Bit over dramatic.

[–]corbeeZ 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

sorry your drama threshold is so low. your movie selection must be amazing.

[–]DonaldIsABellend 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Don't write yourself off.

[–]corbeeZ 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wont, thanks friend!

[–]Make_E_U_Great_Again 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

They just need to make it pay to play, if the woman gets the child, she gets the costs as well.

[–]IsThisYourAlligator 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

oh no, they'd never do that. because its not fair. imagine that.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Right?

I never understood the idea of giving the kid entirely to the one person who can't afford to be a parent.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

not to dissuade you from fatherhood

No, you really REALLY should persuade people NOT to have kids. You're on the right track. I don't have any at 44, and I'm attractive and they've tried.

[–]quackquackoopz 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

I used to think the same, then my first kid arrived. Wake up as normal one day, go to sleep a tiny useless collection of limbs and head's father. There is no bigger life lesson.

Fair play to you though, we all have our own path.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile-4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I used to think the same, then my first kid arrived.

This. You would have kept feeling that way, if you didn't have a kid. You made the mistake of having a kid. I know that you don't think it's a mistake NOW, but it is, because now you have that risk while I do not.

As long as I don't have kids, biology will never cause me to feel the way you do about your kid, so I'm in the clear.

[–]quackquackoopz5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It wasn't a life mistake, it was for the better.

In a way you're right, what you don't know you can't... miss? You can get on and do your thing regardless, and that's powerful. But I'm glad I know what I know now, though.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hey trust me... I'm not totally out of that game.

I plan on getting another cat sometime in the near future. :)

[–]quackquackoopz2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

A fucking cat person too, what's wrong with you?! ;)

[–]Wraeclast_Exile3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I love kitties! Ok all animals are badass, but... come on. I'd get a bobcat if I could.

[–]quackquackoopz1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'd settle for an image of your good self riding a two headed Siberian tiger. Through Mordor. At New Years.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'll take one order, please.

[–]quackquackoopz1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I call it, 'Midnight Exile':

http://i.imgur.com/yhJGJ1O.png

That'll be $4million, please.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I can get that at night!

[–]FeierInMeinHose3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The safest path isn't always the most rewarding, in fact it is usually the least rewarding.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It has more video games, sleep and fun.

[–]AramisNight1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I find PoE cuts into my sleep time, but it is fun.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes sir!

[–]the_unseen_one 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Men SHOULD be dissuaded from fatherhood with the current laws and society. It's a stupid gamble that you are probably going to lose.

[–]stupidgrrl92 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And scary.

[–]Jjmcgrayy1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Store sperm.

Stack money.

Pay a surrogate.

That's how you have a child as a man. And even that is risky.

[–]fakenate28 9 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Have you considered having a child with a man?

[–]Teskje 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Hm, why, are you offering?

[–]quackquackoopz 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

grabs popcorn again

[–]c4v3m4naa 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I might be.

[–]TheHeckWithItAll6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

| The idea of having a child with a women

How many women?

[–]anxious_ibex 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's better than raising a child in an environment where the 2 parents hate each other.

But I don't understand for the life of me why people default to "well the mother is the best parent". I know women who would make piece of shit moms.

And I know moms who are pieces of shit

[–]chewbacaflocka 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Trust me, it sucks. It's been a few years since it became a sickening reality for myself, but it leaves you with a new awareness and (sadly, on a way) new expectations.

Maybe her being baby crazy from the damn start should have been a red flag, though.

[–]Isonor 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's up to you to find a woman you can trust. We need to stop ignoring the signs when we see them and not make excuses for psychos.

[–]ConnorMcDavidsCat 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not only that, you have to now pay that mother to support the child and most of that money is going to be used on random shit that doesn't actually support the child.

[–]SarahC 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then it's rubbed in your face by paying child support - which the mother spends on shit for herself while her new live-in boyfriend (sleeping in YOUR bed) - fucks your misses, and helps himself to some of the shit she's buying with YOUR money.

I'm surprised guys manage to get by day-by-day in that situation... but they do. Much respect to them.

Don't even look up "Parental alienation"..... that's just salt rubbed into the bleeding raw cuts that run deep in to your heart muscle.

[–]Wraeclast_Exile 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup..which is why I have no kids.

[–]GilbertHamilton 9 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

The amount of people, both men and women, who think childsupport is necessary for visitation astounds me. The two have nothing to do with each other. Your visitation with your child is your right. Your child support is related to the support of the child and not paying it can result in legal action resulting in a lack of visitation.

However, the mother is not able to make that decision. I've seen cases where fathers are told " I need more money or I'll not let you see your baby " and they just cuck through it and pay.

Fuck that shit.

[–]Dalem5 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

my exact situation. lost my job because they found out im getting a MUCH better one but it doesnt start until July. I cant see him until then according to her.

lol women

[–]GilbertHamilton1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Stay strong. Don't disparage mom. Keep notes. Lawyer up. Also high five for a better job!

[–]HunterTier5 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That exact thing happened to me almost a whole year ago. We broke up and she took off with our son and told me she didn't know when I would be able to have him overnight again and that's just how it was going to be. I lawyered up the next day and in July we finally are going to have the the big hearing to determine if I get shared parenting or not. I've been stuck with only eight days a month for what seems forever and it sucks. She's admitted in court that I'm a good father so she has no real reason other than spite to deny me shared parenting every time we've gone to a hearing.

Don't take my story scare you away as your experience may vary lol. I don't regret having him with her because I love my son to death and I'll fight for him until you put me in the ground. I only regret how unwilling she's been to work with me for what's best for him.

I have no doubt in my mind that I will get shared parenting so this past year of teeth grinding after each stunt she's​ pulled will be worth it when I get more time to spend with my son.

[–]backtoreality00 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Then be a good father. The reason fathers often lose custody is because more often they are at fault. Once you control for that you actually get fathers getting custody more often because they can hire better lawyers.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They can kill it without the father's consent, so it's not surprising.

[–]Trebor417 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can confirm it's the worst thing ever, having to spend thousands of pounds to get him back and still ending up with a significantly smaller amount of time also sucks.

[–]Make_E_U_Great_Again 577 points578 points579 points 9 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link

The crusade against men need to end - and not with a crusade against women. It just needs to end, this idiotic war between the sexes.

[–]Masterpass 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That pretty much describes most modern social issues. Social Justice is about lowering the best of us to punish them, not finding a way to bring everyone else to the same level.

[–]PerfectiveVerbTense 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I've wondered before what happened to the term social justice. When I was in college I was part of the campus social justice coalition and we like organized events to try to feed local homeless people and we'd start letter writing campaigns to encourage companies to pay their workers in underdeveloped countries living wages and shit like that. It wasn't until I joined Reddit that I saw social justice being used as a pejorative, and now it seems that's the only way it's used...which is crazy to me. Evidently now social justice is just about being fat, having blue hair, stealing men's babies, accusing men of rape, and calling everyone a racist.

Strange times.

[–]Masterpass 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Like most other things about modern social justice, it was pretty much co-opted by the most extreme elements. The fact that it seems to have developed a cult personality doesn't help things: either you're clinging to the most extreme version of whatever views they hold, or you're cast out.

[–]GroundhogExpert 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Eh, I would disagree with that. There are some arguments that are a race to the bottom, but social justice, or group justice, is about punishing people merely for their status as a member of a class/group. It's about as antithetical to justice as one can get.

[–]hustl3tree5 72 points73 points74 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

We can't even agree on not to be sexist how the fuck are we ever gonna get to not being racist

[–]AtomicKittenz 62 points63 points64 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You're triple fucked if you're poor too.

[–]XxPOOPisSw4GxX3 points 9 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

And disabled

[–]Anon-a-mess 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Those poor African American disabled war veterans are really screwed now.. D:

[–]XxPOOPisSw4GxX2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

:(

[–]topsecreteltee 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Interestingly, the Supreme Court just ruled that VA disability compensation may not be considered income in court, that it is explicitly only for the disabled veteran and their dependents.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Not exactly (it's a little complicated).

There are two types of post military compensation, but they both equal 100% of your compensation (horrible description. bear with me).

You retire from the military with 100% retirement benefits.

You go to the VA and get your bad knees classified as a service related disability at 20%.

You can choose to keep the 100% retirement, or take 80% retirement and 20% disability.

Retirement benefits are split upon divorce, but disability benefits are not.

Here are the specifics of this case:

This man had 100% retirement benefits, but had a classified disability. He choose to reduce his retirement benefits (thereby reducing the portion that his wife received every month) by taking his disability benefits.

She took him to court, and had them take more than 50% of the 80% + 20% disability.

He appealed to the Supreme Court.

Disability benefits are off limits in a divorce. Period. That's what was decided by the courts.

[–]Steeped_In_Folly 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's a lot harder to stop being sexist compared to stop being racist. I have a lot more in common with men of different ethnicities than I have with any woman.

[–]WarriorDark 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think this is the best solution to the whole sexism issue. Everyone just stop, take a breather, and let's have a rational discussion without any yelling, please.

[–]Sk8erkid-12 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's hers got it. Carry it if you want it to be yours

[–]Bred11s7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It belongs to both parents, got it? Fertilize the egg if you want it to be yours.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's hers got it. Carry it if you want it to be yours

That's fine as long as she's willing to pay for it.

[–]Sk8erkid0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's her body!

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's her body!

I absolutely agree.

Her body, her choice, her bill.

[–]Man-n-Stars-18 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I didn't get the notice that there was a war on women.

[–]Waldo129 213 points214 points215 points 9 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

If only all judges thought the way Judge Judy does...

[–]zarathustranc-54 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They do, that's the whole point. This gif totally destroys your kids victim complexes yet you hate women so much that you don't even notice it.

[–]FHayek49 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

wat?

[–]zarathustranc-34 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The whole gif is about how their is no bias against men in custody, the woman in the gif was misinformed, like you. Yet the gif involves a woman "being put in her place" so you immediately assume it agrees with your worldview.

[–]chazcope43 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This man has fallen and can't get up.

[–]zarathustranc-26 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No I'm just not a weak little bitch that needs an ideology centered around hating women to feel powerful.

[–]chazcope37 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No you've just missed the entire point.

[–]zarathustranc-6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I get the point, you have nothing to contribute to the world and you need something to blame that on.

[–]chazcope27 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm done playing shouting games with you over the Internet. You're wrong. Deal with it better.

[–]Tukajo13 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What the fuck?

[–]iwathedreamer4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Bahaha, you are literally so confused, love me some mouth breather entertainment on Reddit!

[–]jaib91 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Imagine manginaing so hard.

[–]NorrisChuck1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What? I love women, I just don't trust the devil in them.

[–]Codemancer20 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The woman thought she had a larger right to the child. The reality is that women do win more child's custody cases than men. It doesn't mean that they deserve to. It also doesn't mean that people hate women because of it. This sub isn't about hating women.

[–]zarathustranc-4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The reality is that women do win more child's custody cases than men.

This is a lie. When men contest custody, they get it more often than when women contest custody. This is brought up in every thread but you kids keep pretending not to know that because it destroys your little victim complex that you use in place of a personality.

