Look Out! A Femi-nagger Is Angry With Us!
Have your own psycho ex? Get a FREE Report on "Why Co-Parenting Doesn't Work", or learn how to win child custody with a custody coach.
Our efforts at bringing attention to Parental Alienation Day (April 25th, 2008) has brought me one (so far) bizarre email exchange. More of the same from some circles of feminism - males are the root cause of every problem in the history of ever for females. Nothing is ever their fault, they’ll find a way to blame a male or the “patriarchy.” It’s a can’t-lose for those who don’t want equal responsibility to go along with their (alleged) equal rights.
Eden writes:
Please be aware that fathers alienate as well. If you’ve ever read the Battered Women’s study published by Wellesley college, as well as many other incidences. Do not focus just on mothers, because they are not the only one’s not acting in the best interest of the children. I guarantee, I can provide a story that shows a man crazier than any of the cases you have. If you are not willing to look at the whole picture, you are not against parental alienation….you are just another “father’s rights group”.
Eden
To which I reply:
Eden,
If you’ve read many of my posts, you would know that I understand that both genders are guilty. I accept input from all folks regardless of gender. You have to see past my own personal story to get at it, but it’s there.
And while I am certainly “just another” father’s & families rights proponent, I take exception to such a clearly disdainful characterization. There is nothing wrong with “father’s rights groups” (generally) and I would certainly back up my position that “women’s rights” groups have far more to be ashamed of than MRAs.
Feel free to not only tell me your story… but direct anyone else who has an alienation story they wish to share in my direction… you’ll see that I will GLADLY post them on April 25th regardless of gender.
Feel free to re-read my announcement regarding PAS and cite where I have spoken only of mothers.
Parental Alienation Day - April 25th, 2008
A quote from our “About Us” page: “We realize that these issues are not gender-specific and hope you’ll understand that our posts will very often be rooted in our own experiences. With that in mind, we hope you will stick around to the end - a lot of the information we offer is helpful to both genders!”
Might I also add that Wellesley College (Center for Women) is hardly the picture of objectivity?
Good day,
Mister-M
Eden sent me another email:
Mister-M,
The Batterer’s Report from Wellesley Women’s center is a study on women who were abused my men and then in our probate courts. It doesn’t hide from being a women’s report. So pointing that out is moot. In general, many of the men (in father’s fights groups) are complaining because they have to give their ex-wives child support and they complain they do not see their children as much. Many of these men are mostly angry about the money and yelling “father’s rights” not taking into consideration that the stay-at-home mom who hasn’t worked in years has to go out and find a job with no current work experience. We work with men who’ve moved into their parents home and helped their ex’s out with the house so their children would not have to move, even if the wife is “being difficult”. We also have women who’s children were ripped from them because the men did not want to pay child support and figured if he had the children it would be less of a financial burden. We are trying to create justice and harmony and not point fingers. Even the name of your organization is derogatory and promotes anger. What good are you really doing??
Eden
Eden - thanks for supporting my point.
The Batterer’s Report from Wellesley Women’s center is a study on women who were abused my men and then in our probate courts.
As I said, hardly the picture of objectivity. I appreciate your agreement. I’m sure your stance is that men are never abused by women or the courts, and any fathers/mens rights group that points such instances out is simply trying to get money.
It doesn’t hide from being a women’s report. So pointing that out is moot.
Actually, it’s not moot. It’s the point. It’s not objective. It’s common knowledge that the Wellesley Women’s Center is an anti-male organization who pushes the anti-male, anti-father feminist agenda.
In general, many of the men (in father’s fights groups) are complaining because they have to give their ex-wives child support and they complain they do not see their children as much. Many of these men are mostly angry about the money and yelling “father’s rights” not taking into consideration that the stay-at-home mom who hasn’t worked in years has to go out and find a job with no current work experience.
The NERVE of fathers! Complaining about not seeing their children as much! Bastards!
No, not really, but when you only have a feminist organization’s “study” on which to base your version of reality, it’s not hard to figure out why you believe this to be the case.
Fathers are generally angry about the clear-cut anti-father bias in family courts. They are generally angry about being pushed out of their children’s lives by these biases and being relegated to a work-slave to the child/mother-support that is often unreasonably high and not in line with the real basic costs for raising a child. They’re angry that they can not provide love and care under their own roof (assuming they can afford one with the child support assessments that are granted), but financial assistance as well. Research shows that Fathers AND Mothers provide almost the same financial support for their children for college even when NOT ordered to by the courts. I wonder why that is?