This sub isn't about hating women.

You are truly fucking delusional.

Seriously, your weakness disgusts me.

[–]Codemancer17 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You do realize you're just attacking people at this point, right?

[–]jsuss10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

not really...

https://nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/22457-studies-show-judicial-bias-against-dads

http://www.divorcenet.com/resources/divorce/for-men/divorce-for-men-why-women-get-child-custody-over-80-time

https://www.google.com/amp/s/dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/latest-u-s-custody-and-child-support-data/amp/

[–]CrazyGrappler2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"When men contest custody, they get it more often than when women contest custody." Please cite this.

[–]FHayek6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

the gif involves a woman "being put in her place"

The gif is mainly about the judge who herself said that many other judges are biased and don't get the true equality, it's not about attacking the girl...

And I don't even think anyone was commenting about her, but more about the system, which really is scary as shit to any male in divorce.

You might be projecting slightly there.

[–]infinitezero822 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Are you on drugs?

[–]zarathustranc-9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

REEEEEEE I WANT TO BE A VICTIM BUT THE NORMIE WON'T LET ME!!!!!!!! REEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!

[–]infinitezero83 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYKPdNvH800

[–]Jjmcgrayy18 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They do, that's the whole point

  • the gif literally says that other courts say different.

  • the girl literally states that she was told different.

It's like you didn't even look at the damn thing. You are 100% wrong.

[–]zarathustranc-3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

  1. No it doesn't.
  2. You've been told the wrong thing too, you've also been told the right thing but you've chosen to pretend it doesn't exist because then you weak ineffectual losers couldn't have anything to blame all your problems on.

[–]bufedad14 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Eh? This clip literally has Judge Judy stating that judges treat men like second class citizens... and you are arguing that it proves the opposite?

[–]zarathustranc-4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She literally says that fathers aren't second class citizens.

[–]Codemancer18 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Who someone is and how they are treated are different things.

[–]bufedad6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

And she literally says that many don't believe that to be true, including judges.

[–]Wiseguy3002 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She was referring to the implied biases courts tend to carry towards fathers and pass on to mothers like the one she was talking to.

[–]NaturalSelectorX3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Did you miss the part about "a lot of" judges and probation officers not getting the message? She's advocating for the ideal way to handle it.

[–]JwPATX 173 points174 points175 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

TIL that if I'm ever about to be in a custody battle, judge Judy is the place to go.

[–]guytoronto17 points 9 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

I'm in a custody battle right now. You have to know how to play the game. If you are ignorant and act entitled, you are going to have a bad time in front of a family law judge.

[–]Dark_Movie_Director 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll take "my father" for 800, Alex.

[–]CrazyGrappler 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That's a fine line, honestly. You have to be confident, and expect to be treated fairly. Your lawyer is ultimately much more important than you, in my experience.

[–]guytoronto2 points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

My experience is different. You have to be humble, and want the system to treat your children fairly. And I've had more success self representing.

[–]CrazyGrappler 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's good to hear about a different experience. I will say that I've only ever asked for equal treatment. My child is still very young, so I'm far from an expert.

[–]Winxin 273 points274 points275 points 9 years ago (53 children) | Copy Link

My father got the latter. His ex-wife was caught lying in court, and most of all the stuff about abuse she had done was later proven true. And guess who got most of the custody anyways? Not my father, I can assure you of that.

I Probably won't get married because of this.

[–]alanamablamaspama 49 points50 points51 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I used to work alongside law enforcement and CPS in child abuse cases. The system scares a lot of fathers from reporting the abusive mothers to CPS or family court.

In cases where the father does report it? I'm not surprised when years later you find the father across the country and he couldn't find his own kid after the mother skipped town. Too broke and no resources to track them down.

[–]NaturesMayhem 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Isn't that illegal to some extent? Just think it's very wrong to be able to take off with the kid and cut all ties. If the father was a average or a really good parent and they got divorced over some issue with compatibility then the father should get custody if the wife pulls some shit like that. Vice versa as well.

[–]CountDodo 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I imagine that without marriage the chances of you getting custody of the child are even fewer.

[–]infinitezero8 9 years ago [recovered] (28 children) | Copy Link

I Probably won't get married because of this.

Not all women are as sexist or terrible as it seems, there are rational people out there, and there are women that exist that can be great wives but only to great husbands. Don't single out all women because of a couple cases.

Don't misconstrue my words, people. Always trying to make out something that it's not.

[–][deleted] 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Eclania 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

But taxes tho

[–]tule123 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I've debated about this for a while. I've concluded that you end up spending more money by having a kid and being married. So the taxes aren't worth it.

Basically, save more but spend more.

I rather be single, be free, and be happy.

[–]uniden365 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Meh, statistically the the home builder is happier than the career person.

There is an innate, primal, satisfaction that derives from having a family that the single child-free life can't match.

[–]the_unseen_one 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

And statistically divorced middle aged men who have lost everything and can't even see their children are the most likely demographic to be depressed and kill themselves.

Marriage is like alcohol: stealing happiness from tomorrow so today feels nice. But it'll bite you in the ass eventually.

[–]the_real_MSU_is_us 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Most 1st time marriages don't end in divorce. It's not accurate to say they will "bite you in the ass". Depends on who you marry, how long you dated, etc

[–]the_unseen_one 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not getting divorced doesn't mean a happy life either. Every old couple I've met that'd been married for lifetime was intensely unhappy but stayed together out of necessity or loneliness. There's more pitfalls to marriage than just divorce, even if divorce is arguably the worst.

I think it's irresponsible to advise men to risk their whole lives based off of a special unicorn woman that is unlikely to exist.

[–]the_real_MSU_is_us 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Every old couple I've met that'd been married for lifetime was intensely unhappy

Sorry you've had that experience, but My grandparents and parents (now in their 60s) were/arevery happy with each other

[–]grant2400 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Depends on who you are.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Most married men spend more time at work, and focus more on their career. Having a family means men are pressured into earning more, and having more security for their family, giving up their free time and their time with their family.

They do this for their family, and it's held against them when their wife leaves them (80% of the time the person filing for divorce is the wife).

He was supporting the family, so he doesn't get to have time with them after the divorce.

She gets the kids she got to spend time with, and his money he worked to provide for them... he gets neither.

[–]Math_Not-Even-Once 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can get married and not have kids though, seems like the tax breaks would work better then.

[–]PM_ME_UR_BUTT_PLS_TY1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

According to you and every other monkey replying, marriage can ONLY result in divorce and unhappiness.

Sorry you guys feel that way.

[–]Mexisio87 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But that alimony tho

[–]Source_or_gtfo 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Your position as a parent post-breakup (if it happens) might be worse if you're not married.

[–]Winxin 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe so, but these past experiences sway one's future. I don't think it would be possibly to completely forget.

[–]titaniumjackal 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

"Not all women."

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely. But the legal climate is so stacked against you if you are married (and male).

Think of it this way, no matter how great the UK is, or how much we (the US) trust them, we'd never give them our nuclear launch codes. Why? "Not all countries"? It's just too dangerous.

[–]titaniumjackal 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm just pointing out the language. If you say "not all men" people throw a fit.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh gotcha...

[–]AramisNight 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Here is an example of the kind of scenario you are asking men to sign up for. If your wife had the legal right to just straight up murder you, would you still choose to get married? If so then I'm glad you have a relationship where you have that kind of faith in your wife. Personally as much as i love and trust my SO, i wouldn't want to put myself in that position.

[–]the_unseen_one 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah man, you only have a fifty percent (at least) chance of a woman ruining your life! It's not that bad, it's just a coin flip bro.

there are women that exist that can be great wives but only to great husbands

Ah, the inevitable "she only fucked you over because you were a bad husband" trope.

[–]jaib9 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Not all women" doesn't really work when feminists get triggered to death when someone says "not all men".

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not all women are as sexist or terrible as it seems, there are rational people out there, and there are women that exist that can be great wives but only to great husbands

Absolutely. I'm married to one.

That being said, legally today marrying a woman is giving her far too much power over your future.

It's like the US giving our nuclear launch codes to the UK. We trust them, pretty much implicitly as allies. Would we ever trust them with our nuclear launch codes? No. Why? Because no matter how great someone is, there's a limit to how much power you can give them over you.

I tell my boys they shouldn't get married. It's just not legally worth it.

[–]HauteBlooded1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Most women are not terrible or sexist, just like most men are not. I don't know why so many insist that all the women they know have fucked them over? If you continue to meet shitty women, examine what you are doing and see if it's your tastes or just bad luck. It's like how some women are always attracted to abusive, asshole boyfriends--sometimes you're drawn to the shitty members of a group for some weird reason. Go to therapy, look inward--figure out what's up. That doesn't mean the whole group is shitty, though. You know?

Fwiw, I'm a feminist in that I am 100% for equal men and women's rights, in the courts and everywhere else (which many, many feminists are--but boyyyy our shitty members who disagree are loud and obnoxious). I think if we have to have a draft, both sexes should be eligible--though I disagree with drafts in general. :) 'Benevolent sexism' is just as terrible as the malicious shit. It damages men and even women.

I wish we could all work together instead of demonizing the other group. You guys aren't all bad, but some are (not the majority); can you agree that it's the same for feminists? We're honestly the two sides of the same coin, and the fact that we can't come together (almost never) speaks to how long we still have to go before both men and women are treated equally.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't know why so many insist that all the women they know have fucked them over?

They don't have to be terrible, or sexist.

During divorce women are given an array of levers. Pulling these levers will get them what they want. Pull this lever, and you get half of the current property and assets. Pull that lever you get child support and alimony. Pull this other lever, and you get absolute custody of the child.

People acting in their own best interest are just people. It isn't sexism.

I wish we could all work together instead of demonizing the other group.

We aren't demonizing a group. We are demonizing a system. This system victimizes fathers, and mothers benefit from this. But it's the system that encourages this outcome, not the mothers themselves.

Changing mothers would do nothing to change this outcome. Why? Because women have to give up something they already have during a divorce for us to achieve equality. The system basically starts off with, the woman gets all of this, and you get to pay for it. If you fight that, you are a horrible dad and don't deserve custody. So, the mother has to give up what she's already got if we want equality, which isn't something you can expect people to do (especially in acrimonious divorces).

Requiring the system to treat people equally, would resolve that issue.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 37 points38 points39 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Don't ever marry!

There is no benefit to the man at all. Everything you can have with marriage you can have cohabitating.

Marriage is just an insurance policy for women to take half your shit when they are done. It's a huge waste of money as a man.

[–]guytoronto 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Guess what...cohabitating can often mean common law marriage, and assets can still be split 50/50.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's why you learn the laws in your area.

In some places, just saying that you both are married is legal enough.

Point stands. Don't get "married" . Two people can love each other and be happy without the need for marriage.

[–]AngryPeopleClickMore 9 years ago [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

I see blue pill manginas are downvoting this comment. In case you simps need a reminder why to never get married:

(pasted from here)

I'm afraid that "our " wedding will be all about you and my role will consist of "Shut up. Pay up. Get yelled at."

I'm afraid that after you've had your dream wedding and you find yourself having to deal with day to day reality, it will end up being my fault that you're not living happily ever after.