Eden needs to realize that stay-at-home-mom’s aren’t the only women who are abusing the court system for financial gain. Gainfully employed women are, too. I also wonder how she feels about the rising numbers of stay-at-home-fathers who will be petitioning the courts for full custody and expecting to receive child support when they are faced with divorce. My guess is she’ll be telling them to get a job.
We work with men who’ve moved into their parents home and helped their ex’s out with the house so their children would not have to move, even if the wife is “being difficult”.
Too bad for those fathers because they would do their child more good by being in the children’s lives, not just setting up a bitter, angry, vindictive ex-wife to keep everything he’s worked all of his life for in order to
have and raise a family.
How many women have you worked with to help move into her parents’ homes so that a willing, fit father could raise the children solely or primarily in the marital home and pay child support? My guess is ZERO. Why am I not surprised? Here’s a question for you, Eden… if the money is at or near the top of the list of important things “in the best interests of the children” - why don’t you push to ensure that the primary custodian of the children is the person who makes the higher income? That makes sense, doesn’t it, assuming the father is a fit and willing parent?
We also have women who’s children were ripped from them because the men did not want to pay child support and figured if he had the children it would be less of a financial burden.
Eden - if a fit, willing father has the child with him on a shared or primary basis, he incurs expenses associated with raising the children, right? Isn’t that what “child support” is? Money to take care of the children? So if a father is paying child support, and then gets custody of the children, that child support he was paying to the mother for the “care” of the children, will now go into his household expenses that are associated with the children, right? Or are you telling us that child support is really mother support and it doesn’t actually cost that much to raise a child and the father is being “financially raped?”
Your quote above is accurate - most reasonable human beings realize that the overwhelming majority of child-support orders aren’t realistic. Since you’ve acknowledged that reality in the quote above, why don’t you help push for legislation that doesn’t assess child support based upon the consumer price-index, but on reasonably estimated costs for bringing up a child or children? For instance, why does a Foster parent in Indiana only get $5,000-7,000 a year to raise the foster child, yet the courts say a family with an income of $50,000 a year needs to spend $24,000 to raise a child, most of which will have to come from the Father?
Or better yet, call the willing father’s bluff. Ask your women to tell them that they’ll drastically reduce or eliminate child support and see if the father’s back off from their desire to have custody. I guarantee you that you’ll be shocked by reality.
We are trying to create justice and harmony and not point fingers.
Eden, you’re a liar. Even in what little you’ve written to me, you make no mention of fathers except in derogatory, negative terms and speak nothing of any interest nor care for loving, willing fathers who suffer at the hands of spiteful, vindictive mothers. According to you a father can only want his children for one reason, financial incentive, not because he could actually LOVE his children! Why doesn’t your organization work hard for abused parents regardless of gender?
Even the name of your organization is derogatory and promotes anger.
The name of my organization more than accurately reflects my own experiences. It’s not derogatory. It doesn’t promote anger. It’s factually based and if that makes you or anyone else angry, you should consider taking an anger management class. It should also be pointed out that we own the domain ThePsychoExHusband.com as well and plan on launching it in the future.
Further, I would also argue that the name of your organization [unnamed here] is fraudulent when it appears that you are only concerned about furthering a feminism-fueled, woman-only, anti-father & family agenda.
What good are you really doing??
We’re doing a lot more than you truly care to know and a lot less than we really wish we could.
(Both DW and LM contributed to the commentary after the last email highlighted in the text.)
April 4th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
And now, I MUST reply:
I am a long-term supporter of equality for women. I have suffered from inequality many times and in many ways. I have literally had a boss look me in the eye and tell me that even though I had done outstanding work, he was giving all of the merit money to an undeserving (male) colleague “because he had a family to support”. I have had my college advisor ask me “why would a woman as pretty as you are want to major in math?” I currently work in a highly male-dominated profession (aerospace engineering) and believe me, anti-women biases are alive and well.
=HOWEVER=
Living and coping in our gender-hostile society (and by “gender-hostile”, I mean ALL of the bashing that goes on between males and females) for the past 47 years has taught me that highly-emotive and highly-biased “studies” and “reports” have only contributed to the problem. For example, if Wellesley College wants academic credibility for its well-publicized report on “battered women”, it would do well to put it to a peer review council that will point out that heterosexual MEN are just as likely as women to be battered by a current or former romantic partner (citations available upon request).
And if “Eden” wants credibility for her position, she would do well to acknowledge not only her own biases (which disclose quite glaringly in her shrilling diatribe), but also to acknowledge and address the wealth of quality research out there that draws conclusions opposite to her position.
In sum: true feminism is NOT about male-bashing, and never should become that; bashing and close-mindedness of any kind harms us all; and academic discourse demands the integrity to expand beyond the world view of a single person.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
We are all biased. The family court system proves it.
I find it funny when one tries to point out the splinter in someone else’s eye, yet neglects to remove the log in their own first.
I personally have not affiliated myself with any mother’s or father’s rights organizations for just this reason.
This is my own personal opinion, but I believe that when we can all get over screaming about “rights” and concentrate, really concentrate on the kids, then and only then will their be reform in the family court arena.
This is why I am reluctant to support legislation(either way) which is biased towards one group or another….because frankly, I don’t believe that the anyone should be able to legislate how “it should be”. What is right for one family may not be right for my family.
JB is so eloquent in her closing statement. “Bashing and close-mindedness harms us all”. This is true. “academic discourse demands the integrity to move beyond the world view of a single person”. Amen.
I have personally gotten several hate comments on my blog from father’s rights groups. I have done a self check…and asked myself if I have some shred of bias somewhere(I’m sure there’s a shred) but mostly, I would hope that my concern for my children, and the children of other’s comes through.
As far as PAS goes…here’s another rabbit trail…I’ve met learned scholars who argue that PAS is “bogus” anyway. Again, everyone is entitled to their opinions…and hopefully, we can all be civil enough to listen and respect others even when they disagree with us.
I thank you for providing a forum for us to do just that.
April 4th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
This is my own personal opinion, but I believe that when we can all get over screaming about “rights” and concentrate, really concentrate on the kids, then and only then will their be reform in the family court arena.
That’s a perfectly legitimate thought, however, my problem with the incessant belief that “the children” should be the primary focus is that it puts a child’s “rights” above all others.
My typically unpopular opinion is that this mindset is dangerous and leads to many of the problems that we have today.
I liken it to the overuse and bastardization of “the best interests of the children.” It is used as a disarming weapon to silence people who would stand up for themselves or someone else equally (or moreso) than the children. After all, what kind of a child-hating ogre would argue against the “best interests of the children” or “child’s rights?”
A child’s rights are no more important than any other human being’s rights and the biggest crock I can think of so readily is regarding paternity fraud and the reality that thousands of men are paying for children who aren’t even theirs (and many thousands more unknowingly so).
I find it unconscionable that there are time-limits on establishing paternity by those who would want to not financially support children who aren’t theirs because a woman has cheated and fraudulently named a man a father who isn’t. The reasoning I get from some fails to meet the sense test. They’ll argue that after X-number of years and this person is the only father that the child has ever known (and so on)… but fail to realize that locking them in financially doesn’t guarantee an ongoing emotional/parental relationship. Not after 1-month. Not after 1-year. Not after 5-years. Not after 10-years.
All it guarantees is that a non-father will be responsible for a child who isn’t his. Everyone argues about the potential devastation that would come to that child and rarely consider the devastation to that man… the emotional conflicts… the hurt… the pain… the deceit… it’s as if people think, “well, hey… he’s done it this long, he can just throw some imaginary switch and carry on like it’s no big deal.”
No, he can’t.
Then there is the reality that women who commit paternity fraud rarely, if ever, are punished for committing such fraud. The child is used as a “human shield” because after all - jail or financial sanctions would certainly hurt the child, right? So, let’s punish the innocent man financially and emotionally.
Granted, this issue, and so many others like it - are just the tip of the iceberg, but I figured while I am certain this post will be a lightning rod of criticism - I’d toss this out there, too.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Wow. That’s all I can say. This issues is beyond hope for me. I am currently being alientated from my children by a vindictive ex. He has done everything in his power to limit my contact and to sever or erode the emotional bond between myself and our children. All because I suggested to a court that I would be a better parent than he would given his recent actions.
I have paid child support in excess of $1200 per month for the last 7 years because I had the ability to work and he chose not to. I relinquished my residential custodial rights to ensure that they would continue to grow up in the house they were born in and that they would be provided for financially.
Now I’m sitting here reading a comment posted by a woman who makes me ashamed to be female.