I'm afraid that I will gradually stop being the guy you love and want to spend the rest of your life with and turn into the room-mate you can barely stand but you keep me around for the heavy lifting and helping to pay the rent.

I'm afraid that you will take marriage advice from your mother and her friends, all of whom will tell you that being nice to your husband is fucking stupid and you shouldn't bother. I'm afraid that you'll not wonder why your father is so miserable...

I'm afraid that you will "accidentally" slip up on birth control and I'll end up with children whether I like it or not. ..But when you're the size of a house and fed up, I'll be "the bastard that did this to you."

I'm afraid that the first words my daughter learns will be "Isn't daddy stupid?"

I'm afraid that you'll yellat me for not doing enough with the kids - but every time I try, you show up to tell me that I'm doing it wrong and "why are you so useless?"

I'm afraid that once you've got the children you wanted, your libido will fall off the edge of a cliff.

I'm afraid that sex will stop being a special moment between us and become something you use to keep me in line, only deployed when I've been a good dog.

I'm afraid that "our" home will fill up with your family and your friends, all of whom will treat me like I don't deserve to be there.

I'm afraid our relationship will consist of me trying to keep you from yelling at me.

I'm afraid that I'll be continually expected to support you and care for you and prove how committed I am - and in return I'll get drama, nagging and conintual reminders that I'm useless.

I'm afraid that you'll spend the entire marriage telling me that my opinion is worthless and then bitch when I don't immediately come up with an answer to whatever drama you're moaning about.

I'm afraid that any display of insecurity or feeling down will be met with a terse "Oh man up" and subsequently used to beat me over the head for not being a real man.

I'm afraid that every time I'm sick your way of proving how much you care is to make snide comments about man-flu and bitch because I'm lying around doing nothing.

I'm afraid that any time I get time to myself, you'll be right there with a honey-do list or some little job that needs doing right now, just to make sure I never get chance to relax.

I'm afraid that no matter what I do, there's always something else that's making you pissed off.

I'm afraid that I'll gradually end up losing my hobbies, interests, opinions, friends and as many of my possesions as you can throw away when my back is turned. And you'll then bitch at me for being "Boring"

I'm afraid that I'll wake up one day and realise that I'm paying for a house that isn't my home, full of shit that somebody else wanted, kids that are being raised to treat me with contempt and a life that consists of "work. eat. sleep." Correction. "Work. Eat. Get moaned at. Sleep."

And of course there's always the possibility that after I've tried to give you everything you wanted, you'll decide one day that my services are no longer required and I'll find myself in a bedsit, pisspoor and wondering what happened to the last ten years of my life.

[–]Baridi 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

As a divorcee, this is pretty much all truth in a failed marriage. I spent the last few months of my failed marriage (And even the subsequent failed relationship) just being consistently annoyed by her drama. Because all her trashy friends and family kept giving her advice that causing drama every chance she got would somehow slow down making me care less. That seems to be the mindset of many women, turning every petty molehill into a mountain is somehow supposed to make me care. Pretending to make it important to you does not translate to making it important to me.

About the "Trashy" comment. She was perfectly taken care of when she was with me. She didn't have any bills. I paid for her phone, rent, car, just about all the bills (She paid for netflix, whoopee), and she bummed my smokes. She got a job at Wal-Mart but instead of helping out, she spent 90% of her money on fast food and stupid crap she'd use once and then return. She got really fat... and I mean REALLY fat. Normally wouldn't be a problem, as I'm into bigger women, but she was also a complete slob. Her parents were worthless, my family had to pay for the entire wedding. Her parents didn't even bother to show up.

Also, you do lose your hobbies, friends, and interests when you're married. Everything has to be about her. Everything. But thankfully I never lost my opinions. I'd just roll my eyes whenever she thought her opinion mattered more than mine and said some completely disarming comment.

I know I was a complete asshole in the last few months of the relationship, but she basically battered any romance, attraction or sensitivity I had for her out of me. I couldn't have fun or time to myself. I couldn't even do anything I loved anymore. If I played video games on my laptop she'd start a fight that I wasn't paying attention to her enough. If I wanted to watch college football(Which is only one day of the week for 3 hours) She'd intentionally cause drama so it'd ruin the whole experience for me. If I wanted to have a couple of drinks, she'd go around my entire family and tell them I'm an alcoholic. I basically had quit drinking altogether for half of my marriage. Yet she was constantly playing Destiny on her Xbox, and would go out almost every other night to get shitfaced with her white trash Wal-Mart friends.

Long story short, that marriage was doomed from the get-go. Also, to the ass-hat below me who thinks this shit only happens to pushovers? The only reason I got married in the first place is that there was a point in time where she wasn't a complete nightmare. She took care of my mom when I was on the wrong side of a prison visitation window. Decidedly not a pushover.

The final straw was when she heard female voices over my skype chat (I was talking to my guiid on WoW) and when I went to go to the bathroom she grabbed and smashed my laptop. Luckily she was too stupid to smash the actual computer part, and just broke the screen.(At least I could connect it to a TV and still use it while I waited for my new one to arrive.) I ignored her completely for around two weeks, then she implied she was cheating on me. So I kicked her out. She took her clothes, got in her car, and drove back to the West coast to her parents. Never saw her again. Good riddance. Now I heard she got into meth and is running around with a Neo-Nazi (She's not white) Maybe I should feel bad about the meth part, but the Neo-Nazi part just kinda cancelled it out.

[–]kruivopin 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It sounds like you are describing a toxic relationship. You should try not being in one of those.

[–]Jillian0424 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That whole thing brought tears to my eyes :'( I feel terrible for anyone going through this. It inspires me to be a great wife, and to only improve from there.

[–]DamnItsColdUpHere 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit; Spot. On.

[–]xscamerashyy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

wow. as I read this, I slowly realized I'm screwed

[–]MidEastBeast777-6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

A lot of these points exist because some men are complete push overs and let their women walk all over them. Women are not attracted to weak men, they prefer manly men - this is what I've been told by women and I'm pretty sure its built into our evolutionary DNA. That means someone who is tough but fair.

Guys who are reading this long list of "I'm afraid..." please consider that if you are afraid of this shit you better grow some fucking balls and be a man. Don't be afraid to put your foot down, or your woman WILL walk all over you - I don't care how nice she is.

Like the old Bill Burr joke of sleeping on the couch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzgadoLEVFk

[–]Pootanium6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think you're being overly optimistic, borderline zealous. You can be the manliest, John Wayne, hard-working, take-no-shit type of man, and still get divorced/have her leave you for any reason, then have all this shit that "I'm afraid of" still happen to you. Life is tough and love and or a wife isn't guaranteed. These are valid points this post is making. Those things he's listing exist, it's just that men aren't allowed to bitch about it. PS. Love is worth all that bullshit. I know its stupid. Now I'm being overly optimistic.

[–]the_unseen_one3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Traditional conservatives are as bad as feminists. "It's only this bad because of men, women are innocent cherubs that can do no wrong!"

Same shit, different rectum.

[–]TyroneofAfrica 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Married people get tax benefits. Just sign a prenup and you don't have to worry about it.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Prenuptial agreements get tossed easily. Look it up if you don't believe.

And sometimes it costs more to be married. I recall one article of two intellectuals realizing that marriage was a net loss. So they divorced, remained together and enjoyed the extra income.

[–]LucasPmS 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

how is that you lose money by being married?

[–]Jjmcgrayy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It was an article. Two professors (I beleive) calculated their expenses and realized their taxes would be less if they were not married and filed separately.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_penalty

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Being married means that your income is joined as well, which can put you in a higher tax bracket, increasing your overall tax burden.

For instance...

Woman's income: 75,000 @ 20% = 15,000 taxes Man's income: 75,000 @ 20% = 15,000 taxes

Total tax burden ($30,000)

Combined income 150,000

The first tax bracket 0-75,000 @ 20% = 15,000 taxes

The second tax bracket 75,001-150,000 @40% = 30,000 taxes

Total tax burden is 45,000 (minus $2,000 for the marriage tax credit), so total of $43,000... which is $13,000 more than single.

These numbers are totally made up (including the brackets) but this is the principle of how that would work.

[–]FeierInMeinHose 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Prenups aren't always upheld, they may save your ass but at the same time it's not a guarantee.

[–]the_unseen_one 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Prenups are a joke. They are virtually never upheld, and they can only cover a scant few subjects. They're expensive toilet paper.

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There was a news article about a judge who dismissed a prenup because the wife wasn't getting enough of his money.

I mean, literally, the prenup sets up how much she gets in the divorce, and the judge just said, I know this is your money, but I think she deserves it, and your contract preventing that isn't going to stand in the way of me giving it to her.

[–]the_unseen_one 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No men should get married or have children under the current anti-male system. It's the height of stupidity to do so, akin to watching dozens of men put their hands on a hot poker, get burnt, then decide to do the same thing anyways.

[–]shaolin_cowboy 108 points109 points110 points 9 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Hello everyone. I'm a single dad. I feel like my son is many times more safe with me than with his mom. Before I got my son, my ex had lots of boyfriends, and the last one she was with was an ex-con who was in and out of jail a lot.

I've come to realize a couple things. One, it is easier for a woman to find a man in the dating world than the other way around. Everyone knows this but few admit it for whatever reason. So the probability of a woman having multiple men in their lives is higher than most men having multiple women. Multiple people coming in a child's home probably increases the odds of something bad happening to the child, but I don't have the data, except from my own experience with my ex. I would think it would create a less stable environment. I have had my child for three years now, and in that span of time I only had one relationship with a woman and it only lasted a month. That was it. I don't really see myself meeting anyone new any time soon either. The dating scene is very bad for men these days if you ask me. I've also learned recently that women without kids don't want to date men with children. The reverse is not as true I don't think. Personally, I would not want to date a woman with more than two kids (but I might make an exception depending on the circumstances), mostly because that is a lot of responsibility, but one or two kids, I'm ok with that as long as the mother is a responsible person, and I was even this way before I had my son. However, I have seen lots of online dating profiles where women don't want guys with kids and I also had a lady turn me down recently because I had a kid.

So for the past three years, it has mostly just been me and my son. He has had his own room (for the first time in his life) and a safe environment in which to grow. I'm also college educated and work in computers. We have a total of four computers in our apartment and his computer skills have increased a great deal because of this. He sometimes surprises me and learns things I never even knew about. He actually installed hardware like the Steam Link himself and configured a programmable keypad on his $45 gaming mouse all by himself. He never really had these opportunities before.

The point is that society needs to stop assuming that the mother is always the better choice. I can't stress enough how much this needs to change. I wanted to tell my own story because I know there are dads out there still struggling, still being stereotyped by society, and still not seeing justice. Some guys out there might disagree with my story, and to this I would say I am speaking from my own experience in life. My experience may not be typical, but it is true to my own existence.

[–]Dat_grammar_tho 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

tip: Two line returns make a new paragraph

[–]changing_rivers 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Thank you for sharing, and good luck!

[–]shaolin_cowboy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No problem. I'm in a pretty good state right now. I feel sympathy for the guys out there who have it worse than me.

[–]the_unseen_one 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nice, fair handed, good post dude. Thanks for sharing.

[–]blackop 36 points37 points38 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Dude I just got a who new level of respect for her

[–]fuckthiscrazyshit 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Amen. Can I appeal my case to her?

[–]bat_in_the_stacks 119 points120 points121 points 9 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

Well, she has my support for Supreme Court Justice.

[–]Stegasaurus_Wrecks 76 points77 points78 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Jesus can you imagine the 'does not compute' moment from some feminists if that happened?

"She's a woman, yay!"

"But she's in favour of men's rights? Boo."

[–]dalisu45 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If you don't support Hillary you're a sexist. If you support Marine Le Pen, you're a racist.

They don't have a problem being inconsistent.

[–]Jjmcgrayy 17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's easy.

"internalized mysoginy"

They already have tools for dealing with rebellious women already. No bigger sexist than a feminist

[–]juniperbees3 points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

But feminists aren't against men's rights.

[–]Demonspawn 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But feminists aren't against men's rights.

Just in case you weren't being sarcastic.

[–]Frosted_Anything0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Can we stop putting labels on someone just fighting for equality?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Can we stop putting labels on someone just fighting for equality?

We weren't talking about anyone fighting for equality. We were talking about feminists.

[–]Frosted_Anything1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I was talking about judge Judy

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ah... gotcha. That makes more sense.

[–]Griffin8800 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The vast majority of feminists (not the ones making crazy tumblr post you see on reddit) are in favor of equal parental rights for men and women. This idea that fathers aren't real parents leads to companies not providing paternal leave and shit like that, which puts pressure on mothers to leave their careers when they have kids.

At the very least when it comes to parental rights, feminists and men's rights activists are on the same page. Unfortunately I think the only exposure to feminism people on Reddit see is from dumbshit teenagers who shouldn't be taken seriously on any subject.

[–]Demonspawn3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The vast majority of feminists (not the ones making crazy tumblr post you see on reddit) are in favor of equal parental rights for men and women.

No, no they are not.

[–]nosmokingbandit 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit can this be a thing?

[–]PalaceKicks 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

iirc anyone can be nominated to the position regardless of education

[–]blumhagen 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You don't even need to be a lawyer or judge.

[–]PalaceKicks 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Nope absolutely anyone can get nominated

[–]blumhagen 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah I know I was just adding that to your comment. I realize now it probably looked like a question without a question mark

[–]PalaceKicks1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh I see now haha my bad

[–]mrstickman 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Christopher Buckley would agree.

[–]HelperBot_ 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Courtship


HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 71913

[–]ThogOfWar 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's an interesting concept, have you read it? Is it any good?

[–]mrstickman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've not read it; the description just got stuck in my head.

[–]paperclipEnthusiast 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As someone who grew up with only a father in their life, this is a beautiful thing to see.

[–]RingosTurdFace 94 points95 points96 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

What a cunt that young mother is though: JJ - "...and he has as much right to take that child as you..."

Mother - "That's not what I've been told".

Even if the system is telling her she has more rights to her child (and that's fucked up enough), what sort of horrible, utterly selfish person does it take to actually act upon that and try to deprive her own child of it's father?

Plus the pain and fear she must feel if ever she imagines life without her daughter - with someone having legally taken her child away from her and prevent her from seeing it, regardless of how wrong it feels, or how much distress it causes and then to deliberately inflict that on someone else, and to even go as far and going to court to try and do so....

Some people are so disgustingly self centred and selfish.

[–]Stegasaurus_Wrecks 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Even if the system is telling her she has more rights to her child (and that's fucked up enough), what sort of horrible, utterly selfish person does it take to actually act upon that and try to deprive her own child of it's father?

Exactly.

To just selfishly do that makes me think the kid is BETTER OFF with the father.

[–]MikeGamerGuy 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are a lot of people like that. That's why the world is full of suffering. "I don't care if it's right. Just give me all that I can get."

[–]niggoms 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Haha. You give people too much credit. Not only do they do everything horrible you've listed, but they do it mainly for child support money, not even for the kids. And they do it on a mass scale and the courts help them.

[–]yarnicles 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Replying to the "that's not what I've been told"... Drives me crazy! I'm going through a divorce and even my parents think I (the mom) should have full custody and my ex should just get a weekend every now and then. Why?! Because I'm a woman? No thank you. Our daughter deserves both of her parents. I hope 50/50 becomes the norm so I can stop arguing this with people.

[–]SpaceDog777 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

To a number of women, children are possessions that can be used as weapons against the fathers.

[–]zombiemakemelol 103 points104 points105 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The double think is real though:

"Women can do more than raise kids, why don't men be stay at home dads?!"

"Men can't get custody of the kids, they don't have the nurturing mother's instinct! It's cruel to deprive a mother from her kids, men probably don't REALLY care anyway!"

[–]kupo_moogle 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

My husband is a stay-at-home dad and he's awesome at it. I was off for a year on mat leave so I got to enjoy my time with our son, now it's his turn. When he turns two we will probably put him in daycare during the week, but for now this works for us.

[–]RabbleRabble668 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm actually a stay at home dad right now! It's harder than I thought it would be but I love it honestly. Same deal, my wife took her full year mat leave and then went back to work. she makes more than I would so I just made more sense

[–]JBthrizzle 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

as a former stay at home dad, it was the best year of my life. i love my kids more than the moon, and it made me appreciate what the women in my life did for me.

[–]majortom22 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

"That's not what I was told"

Fuck. You.

On so many levels. What a complete fool.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

well, to be fair she probably has been told that her entire life.

[–]the_unseen_one 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Most women have been told they are entitled to much more than they should be for much of their life, either directly or indirectly. Part of the blame for her being a selfish child is on society.

[–]majortom22 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh I don't doubt that for a second. It's a combination of her accepting/believing that and just standing their like a dumb cow "that's not what I was told". No thinking. No concern for right or wrong. Only about herself and "what she was told". Dumb bitch.

[–]CrazyGrappler 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. Fuck You is still the correct response.

[–]byecyclehelmet 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So the quotes on the facebook pages are real! Great stuff. I like this woman a lot more now. She's awesome. This GIF loops quite well as an infinite rant. :P

[–]candyred1 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Family court, at least in San Jose CA, has either never been educated about personality disorders, parental alienation, and hostile aggressive parenting.....or they have and that is not important to them and bias trumps it all. We had clear evidence presented to the court of my husbands ex emotionally/psychologically abusing their daughter, and it is very obvious severe alienation with each court hearing. What do they do? Change split custody- AND GIVE THE ABUSING MOTHER FULL CUSTODY!!! This is what happened. I never in a million years would have thought this was the reality of it. My husbands ex is the Golden Uterus Syndrome mother word per word, all of it exactly. Alot of children would be saved from abuse if judges, lawyers, and therapists had the heart and intellect that Judge Judy has.

[–]Hero_764 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm curious -- What evidence did you have? I'm also in SJ.

[–]candyred1 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

We recorded telephone calls she had with her mother while at our house. After calls with her mother she would act very different, quiet then with angry outbursts and upset with no clear explanation. So we recorded calls and they were clearly, severe mental manipulation, threats if she didnt follow what her mother said, etc. I almost threw up the first time i heard it, and ive seen some shit, thats how bad. Other than every one in the courtroom having a case of Golden Uterus Syndrome, I cant even come close to an explaination or logical reason why the mother wasnt ordered to do intensive psych treatment and lose custody. My husband and I have a home, her sisters live here (our kids together), and no criminal record. The mother has several DV convictions. Really.

[–]Hero_764 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's fucked up. I hope my luck is better than yours, I also share custody with a golden uterus.

[–]candyred1 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Cara Ulney, does eval for screenings, stay away from her at all costs.

[–]notanotherluke 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I would like to shake Judge Judy's hand.

[–]polaryzed 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy, you're goddamn right.

[–]fmlom 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

Custody should never be granted to a jobless parent if the other parent works to support the child.

[–]joggle1 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That happened with my dad. He owns his own business and has run it successfully for decades. His ex is homeless if she isn't living with a boyfriend, she's long since burned all her bridges with her own family, and hasn't had a job in decades. Yet she got primary custody of their daughter (my half sister). Even when he fought for custody he couldn't win (mainly because he lived in another state apparently as if that makes a lot of sense when weighing whether it's better to live in a homeless shelter or to live in a normal house).

Fortunately, she had good friends and spent most of her time living with them while going to high school. Somehow she came out OK in the end despite everything and is nearly the complete opposite of her mom.

[–]cadaada 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, you dont get it, with that, the jobless person can live with the money as well :)

[–]zarathustranc-9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. You have a stay at home parent that spends most of every day with the child and you think it's a good idea to send the child to the parent that spends little time actually raising the kid? You victim complex is showing.

[–]bufedad18 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

The stupidest thing you've ever heard is that a parent who cannot support their child in any way shouldn't have custody of that child?

Man the bubble you must live in.

You have a stay at home parent that spends most of every day with the child and you think it's a good idea to send the child to the parent that spends little time actually raising the kid?

You mean, the person who has sacrificed their life, body and soul to provide for that child? The person who is willing to do whatever it takes to make sure that child is cared for? That person? Yeah... that person should have custody of that child.

[–]likes_tea-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

To be fair, the stay at home parent is usually closer to the child and I'm sure the child would be happier with that parent. If a parent is working really long hours, they might not know the kid and be a good of a care taker as the stay at home one.

Honestly if I was young and my parents got separated I would be a bit devastated if I were to go with my dad an not my mom since she was the one that did the primary caring for me at the time. And I absolutely love my dad, it's just that he's not gonna know what I like to eat, what clothes to buy, helping me with emotional adjustments, who my friends are etc. as much as my mom that spends more time listening to me talk.

It would be a different story if my mom was abusive or has a dangerous lifestyle, but that's not the case.

Also jobless can be kinda temporary, what if 1 parent is just laid off or studying, or looking at the time of the divorce.

[–]bufedad8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Honestly if I was young and my parents got separated I would be a bit devastated if I were to go with my dad an not my mom since she was the one that did the primary caring for me at the time.

Would you say that if your mom would have to support you completely on her own? No. You can only say that because you know that if you went to your mom, your dad would still have to sacrifice his body, mind, and soul to support the two of you... without any of the benefits of having the family he still has to support.

[–]likes_tea-3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Should could've if she tried. She was studying for a while, but she could've just went and got a job if really needed. The thing is my dad probably wouldn't have wanted her to stop studying and would've supported me either way even if they did separate, cuz her working a crappy job would mean she would have no time for me and my quality of life would suffer. And he would still be my dad, he would've just lost my mom as his wife. Not every divorce causes the couple to be mortal enemies or screw each other with any means possible.

What's this sacrificing body mind and soul stuff? It would just be money that he would have to spend on his family anyways before a separation. He would only suffer if my mom was an asshole that wanted to make him suffer and keep me from my father for selfish reasons. If my mom was that crazy and that much of an asshole, then yeah custody should probably not go to her.

The argument was custody should go to someone that's working, which is irrelevant. It should go to whoever would give the child the best life (which includes not being crazy). Not working doesn't make you a bad parent.