We are parents people. PARENTS. That means we all have a constitutional right to enjoy a healthy, loving, ongoing relationship with our children that is free from manipulation and undermining. No one should be able to infringe on this right, and those that do should be held accountable. Sadly our system does not recognize this right unless the issue is pursued to the U.S. Supreme Court. Not many of us, after paying child support and maintaining homes of our own, are able to finacially follow this path.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Ack, this discussion hits so many nerves for me. I am feminist and also strongly support father’s rights. I still believe the 2 are not at odds if both groups are truly for equality instead of one-upping.
The phrase ‘best interests of the children’ has become a cliche for people with nothing more substantial to say to toss about with a holier-than-thou, pious expression to mask a hidden agenda that is, in fact, in the best interests of themselves.
I have no doubt both fathers and mothers are capable of PAS, however, in a society and court system that buys into the sacred womb concept, a mother seems to feel like she’s been slighted if the father has a scrap of rights, dignity, happiness, or soul left, as if he has to right to that. I honestly can’t understand anything being so important that someone would lie to their own kids, feed them poison, and not care what happens to them; I understand motive but not how any parent can do it.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Mr. M.–
I replied and then my comment disappeared!:)Blogger must be acting up again.
I agree with you that “children’s rights” is a term that is over bastardized and overused by those with extremist agendas.
However, I do have a problem with a system that, at the present time, views children as no more than property. I’ve been told by judges, lawyers, police, CPS workers etc that children are “property”. This is wrong.
I have a problem with a system that can allow a man who has done horrific things “visitation privileges” simply because he donated genetic material and has “rights”. However, my case is an extreme case as well, and I need to remember this. Not everyone is dealing with the issues I deal with. I feel that, in my case, if those in authority spent time thinking about the “children”, half of what happened to us wouldn’t have occurred. Then again…..who knows. Logic doesn’t apply in the family court system as you have pointed out in your comment as well.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to share my views on your blog.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Sorry…just read Smirking Cat’s comment and ITA with her…said it better than I could and frankly did.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I enjoy very much discussing these issues with The Smirking Cat (check out her blog).
Our recent discussion was like a stiff, ballroom dance between two people with bad-breath, but we made a reasonable go of it and it was very interesting, if incomplete.
Still, it was nice to have a rare, reasonable discussion about these issues.
I hoped you would wander over for this one.
April 4th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Eden continues her email barrage…
As a therapist (PhD) as well as an advocate, I feel a lot of anger in your e-mail. There are men who are unable to do the right thing by their children because they are more focused on their ex-wife. When these men have experienced therapy - perhaps with their ex - in order to realize what they are doing in for the children; then they can be proud of taking care of their child(ren) and feel that they really are men. You may want to consider therapy for your anger issues.
Our best,
Eden
—————
To Which I’ve Replied:
Eden,
You feel a lot of anger in my email because it satiates your need to justify propagating your obvious position that only women/mothers suffer at the hands of men and the other side of the coin is fiction or otherwise substantially less important.
I invite you to post your commentary on my blog as I’ve featured your rant against me in today’s post.
I assure you that you’re projecting your issues onto me, which is not uncommon in the radical feminist community. You may want to consider that all genders suffer at the hands of angry, bitter, vindictive ex-spouses and it’s no one gender has the market cornered on viciousness towards the other.
Perhaps when you wake up to the reality, your comments will truly have some substance. It’s truly frightening to me that with your alleged credentials, that you are furthering the gender-war with your clear and convincing biases against men and fathers. It’s obvious from each new email - women are not responsible and the men are the ones who need to be taught lessons. It’s disgusting and people like you are what is primarily wrong within this entire mess.
Bring it to the blog, Eden. We’re done via email.
Sincerely,
Mister-M
April 4th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
I think by “right thing” Eden means abandon your child to the Mother and give her all your money. Clearly wanting 50% custody is not the right thing to do, for the children of course.
Eden, go back to school because you clearly missed a few things, or maybe I don’t know, ask a kid if they would rather have their father or their mother have money.
April 4th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Long time lurker here, but had to post on this one.
I am married to a divorced father of two children who complains about the child support he pays his ex-wife. He also complains that he doesn’t get to see his children as much as he would like. He never complains about being a Dad.
My DH and his ex have wildly different views on money. He’s a saver, she’s a spender. Teaching his children to be fiscally responsible is and always has been very important to DH. When the kids are with us they receive an allowance for chores they do around the house. DH helps the children “budget” their money after each payment – a portion goes to charity, a portion to savings and the rest they can spend as they wish. The Ex receives an exorbitant amount of child support each month which she spends (blows) freely. At mom’s house the kids get whatever they want, whenever they want it. There is no incentive to “save” or “budget”. So yes, my DH complains about the child support he pays because it is woefully mismanaged. The children spend more time with their mom, so will DH’s money lessons stick? How much of an impact can he make in his limited parenting time?