[–]bufedad7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Should could've if she tried. She was studying for a while, but she could've just went and got a job if really needed.

Must be nice to be able to use someone else's work to finance your goals.

The thing is my dad probably wouldn't have wanted her to stop studying and would've supported me either way even if they did separate, cuz her working a crappy job would mean she would have no time for me and my quality of life would suffer.

You ever talk to your dad about that? Or are you just assuming that of course he would be happy with it?

[–]likes_tea-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm 100% sure he'll be ok with it, but that's my family.

I understand some people might use this to do unkind things to each other. Ideally when 2 people separate from each other, they should be able to have nothing to do with each other, but when you have a kid it's complicated. Both parents should be involved as much as possible, contributing however they can, unless one of them is toxic. Honestly if went with my dad, it should be unfair to my dad cuz he has to do primary care AND work long hours while my mom just play with me whenever she feels like it.

Anyone that has custody can abuse that privilege to hurt the other parent, both the mother and father, employed or not can do that. That's not right, but it's not an issue of who's making money.

[–]bufedad7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm 100% sure he'll be ok with it, but that's my family.

Of course you are. You've never asked him. You've never discussed it with him. You've just assumed he'd be happy to make that sacrifice.

[–]likes_tea-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think I know my dad very well... again this is my own family.

Other families may be different, if other dads don't want to do that, that's like a father saying he doesn't want to spend money on supporting his kid. It's irresponsible to walk away from a kid, it's not the kid's fault the parents decided to separate. A dad would only not want to help his kid if he didn't love his kid, or hates the mom more than he loves the kid.

Basically, he has responsibilities to his kid, whether he has custody or not. When a child's parents divorce, it shouldn't be a case of "pick 1 parent and the other parent no longer have parental duties towards you".

[–]bufedad3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think I know my dad very well... again this is my own family.

I'm sure you do. Yet you assume his opinion on this, even though you've never discussed it with him. He's be willing to sacrifice all of that, just because.

[–]likes_tea1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think it's fair to speak for people that's close to you if you know them well enough. I'm not gonna randomly say "hey dad, if you and mom had a divorce and mom got custody would you still pay for me" out of nowhere.

I don't get why you think I need to get a written statement from him or something to represent his feelings accurately. I'm also quite sure that my parents won't disown me if I had premarital sex or something, and no I didn't discuss this with them explicitly, but I know them well enough to be very certain about their answers.

[–]bufedad3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I think it's fair to speak for people that's close to you if you know them well enough.

And people wonder why we don't offer up our feelings on things. It doesn't even matter what his real feelings on this issue are, you've already decided what he would've wanted, and that's good enough for you.

[–]likes_tea1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm not going to guess your feelings, or your dad's feelings. But I can make a statement on my own dad's feelings since I know him well. He's not the type to have "real feelings" that he would hide, and he has a pretty healthy environment to make his feelings known.

If you have concerns about expressing your real feelings or feel like people are making decisions for your against your will, that's probably based on your own experiences and you shouldn't project that onto other people.

I'm not saying all dads would be happy about this, I'm saying MY dad would be happy to financially provide for me (even now being fully grown, making more money than him, I can't even get him to stop trying to pay for everything). You don't have anyone that you know so well that you can speak for them with a great amount of certainty?

Anyways, I think you're pursuing a thing that isn't even relevant in this conversation, caring for your kid is a responsibility regardless of how you feel about it.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

But I can make a statement on my own dad's feelings since I know him well

Yep. You've decided what his feelings on the matter are. What they actually are, doesn't matter.

[–]likes_tea1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I can't "decide" the feelings of anyone, I can express my understanding of them. You keep implying I disregard the feeling of my dad, I wonder how I'm doing that, disregarding would usually imply actions on my part that go against what he wants without considering what he thinks.

I'm just stating my understanding of my own dad. I'm not deciding anything for him. He can speak you know, and communicate his feelings, which he does.

I don't know why you're arguing with me on this, since if you didn't realize, my thoughts on my dad's feelings are not legally binding. A judge isn't going to be like, oh your child THINKS you like paying for them, so you should. You're just saying for some reason I can't be sure of my dad's feelings, which is weird since you don't know my dad at all.

This is like if my dad said "Hey likes_tea really likes to drink tea", and you going "well looks like you already decided what they like, what likes_tea's feelings really are doesn't matter".

I'm going to ask you this again, do you have no one that you're so close to that you can represent their feelings with great certainty? And do you think there's no one in the world that would have a relationship like that with someone?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I can't "decide" the feelings of anyone, I can express my understanding of them.

You don't have an understanding of them. You haven't discussed them with him. You've decided what they should be, and what he actually feels is irrelevant.

[–]likes_tea0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're just repeating the same thing in each comment right now, and not addressing any of my responses... if you feel like writing something unique then I'll respond. If not that's cool too.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You mean in each comment where you tell me that his actual thoughts don't matter, and you're able to discern without any input from him? You don't change your tune. Why should i?

[–]fmlom2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Honestly if I was young and my parents got separated I would be a bit devastated if I were to go with my dad an not my mom since she was the one that did the primary caring for me at the time.

Really? Who was paying for your food? Your roof? Your transportation? Your clothing?

Also jobless can be kinda temporary, what if 1 parent is just laid off or studying, or looking at the time of the divorce.

Compare tax returns over the last 5 years. See if one parent is financially incapable of raising a child.

[–]likes_tea0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

My dad would be paying for most stuff until my mom finishes school? I feel like people here are inherently triggered by child support even if it's done right. Child support actually serves a real purpose. It could be exploited but only if the parent isn't using it on the kid.

A kid needs more than money to survive, and money is one of the most transferrable things. What if the earning potential of the parents switches after the separation (very well can happen if my dad gets laid off and my mom graduates and find a decent job)? Does custody get changed around? It's a terrible way to decide custody.

Children should have the support of both parents, in as similar of a situation as possible before a divorce happens. If I stayed with my mom primarily, and get financial support, occasional homework help, play fights, and random adventures from my dad, it would simulate the environment I had before as closely as possible. It sucks that I would have to travel to another house to do cool stuff with my dad, but that's what sucks about a divorce.

While if I went with my dad, my life would suddenly be really strange since my dad while really cool most of the time, can't take care of the day to day as much.

[–]fmlom1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

My dad would be paying for most stuff until my mom finishes school?

So you admit you're never was incapable of raising a child, and that your father was.

I feel like people here are inherently triggered by child support even if it's done right.

Lol, you think child support can be right.

Child support actually serves a real purpose.

Creating weak minded, spineless losers.

What if the earning potential of the parents switches after the separation (very well can happen if my dad gets laid off and my mom graduates and find a decent job)?

Dumb lazy bitches that raise liberals don't just become useful. That's like asking what would happen if the Browns won the World Series. The Browns suck, and they don't play baseball.

[–]likes_tea1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I guess we disagree fundamentally on child support and I guess how society should work. I don't think there's a point of continuing this discussion since we disagree on something a lot bigger than that.

My mom actually makes almost the same amount of money as my dad now btw. She was a doctor from another country, and just had to get herself re-licensed as a nurse here. She would've been able to support me if she got a worse job and stopped studying, but my dad wouldn't have wanted that anyways and would've just paid for it (cuz he's actually a decent person).

I don't understand why after a divorce, a person would hurt themselves and their kid just so their ex would suffer as well, it's so petty.

But I think we disagree on when people should help and support each other. It's a huge political issue and you can have your own opinions. Honesty both my parents are pretty politically conservative, they hate welfare, minimum wage, and taxes and stuff, but agree on parents supporting their kids fully. I lean more liberal for sure, cuz I would rather have my society safe and happy, and believes that the benefit of potentially rescuing a life is worth the possibility someone takes advantage of a benefit. Each to their own.

[–]fmlom1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Welfare is for subhumans.

[–]likes_tea1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ok... I disagree but can't control what you think.

[–]zarathustranc-6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's called child support, but you knew that. Enjoy your victim complex. I'll be over here not blaming all my problems on women.

[–]LegalSC12 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nice bait.

[–]Santaball4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Didn't say anything about women. Said jobless parent. Believer it or not women work, stop being sexist.

[–]bufedad3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's called child support, but you knew that.

And? That makes it right?

Enjoy your victim complex.

Acknowledging areas where society (and the legal system) is biased against men is a victim complex?

I'll be over here not blaming all my problems on women.

Who blamed women for anything?

[–]RubyOrchid131 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Nope, you'll blame the evil patriarchy instead!

[–]fmlom2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, because a stay at home parent that lives on welfare and child support is a detriment to the kid's life. Look up welfare house hold stats. It's retarded to assume that just spending time with a kid helps it.

[–]IIIIRadsIIII 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The happiness in his eyes when she says he has a right to his child is beautiful. I could imagine my little boy being taken away.

[–]Greencheezy 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

thats not what I've been told.

Jeez

[–]scirio 19 points20 points21 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

/r/perfectloops

[–]FruitPunchCult 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I can't really handle her show. To much yelling. I love what see of her in the clips like this tho. She seems interesting in interviews too.

[–]interstate-15 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

And it's a show, cases are real but everything has been decided.

[–]IsThisYourAlligator-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

duh...?

did you think she would just listen to cases and they would leave with no decision being handed down?

or do you just not understand what judges do?

[–]interstate-153 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I mean it's already all been decided off camera, what you're seeing is simply a show that's put on.

[–]soingee3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Both sides also get paid for being on the show, so it's a weird sense of justice where you can lose but still win.

[–]HoMaster 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And yet it's the yelling and no nonesense that the public likes. Yeah, the masses are stupid.

[–]quackquackoopz 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If only, Judy, if only...

[–]savngtheworld 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy for SCOTUS!?

[–]speedisavirus 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Too bad more people didn't see this episode. I think she is a real twat but this is something she does that is positive and I haven't ever really go off message on it. She thinks men have as much a right to parenthood as women do and is vocal about it when she sees it not happening.

[–]Masterpass 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy is a based bitch and I love her for it. Seriously intelligent woman. I've seen her in a couple of television interviews that she's done outside of the show, funny thing is, she's actually fairly quiet when she's not on the stand, but you can tell that she's incredibly sharp.

[–]Hammonkey 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In this country fathers are not 2nd class citizens.

Unless you live in California

[–]ManiacFoSho7 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The thing about Judge Judy is that she's a bitch, but she's fair.

[–]coderbond 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Got custody of my little girl when she was three, I was 23. She'll be 18 this winter. Thanks for helping me grow up sis :'/

[–]BellyHat 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My children were moved against my will 4000 miles away yesterday. I tried to fight, but to no avail. This hits hard.

[–]ButtonBreakingGamer 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What a progressive stance. Surprised to see this on r/all, but it's nice to see that the court bias is being brought into people's minds.

[–]enlightenedkitty 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That almost made me cry. Not a lot of women think fathers have rights to the children and thats so wrong.

[–]P00pyd 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I totally feel for this guy. She pretty cute I would even say a step above him. I can envision the night where he made his decision while that tight body, cute face but crazy antics and shitty attitude gave him a chance. That was the day he made the mistake and stuck his dick in crazy. Proud of him for fighting for his child.

[–]CrazyGrappler 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Having been in the exact situation you described I totally feel for the man. You forgot about the silver tongue and manipulating promises that go along with the right body and cute face though.

[–]MaunaLoona 21 points22 points23 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In this country fathers are not second class citizens.

If only that was the case.

[–]ihatefeminazis1 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

"that's not what i've been told"

i'm sure you've also not been told that you can get pregnant if you have sex....

[–]bufedad0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Women from all walks of life are told that children have a right to be with their mother, and that fathers are every other weekend (if the mother allows that).

[–]ihatefeminazis10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Which ones are you talking about? Everything I've heard and i've experienced say that both parents have an equal right...

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Really? It's so ingrained in our culture that women are the actual parents, that most people don't even question it.

Let me just point out a popular example. Two parents gave their lives for Harry Potter. Only one of them mattered.

[–]ihatefeminazis10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Harry potter? Last I heard that was fiction.... No man... women aren't the only parents both men and women are the parents and have always been. yes there are some men that don't care for their offspring and there are some women that do the same

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, and I would assume that you were intelligent enough to understand that society includes culture.

[–]bambooskeleton 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy is the bomb. Not sure how legit she is as a judge now but her time in the real court system was baller.

[–]Tetragonos 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

that is a really well done loop

[–]Baconbitsthrowaway 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It really is that simple. Judy completely distilled the truth

[–]Tatsimaki 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As a dad going to court a week from today for my custody hearing, this is music to my ears!

[–]BrockMister 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I just watched the red pill and one of the biggest subjects is custody rights for father so it was really good to see this

[–]TheSupernaturalist 41 points42 points43 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Hey look at that, it's feminism! Treating men and women equally!

[–]jaib9 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Spreading propaganda shamelessly. It was feminists who painted fathers as abusive and incompetent parents.

[–]TheSupernaturalist0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I just thought it was funny that a front page post on the Men's rights sub was the classic example of how feminism can help men too. There's definitely some people who think differently (usually the loud ones), but the vast majority of feminists believe that men and women should be treated like equals. Someone should probably change the name of the movement because there's clearly still plenty of misconceptions about it, and some use the label to push different agendas.

[–]jaib91 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Feminists have literally voted against shared parenting. I don't know what kind of feminists you are talking about but the ones who have power has voted against it. Feminists are to equality what KKK is to Christianity. Nothing but hatred and bigotry. http://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bloomfield/2015/03/if-feminism-is-about-equality-why-do-feminists-oppose-equality/

[–]TheSupernaturalist0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I've never met a feminist like this in my life. Again, this is why I think there should be some sort of rebranding of the movement. People like this are hypocritical and are hurting what feminists actully stand for. Not only that, but because they claim to be feminists it hurts the image of feminism.

Here is the dictionary definition of feminism: "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" straight from merriam webster. I don't know what else I can do to assure you that this is what the vast majority of feminists stand for, and that we condemn those who use the name to fight for hatred and bigotry.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

[–]jaib91 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You can shove your dictionary definition in your vagina when the majority of actions are the complete opposite. "Male tears", "kill all men" etc were brought by feminists into our culture. Again dictionary definition doesn't mean shit when this kind of hatred is normalized by feminists.

[–]TheSupernaturalist0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Okay, to be clear I'm a guy, but I'm glad that this is what you resort to when your argument doesn't work out. You can cherry pick the actions of radicals from any group of people to make the whole group look bad, that doesn't make it any more true though. It's clear nothing I say will change your mind. I'm sorry if you've been hurt by people claiming feminism as an excuse.

[–]jaib91 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ok mangina. Are you like those Jews who sympathize with the Nazis?

[–]WarriorDark 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Proper feminism FTW!

[–]Snakeven0m 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A leaderless movement cannot have any proper or improper form.

What you believe to be "Proper feminism" will differ from what other people believe it to be.

[–]SeeEmmDee1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I thought the correct term was "true feminism".

[–]fist_my_japs_eye_Sir5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I thought the correct term was "egalitarianism".

[–]akafamilyfunny1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yep. A natural response of the wild feminist is to co-opt progressive actions done by free thinking human beings as "true feminism" when the actual, non gendered specific term of treating others fairly (e.g. egalitarianism) is perfectly fine.

[–]Manuelcp 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

As a feminist on r/all. Thank you for this. I wish there were more people who thought like you.

[–]bufedad 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Having fought feminists to try to achieve shared parenting being the default in divorces... well, I don't think feminists deserve to be a part of this conversation.

[–]Manuelcp-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Then you don't understand feminism.

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't understand feminism? NOW, the largest feminist group in the US, has fought for decades to prevent shared parenting being the default in divorce.

What exactly is there to understand? Feminists are fighting against equality in custody.

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This wouldn't be an issue if feminists would stop fighting shared custody as the default in divorce.

[–]NaturesMayhem 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed, a lot of feminist I see around don't seem to understand the meaning of the word. The feel that they should be entitled rather than equal, and when treated equally they find it disrespectful.

[–]provibing 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Women want equal rights until it doesn't benefit them.

[–]Woodaroe1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

*Some women

[–]stolencatkarma4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

*most.

[–]m3n00bz 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I just fell in love with that old woman

[–]Fuhrerwantsjuice 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This makes me respect her a lot more.

I thought she was just a fake tv judge, glad to see otherwise

[–]Blazeit420mlgnoscope 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She ran family court in NYC in the '80s-'90s, I believe.

[–]wonkey_monkey 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm overly amused that the title here is "Judge Judy gets it" while the title on another submission of the same gif is "Judge Judy not having it."

[–]Javrixx 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This hits hard for me. I'm currently towards the end stages of going through this myself. Court for permanent orders is only a few months away and I hope the judge has the same attitude.

[–]g-j-a 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Have met her and had a brief chat. She actually IS that smart and sensible.

And she takes NO shit from anyone. She's not a bitch, she just doesn't suffer fools or the willfully stupid.

[–]mcraamu 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like how the gif is looped to appear like she keeps going on the topic.

[–]friend1y 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

r/Judge_Judy_for_SCOTUS

[–]alclarkey 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Except I don't think she'd be OK with the cut in pay, but we can hope.

[–]Istalriblaka 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If I were that father is ask if I could hug her

[–]trustworthysauce 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Weird how the dialogue kinda loops. I really appreciate the sentiment also. I have seen other quotes from Judge Judy that indicate that she is standing up for men as equal partners in parenting. I understand that social tradition sees the woman as the caregiver, but we should not support that as a legal construct when it comes to a parent's rights.

[–]ilovetanks 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

look at the look on her face . i bet she was counting on that child support money so she could get her nails done or some shit

[–]Qu4ttro87 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy really is a national treasure.

[–]Melovesfoxes 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Only Judge Judy can judge me <3

[–]SomeGoodInThisWorld 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is great, my respect Judge Judy just raised

[–]2_STEPS_FROM_america 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"thats not what ive been told" wew lads

[–]MightierThanThou 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The look on the guy's face is the best part. He probably just got a huge boost of confidence from that. I imagine the court system has been pretty brutal to him so far when it comes to custody of his child. Seeing Judge Judy lay down the law like that must have been great.

Seriously though, there are a lot of bad fathers and a lot of bad mothers, but there are a lot kids living with bad single mothers who have used the court system and their gender to rob men of their children. This rarely helps anyone aside from the mother herself. The father and the child both suffer from that situation. A child who doesn't have a relationship with his/her father almost always has serious issues growing up that persist through adulthood.

If I look back on all the people I've met throughout my life, kids I met in school, people I've worked with etc... almost every person who had serious issues was raised by a single mother. This doesn't necessarily mean the mothers were bad, that's not what I'm saying. But it does show, to me at least, that it's very important to have a stable home for raising children, or at least let a child have their father as a role model and active participant in their life. Shutting out the dad when he did nothing wrong usually destroys two lives while only making one life, that of the mother, marginally more pleasant. The fact that everyone in our media and education system keep selling us a vision of society that undermines the importance of men as fathers seems like we're being set up for a social disaster. The destruction of the family unit will result in the destruction of our society.

[–]Bebop_and_Rocksteady 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This isn't the only case where Judge Judy has said this type of thing. I really wish she would run for president. It's getting harder and harder to find people with a spine these days.

[–]GrnYellowBird 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

This is feminism at its finest. Go Judy.

[–]bufedad 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Sorry, but no. Feminist organizations are actively fighting against shared parenting as the default in divorce ( you know... equality).

[–]GrnYellowBird0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Actually, you're incorrect. Feminism wants to make an equal playing field for both genders. Currently, most women get children when they really shouldn't. Feminism wishes to rectify that playing field so it benefits men as well. So in the end the most responsible parent gets the child.

The whole point of feminism is to make both genders equal.

While there are women who fly the feminism banner yelling what you state, those are not the true intentions of feminism.

[–]bufedad2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Actually, I'm not. NOW (three largest feminist organization in the US) has been fighting against equality in custody for decades. You know of any feminist organizations fighting footer equality in custody?

[–]GrnYellowBird1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Sources? You can't just make claims against people or organizations without providing sources of their wrong doing? News articles? Blog posts?

[–]bufedad1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Will NOWs own website suffice add a sufficient source?

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/6d1h12/z/di1ccw8

On mobile. Forgive the formatting.

[–]Justikyzer 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A victory for us!!!

[–]adroom 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

love this

[–]StonerSour 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Takes two to tango

[–]WadeTheWilson 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck yeah! It's sad we gotta go on a TV show to get fair treatment in court, but hey, it's something!

[–]Robonator7of9 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really want to shake Judge Judy's hand now.

[–]veloroflraptor 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

OHHHHH VINDICATION. /s

[–]curiouskatq 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Great message and even better loop :)

[–]2017acc0unt 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nicely edited. It loops right back into itself.

[–]TheHeedmeister 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

/r/perfectloops

[–]FinerGamerBros 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Video pls

[–]cjdabeast 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm stopping in from r/all and I noticed that it loops perfectly.

[–]MrSoapNWater 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

On mobile, I could only see the second line of each subtitle and that made this extremely confusing/funny to see.

[–]TheManglerr 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Fathers are not citizens.

[–]MrSoapNWater 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A lot of people including probation officers get that message.

[–]flippityflop420 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Refreshing to see this. Here's to hoping the judge at my hearing today agrees!

[–]cardinals1996 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You tell her, Judge!

[–]colodogguy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For more common sense I suggest checking out (Judge) Judy Sheindlin's book - Don't Pee on My Leg and Tell Me It's Raining: America's Toughest Family Court Judge Speaks Out.

[–]Raithed 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is very hopeful.

[–]ne0n_valkyrie 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

i like how this gif kind of has no end. The end of the argument perfectly leads back into the beginning and it seems like a never ending rant.

[–]ModestMouseMusorgsky 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm a kidnapper. I have as much right to take that kid as either of them.

[–]neatoqueen 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

all the yes

[–]Catoblepas 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Her speech gets you a little in the feels. I don't have kids myself (thank god) but I've seen some really good dads have their hearts broken by the legal system.