Speaking of parenting time… Due to the fact that my husband’s Ex won’t allow him one minute more with the children than the divorce decree defines, he’s missing out on a lot. He misses helping them with homework every evening and tucking them in every night. One night a week and every other weekend is just not the same – especially now that the Ex has scheduled extracurricular activities during DH’s limited time with them. Yes – DH complains that he doesn’t get to see his children as much as he likes. Even though he has joint custody of the children, his time with the children is viewed as “visitation”.
I’m sure it would create a sense of “harmony and justice” in the Ex’s life if my DH would just bow out of the picture. Fortunately for his children, DH won’t give up on being their Dad.
April 4th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Eden, admittedly based on this limited interaction, sounds a lot like the PEW.
She would probably argue that I spent in the neighborhood of $80,000+ and fought my ass off to get equal time with my children just to save a couple of bucks on child support.
Do the readers find it as scary as I do that a woman with this biased a mindset is a PhD and in such a position to counsel others on the ways of the world? …in love? …in relationships? …in the aftermath of divorce?
Men = bad.
Women = victims of men.
Welcome to Eden’s reality. She is not alone, either.
- These are the people pushing for the legislation that breaks up families so easily.
- These are the people doing your custody evaluations.
- These are the people who are fanning the flames of anti-male hysteria in this country and abroad.
Men, and the women who love them, really need to start offering a “take charge” position to reverse this course we’re on.
April 4th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
This is a reality. People are biased. There is nothing we can do about biased people. Logic and rational arguments will not change their views.
It’s sad, however, when the biases that people hold are forced upon others. People are entitled to their biases, however, when their biases affect my family and I personally, that’s when I get steamed.
You speak of “anti-male hysteria”–On the other side of the coin, respectfully, I would say that there are plenty of anti-women folks out there too.
I’ve experienced quite a few.
Again, respectfully, I think it is time for people to stand up and say that gender bias, whether for or against either sex is wrong.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:59 am
[...] look out! They used the term “syndrome” and I’m sure that the rad-fems of the world will be screaming their lungs out to see this “travesty of justice” [...]
January 5th, 2010 at 7:20 pm
I’ve read the posts. First, I’m a School Psychologist by profession. I’m also the victim of a vindictive ex who has tried a plethora of ways to deal with her. Mister-M and Smirking Cat are simply being honest and obviously have real life experiences. Eden, you’re either trying to drum up business, are idealistic, or projecting your predjudices onto others. Professionally, do you think it’s a good idea to read a few blogs, then assume that people who have a natural angry reaction to a very personal and frustrating vidictive ex situation? Unbelievable. You sound like a grad student doing an internship who’s never been married, divorced and had to play the “tug of war” with an angry ex over your own kids. Don’t criticise any of these people, or suggest therapy until you’ve earned that right - it’s obvious to me you haven’t. Once you’ve been through it and pulled your head out of the sand, then come back here and we’ll see what advice you have to offer. The court system is heavily biased in favor of women for financial reasons more than anything else - the divorce industry makes a lot of money off of the rest of us and bleed us dry during the most difficult part of our lives… not anger, just fact. The day you and your ex’s attorneys come into the room you and your wife are sitting in and say “It’s over!” Then, dumfounded you say, “but, but we haven’t finished yet!” Then they clear it up by saying, “You’re both out of money, there’s nothing left to fight over… it’s over!” Then you realize the system isn’t there for any reason but to size up your money, assets and take them. The kids… the system collect $5 for every dollar collected throught he state for alimony and child support… they could care less about your kids, they only care about the revenue generated by the payments made (usually by the father because the mother was given custody). My ex threatened suicide multiple times, is in a pile of meds and still obtained custody of my daughter under a “that was then, this is now” argument… she’s fixed via therapy. The truth, not even close… her psychopathologies are deep and chronic. I’ve spoken to a lot of others who have gone through it and having been through it myself has caused me to do extensive research into family law, the bill of rights, custody and why are some decrees so obviously unfair to one of the parents. Eden, please focus less on therapy and more on understanding what parents are going through, how the system is biased, how unfair the system is and pretend for a minute you’re paying 1/2 your salary to an ex who hates you and has made you hate them - a college educated ex. Eden, you don’t have a clue… that wasn’t very professional, but it is the truth.