[–]Pedromac 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I always find myself respecting this woman more and more as life goes by.

[–]clo99dx 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy 2020

[–]niggoms 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Only on judge judy. Not even close in real life.

[–]MomoYaseen 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

UGHHHHH HER SMUG FACE 😡😡

Man I am so triggered. No remorse and shame. No fucks given.

[–]loissemuter 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

From the thumbnail, that girl looks like a doll. She looks like a Snapchat filter.

[–]leparsdon 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"That's not what I was told" O_o

[–]thisismyMelody 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If I was the father I woulda probably broke down crying knowing the mother doesn't get any sort of advantage off the bat and I have a chance to have custody.

[–]millstreet 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That girl seems like such a bitch, slut face and all.

[–]dIGITAL_cLARKE 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For once, I didn't want to run up and shake judge Judy out of anger and frustration.

[–]dedasdude 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sadly most women want custody only so that they can ask money.

Imho if a woman wants custody as well as the dad and she is the one awarded custody, then she must be able to support herself n the kid without any cash help from papa.

I think tben we would suddenly see a lot of woman not wanting custody.

[–]quattroformaggixfour 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Rights go hand in hand with responsibility. If you fail to uphold the responsibilities, you forfeit the rights. Both genders.

[–]Earth_Normal 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not a real judge. You can tell because she advocates for father's rights.

[–]russelg000 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She's a retired family court judge. My longtime friend actually had his case presided by her. She pretty much said the same thing during his custody hearing. His father retained custody of him even though his mother's lawyer stated in court that a son needs his mother. I was just happy he got to stay living near me.

[–]wasul 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

not to advocate violence against women or something but does that woman have the most punchable face ever or what

[–]rabbittexpress 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

(misunderstanding)

[–]wasul 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

authority figures? i didn't mean judge judy's face

[–]rabbittexpress 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Aha got it!! :P

She looks like she has a curfew at 9:00 and at least a full schedule of classes...at a high school somewhere.

[–]Making_Butts_Hurt 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Based Judy

[–]pretzelzetzel 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy has always been based as fuck.

[–]Wubst3r2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Boom. Roasted

[–]wordjedi2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well said, Judge Judy.

That girl has some serious neoteny by the way. I'll bet she has had five guys after her at once since high school. Knowing how those features manipulate you emotionally is a good way to protect yourself from being taken advantage of.

[–]futureruins2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She's a rare person indeed that Judge Judy. It's too bad the family courts don't follow her lead.

[–]SamsquamtchHunter1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'll try to find a link but I recall reading she got into some shit before by meddling in a custody arrangement outside the scope of the arbitration agreement people agreed to when going on her show. I wonder if this was from that episode.

Turns out she didn't really catch shit but the couple had to go to court to sort it out after since she overreached.

https://www.fact.on.ca/news/news0003/lw000317.htm

http://mentalfloss.com/article/29829/what-legal-authority-does-judge-judy-have

[–]jerdub19931 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Did I just get a boner for judge Judy? Yes. Yes I did.

[–]BelovedRoyalViking1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This made me hard

[–]mindscrambler261 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

but...https://conservativedailypost.com/feminist-group-pushes-law-to-ban-fathers-day-obama-announces-endorsement/

[–]AndreyKvaNew1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This subreddit is a piece of shit, but this is a relevant post. I'll give you that one.

[–]raver61 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Wow, I didn't think I'd EVER like this otherwise witch-like lady.

Good job Judge Judy!

[–]I_thought_i_do_dho1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She is the only 'celebrity' I would love to talk to. She has always been fair. Her love for children and compassion for truth have made me love watching her. She doesn't shy from the truth and while I 'sometimes' don't agree I always respect her. Legend.

[–]seabob -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

*Arbitrator Judy Gets it

[–]rent-a-cop7 points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

My understanding is that your judge title never goes away. Much like the title of President.

[–]seabob 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh you're absolutely right. Didn't know that, thanks!

[–]Zhay99 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Does anyone has the link to the video?

[–]AmericanIce 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy for Supreme Court!

[–]IndianLanny 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Never really cared for her but Judy seems to be on my cool radar now

[–]Ramblar 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now this is a woman I'd vote for!

[–][deleted] 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]botIsBalanced0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hey, seriously. Stop that foul language right now!

[–]romeo_Dark00 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She made my day

[–]CRISPR 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That Judge Judy sounds like Martin Luther King and Cicero combined, making profound declarations of equality like that...

[–]ethical_slut 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck yeah.

[–]AndyBreal 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This needs lots and lots of applause 👏 👏 👏

[–]mscohe01 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Whether you like her abrasive nature or not, she is one hell of a judge. She knows the laws and is unbiased.

[–]dexfagcasul 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The way she says Ok makes me wanna scream

[–]azonian91 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

this.

[–]sd4c 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good info, thanks

[–]This-Friggin-Guy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Girls face looks like she has a permanent snap chat filter.

[–]Marsmar-LordofMars 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The first part of what she says actually follows very smoothly from the last thing she says. It's a perfect loop.

[–]lamapuchita 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Dead right. I know this is a risky point to make but you know that whole 50/50 being treated equally thing? That's exactly what feminism is about. The social, political and economical equality of the sexes.

[–]foxinthesky 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Only Judy can judge me

[–]brandnamenerd 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't care how many people dislike her, she took the time to bake my coworkers frickin cookies AND decorated them after we helped her with her phone.

[–]Archlinder0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hitler also did some very nice paintings. He was still a cunt.

[–]TYRito 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think Judge Judy is real.

[–]DonkeyNickDigger 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bitch is just jacked up because she could smell that sweet pay check rolling in while she sucked me off and left the kid locked in the other room.

[–]SubtleMockery 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The thing that we need to reinforce is that the courts should be doing what is best for the children, not either parent.

[–]uptokesforall 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This /r/getsbettereveryloop

Just like an argument with a meathead

[–]Vanillathunder80 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She should run for President. She would be awesome.

[–]bumcheek 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Incredible how common sense is praised nowadays.

[–]tadpole256 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She was a family court judge. She should know.

[–]TraitorKiller 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Love when she gets shut down after she says "That's not what I've been told"

unfortunately in many other areas, that probably wouldn't have happened...

[–]amycd 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Psh, as a girl - fuck that girl. That's a shitty way to treat the father to your daughter.

[–]aHugeGapingAsshole 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Damn that guy swung out of his league.

[–]friendlessboob 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hits home, damn, Judge Judy clip is fucking me up. That is crazy.

[–]rammutroll 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy... respect lady! I'm a big fan of your hair style you da best Judgette ever!!!

[–]Dustinfl 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy for supreme court justice

[–]simmonsg 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I just kept watching, over and over and over again.

[–]gray_rain 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Coming here from r/all ... the fact her argument in gif form can loop indefinitely is extremely satisfying!

"You're the mother. He's the father. [. . .] It's not 'yours'. It's both of yours. You made her, together. [starts over] You're the mother. He's the father." Rinse and repeat.

[–]SupremeRedditBot 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Congrats for reaching r/all/top/ (of the day, top 50) with your post!  


I am a bot, probably quite annoying, I mean no harm though

Message me to add your account or subreddit to my blacklist

[–]Juxtapointer 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

BASED JUDY

[–]Vanriel 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Damn straight!

[–]TermyYT 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Judge Judy is like, the chillest person on the planet. 10/10 would hang out with in spare time.

[–]Nutinurgut 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I love the dudes face as he gets a justice boner.

[–][deleted]0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Please tell me that a TV judge isn't handling custody cases.

[–]Snakeven0m4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I believe she is an actual qualified judge but she just also has a TV show. I'm not 100% sure on that though.

[–][deleted]2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Regardless, there's a conflict of interest between what's right and what's entertaining.

[–]Snakeven0m1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's a good point actually, never thought of it that way.

[–]shenaniganfluff0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Like I said the people get paid to be on this kind of shows, appearance fee plus travel to LA.

https://pix-media.priceonomics-media.com/blog/1110/judy_letter.jpg

[–]McFeely_Smackup0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

this message is pretty poorly delivered 3 words at a time.

[–]bananapanther0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Just post the fucking video. This gif gave me cancer.

[–]alc00 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Fathers are second class citizens.

[–]PinballandBoardGames-9 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

My question is how does a guy like that even get a girl that hot. He looks like a fucking potato crossed with Bobby Hill.

[–]Korakc15 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Holy shit

Because it isn't all about looks?

[–]Virtual_Messiah-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ye-yeah..?

[–]tehlolredditor10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

She looks like avg American female #1374672

[–]PinballandBoardGames1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm talking about it relatively

[–]Poormidlifechoices3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Money

[–]arrogant_elk-10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

A low framerate video of a tv, with a bar added above and with off time text showing in it. Took me a few watches to realise that it's just Judy talking the whole time. Just post a transcript or something. Is there no actual video of this?

[–]sbeloud1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Took me a few watches to realise that it's just Judy talking the whole time

no it wasnt. The defendant said a line also.

[–]crackchimychong1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Don't know why your down voted quality is shit. I agree with the message but could we not find a better source?

[–]fireandlce-4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Shut up! It's beautiful and you shouldn't complain about it. Ever!

//////s

[–]mistixs-10 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Not saying I disagree completely but "you made her together" is idiotic reasoning.

How does she feel about abortion? Does she think that a zygote - which is a single cell, the only thing that arises from the union of egg&sperm - is a valuable living breathing human being? Because it's the mother who turns the zygote into a valuable living breathing human being, not the father.

[–]chaun28 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Right. Father isn't involved at all. Also, I guess IVF and incubation also don't exist

[–]crackchimychong2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What would happen without the zygote though? Hmmmm

[–]mistixs-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Great point! Likewise, an artist's mother deserves equal credit for the artist's painting, because without her gestating and giving birth to him, he never would've made it

[–]TrigglyPuffs-12 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You guys know her show is scripted, right? She may be a judge, but her words are hollow in this setting.

[–]McFeely_Smackup14 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The "Judge Judy" show is not scripted, it's a legal arbitration. As a result she is not a "Judge", she is legally an arbitrator.

[–]patiense-14 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Was watching this great TV show and they mentioned you guys, it was a great: https://m.imgur.com/gallery/NUTzbYF

[–]MRALawyer18 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I was watching "My 600-lb Life" and thought of you.

[–]zfighter187 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Asshat. Thanks for that.

[–]morerokk5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

WOW, you sure got us!

Go back to your safe space.

[–]TheRapidfir3Pho3nix-21 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

cough But, no, real feminists don't fight for men's rights cough

[–]Tepidatious20 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They don't. Actual political and legal activist feminists 100% don't fight for men.

You're assuming she's a feminist, and even if she is it's an anecdotal one off case.

[–]Ithelda8 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Are you saying she's a feminist? I don't know when it was from but I just watched a clip of her saying she never identified as a feminist.

[–]morerokk3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"Real" feminists are out there, actively erasing male abuse victims.

[–]wpfone2-22 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The first time I have ever agreed with that self righteous, holier-than-thou, stuck-up and officious old witch. Can't stand her, and suspect quite strongly that her 'team' advised her that she should take that stance in this instance...

[–]RubyOrchid133 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Or she was head of new York City family courts for many years and has direct experience with this topic. Dumbass...

[–]wpfone21 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yep, that now seems likely, rather than her being told what to say. Especially in light of the fact that she wouldn't listen to what anyone told her anyway, as she already knows everything and everyone else is beneath her. I'm sure every father that went through the courts in New York while she was in charge got a fair shake though (yeah). She's still a complete c*nt.

[–]shenaniganfluff-23 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I hope people know the actors are paid to do shows like this.

[–]dolandoes13 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They aren't actors. They are real people with small claims who are paid to have them decided by Judge Judy (who is acting as an arbitrator). The plaintiff and defendant both receive an arbitration award and have their trip paid for in full, and the winner of the case also receives whatever was decided in their favor. In addition, defendants won't suffer any sort of record of a civil judgement if they lose.

[–]shenaniganfluff0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

http://blogs.findlaw.com/celebrity_justice/2012/01/is-judge-judy-a-real-court-top-3-secrets-of-tv-judge-shows.html

appearance fee and travel to LA.

https://pix-media.priceonomics-media.com/blog/1110/judy_letter.jpg

[–]dolandoes1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

you just linked me to a page that says almost exactly what i said, so thanks for the sources.

[–]Drclaw4115 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

They aren't "paid". They get their bail or something paid for them. It's not like they get residuals for reruns or something.

[–]shenaniganfluff0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

http://blogs.findlaw.com/celebrity_justice/2012/01/is-judge-judy-a-real-court-top-3-secrets-of-tv-judge-shows.html

https://pix-media.priceonomics-media.com/blog/1110/judy_letter.jpg

[–]ITS_notactuallyme3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Definitely but it's still a very real issue.

[–]shenaniganfluff1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

wonderful

[–]King_Groovy3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

member of SAG here.... there are no actors on Judge Judy

[–]shenaniganfluff-1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well good for you, The people on court tv shows get paid. https://pix-media.priceonomics-media.com/blog/1110/judy_letter.jpg

Getting an appearance fee plus free travel to LA plus hotel, So IMO they to are actors.

[–]King_Groovy3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

and your opinion is ignorant. They are not actors

[–]shenaniganfluff0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You poor little child, Think what you like.

[–]King_Groovy3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

yeah, you're right. I've only been in the Screen Actor's Guild for 11 years. I have no idea what I'm talking about.... fucking retard lol

[–]shenaniganfluff-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

insulting people who disagree, Good job.

[–]TripleQuestionMark1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If they are actors, so what? At least JJ is spreading a good message to her viewers. Fake or not, it's a good philosophy that is good to be spread.

[–]zarathustranc-26 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

ITT: People that don't realize that the gif that they're circlejerking about proves that their victim complex is bullshit.

[–]bufedad32 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The gif where the person admits that judges treat men like second class citizens... that gif?

[–]zfighter183 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Really?

[–]caseycoold2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You should probably watch the gif...

[–]crackchimychong2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

ITT: People who think woman have exclusive rights to a child and men are not needed in the process.

[–]TikeMyson31-28 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

it's fucking staged retard

[–]Dazz3167 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's kinda. I believe the cases are real and everything is decided outside of this. This part is a non deciding or legal part of the proceedings. The course is real and they kinda just hash it out.

[–]down_vote_city__5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This is an abritration process. What the judge / officer rules is official.

[–]Dazz3163 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Cool. She is a judge though so she's moonlighting as an Arbitrator?

[–]down_vote_city__1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I would assume she's making at least double as the host of that show than as an actual judge. Not like she needs the money, though. I think she's worth double digit millions by now.

[–]hageshii_panda-32 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This sub is dumb wow.

[–]aonome11 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Explain?

[–]hageshii_panda-17 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why so we can "debate", and accomplish nothing since neither of us will budge on our views? I'm alright thanks. I just wish this trash sub wouldn't pop up on r/all. Judge Judy is awesome though.

[–]aonome17 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What caused your hatred?

[–]hageshii_panda-13 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It all started years ago when I was still in training...

I was forbidden to love, but oh how I fell for my queen! It was taboo sure, barely a man yet these feelings were wise beyond the oldest masters. So real, so intense. I had to have her. We retreated to her summer abode. Frolicked in the gardens, made love by the fire place. Our passion was glorious!

But it was a fantasy. It could not last, our lives were too complicated. My passion turned into fear; fear that would lose my love! I had already lost my mother. I held her in my hands as her life faded, I could do nothing to stop it! All this training, and power that reside in me and I couldn't protect my own mother! But I would not lose my queen no.

Another teacher told me to embrace my feelings, that it would make me more powerful. To embrace the face the fear, and let it turn into hate. That's what I did. I felt my power grow, and now I would be able to defend my love from the galaxy if I had to. They took my mother, they took my freedom, but they can't have my queen.

[–]RubyOrchid137 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You'll write all that but not a simple explanation of why you think the sub is dumb? Hahaha, cool story dumbass.

[–]ITS_notactuallyme13 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Why would you comment in the first place then?

[–]hageshii_panda-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's so easy on the mobile app you just poke and type, or even talk to text.

[–]morerokk6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Then filter it and move on, stop whining.

since neither of us will budge on our views?

At least you're honest about your unwillingness to listen to reason.

[–]hageshii_panda-2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Who is whining? Lol I was being observant.

I'll budge a bit since this is my last comment. There's no reasoning with you guys, so there is no point in arguing. This sub is a reactionary statement like all lives matter. It's pathetic.

[–]morerokk3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This sub is a reactionary statement like all lives matter.

Yeah, sorry for actually wanting equal rights. Guess I'll just become a second-class citizen, then.

[–]hageshii_panda1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Like you truly believe that you have less rights than women? It's sad honestly. I hope one day you realize the reality of men's rights. No one should have to traverse life feeling oppressed.

[–]morerokk3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I never said I had "less" rights. You need to get out of that zero-sum game mindset. Men and women both have privileges, and they both suffer from sexism. Society only pays attention to women's issues, however.

If the idea of men's rights offends you this much, just filter the subreddit and move on.

[–]hageshii_panda1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I will eventually. I'm just curious at this point. To make the claim that society only pays attention to women's issues just doesn't make sense. Historically speaking, no one has cared about women at all until maybe the 1800s globally, and as late as the 1900s in the USA. So now that women's issues are acceptable, and men don't have the same media coverage that makes you a 2nd class citizen? Isn't that a little dramatic considering those privileges that you yourself admit to having (I'm assuming you know the meta for men's privilege: salary, crime,ect..)?

[–]morerokk2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Historically speaking, no one has cared about women at all until maybe the 1800s globally, and as late as the 1900s in the USA.

I'm talking about now, not 100 years ago.

So now that women's issues are acceptable, and men don't have the same media coverage that makes you a 2nd class citizen?

Considering men can be forced into fighting wars, or literally arrested for being an abuse victim? Yes.

salary

You mean the debunked wage gap? Certain demographics of women actually earn more than their male counterparts.

crime

You mean the sentencing gap?

[–]hageshii_panda0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So your end all be all evidence is a times article from 2010 and local Canadian news article showing one case? What are global statistics showing no wage gap or sentencing gap? Also women are eligible for the draft now as well and have been fighting for years to be combat soildiers. It's men who created that boundary. It seems like you actually have a lot of overlap with feminist views.

[–]hageshii_panda0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So your end all be all evidence is a times article from 2010 and local Canadian news article showing one case? What are global statistics showing no wage gap or exposing a biased sentencing gap? Have you read the 400 page report by the department of labor? It breaks down the gap in each major industry. It came out in 2012 I believe, you can Google it. Of course that would require having an open mind, so I'm not sure about anyone on this sub skimming through the report lol.

Also women are eligible for the draft now as well and have been fighting for years to be combat soildiers. Remember 2 years ago the women trying out for the army rangers? They failed because instead of the idea of all female units with their own requirements, the army held the standards set for males. It's men who created that boundary, and men who continue to uphold then. It seems like you actually have a lot of overlap with feminist views, am I right to assume that?

[–]UnRayoDeSol3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Wow!

Wow!

Wow!

[–]14andSoBrave-38 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So this sub now goes to Judge Judy?

Pathetic.

Most people believe both are equal. But you are using fucking Judge Judy to make a point. Fucking laughable.

At the very least I can laugh at you all.

[–]OSHA_certified18 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Using JJ to make a point to the people who think they aren't equal is more like it.

Yes, most people know that men and women are equal but there are movements out there that are actively trying to make men second class citizens, and movements trying to make women second class citizens. This message is for those groups, not for people who already know that they are equal.

Get off your high horse and read between the lines.

[–]bufedad6 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes, most people know that men and women are equal

With the exception of the legal system.

Aside from family law there is a gender sentencing disparity in the legal system https://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx

This disparity is larger than the racial sentencing disparity.

It would be better to get black men to the same place as black women than it would be to get them to the same place as white men.

[–]OSHA_certified1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Oh yes I definitely agree here. I was speaking merely on the civilian side of things and not the legal side.

[–]bufedad4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Even there people don't treat men and women equally.

A man attacking a woman will be destroyed by the crowd.

A woman attacking a man will be cheered on, and people will actively join in to help.

We are not equal in society.

[–]Cadd196 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Your a horrible human being . Nuff said

[–]bufedad3 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So this sub now goes to Judge Judy?

Does the fact that Judge Judy said it make it any less valid?

[–]RubyOrchid133 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You realize she is actually very qualified to speak on the topic? Considering she was head of NYC family courts and all... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy_Sheindlin

Dumbass.

[–]HelperBot_1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy_Sheindlin


<sup>HelperBot</sup> <sup>v1.1</sup> <sup>/r/HelperBot_</sup> <sup>I</sup> <sup>am</sup> <sup>a</sup> <sup>bot.</sup> <sup>Please</sup> <sup>message</sup> <sup>/u/swim1929</sup> <sup>with</sup> <sup>any</sup> <sup>feedback</sup> <sup>and/or</sup> <sup>hate.</sup> <sup>Counter:</sup> <sup>72080</sup>

[–]TripleQuestionMark2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"Here's a good example of true equality that brings up some good points. BUT IT'S FUCKING JUDGE JUDY XDDDD SO LAUGHABLE. ALL OF YOU ARE DUMB FOR AGREEING!" -/u/14andSoBrave

Does her being Judge Judy devalue her point in any way?

[–]Navysealguy3-46 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

im still wondering how that fat guy hooked up with that girl on the first place

[–]crustywhitesock25 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

prolly has a good personality

[–]Make_E_U_Great_Again19 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

He probably wasn't fat back then, looking at his face he doesn't even look that fat right now.

[–]redd92 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

double chin.. but some people can have a double chin even when they're not fat.

[–]supersurfr16 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

His paycheck

[–]tallwheel2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

A fat paycheck.

[–]Saerain14 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

May not be so fat, but she's one odd specimen herself. Looks like someone used Photoshop to liquify her jaw away.

[–]ShowMeUrrGenitals0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Had to sort by controversial and scroll a long way to find someone who had the same concern as me.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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