Today’s statistical foray is into the field of 'Survivorship'. One key way that we measure the relative treatment and condition of the different races is by their relative survivorship over time – how quickly they die off as opposed to the average, and as compared to other races. Black men, for instance, are about 1/3rd less likely to make it to age 80 than white men, and that indicates to us that black men are doing about 33% less well in our society than white men.
And the same logic reasonably applies to the differential in survival rates between men and women – a black male is 50% less likely than a white woman to make it to age 80, and about 35% less likely than a black woman to achieve that age.
And it isn’t about race as much as it is about sex. Life expectancy at birth for black women has uniformly exceeded that of both white men and black men since at least the 1970s. More than your race, your sex determines when you will die.
And the problem doesn’t start at the end of life, or even at age 80. Somehow disparities in being able to care for and raise males start in the very beginning of life. Already at age one, per the survival tables, we have 240 less males per 100,000 than we do white women. Apparently there is something it about white girl babies that their odds of living are just higher. Like, maybe we take care of them better. Oh you may say “That’s just boy babies – they die more.” But if they do, shouldn’t we do something about it? And can you imagine saying something like that about girl babies? 240 out of 100,000 may not seem like a lot, but extrapolate that out to our current population of about 300,000,000, and you find that almost 400,000 of today’s potential males are missing because they died in their first year – males that perhaps could have still been around if we could take care of them as good as we do white girl-babies.
And by the time we get to the 20 year-olds, that number has almost doubled – with about 720,000 missing young men, men who might be around if we socialized and cared for our males the way we do women. But there’s more. Now we are getting into the work, marriage and divorce years. Men are getting married and then divorced, most often not by choice, and find themselves destitute, emasculated, enslaved and financially destroyed, and are also taking jobs that put their lives and health at risk - and the numbers start shooting up. By the time US men hit 45, more than 2.7 milion of them are missing. Dead. 2.7 million men in their mid 40s are dead who would be alive today if we could just do as good a job keeping them alive as we do women.
And it keeps on going up. Without going into detailed age distributions, it can be estimated that over 10 million men have died who might still be around today at age 80 – if only we could have taken as good care of them as we do women.
But instead we hear about ‘breast cancer’ and ‘ovarian cancer’ and ‘women’s heart disease’ and all manner of women’s ailments, and even more tellingly, our media is full of stories about women feeling ‘unfulfilled’ and ‘unhappy’ with their roles in life, and taking weeks and months off to renew themselves.
Few and far between are the organizations raising awareness for men’s concerns – suicide, men’s heart disease, prostate cancer, testicular cancer, penile cancer, male breast cancer, workplace hazards and the like. Where are the stories in the media about men taking months off to renew themselves after half a life of wage slavery? There aren’t many, and you won’t find Oprah, Oxygen or HGTV financing a men’s month off to get rejuvenated either. You gotta earn the money and go do it yourself.
So in case you haven’t figured it out yet, it’s a woman’s world.
Welcome to the Gynocracy
My Best To You In Your Struggles
-M
Your comments and thoughts are always welcome, - and do please hit the ‘Donate’ button, if you can.
(Data used for calculations in this article is from the CDC’s December 2007 National Vital Statistics Report, Vol 56, No 5 United States Life Tables, 2004 by Elizabeth Arias, PHD, and also from the historical statistical abstracts of census data maintained by the US Census Bureau)
Showing posts with label Suicide. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Suicide. Show all posts
Friday, October 09, 2009
Thursday, October 01, 2009
E is for The Economic Lull
I can't imagine why divorce would drop off in bad times.
I mean, if the problem is the evil, cheating man, then the solution is divorce, no? Bearing in mind that the majority (about 70%) of divorces are filed by women, then certainly, if the problems are violence, masculine stubbornness, male ignorance, and the like, and given a divorce system that makes men pay their partner's legal fees, divorce rates should stay the same.
Unless, of course, it isn't about anything but the freaking money.
I've said it before - it's a storm of the spirit - a moral storm, and unfortunately it appears that the majority of women lack a moral compass, and so therefore their partners, the men, are at great risk.
My Best To You In Your Struggles
-M
Your comments and thoughts are always welcome, - and do please hit the ‘Donate’ button, if you can.
I mean, if the problem is the evil, cheating man, then the solution is divorce, no? Bearing in mind that the majority (about 70%) of divorces are filed by women, then certainly, if the problems are violence, masculine stubbornness, male ignorance, and the like, and given a divorce system that makes men pay their partner's legal fees, divorce rates should stay the same.
Unless, of course, it isn't about anything but the freaking money.
I've said it before - it's a storm of the spirit - a moral storm, and unfortunately it appears that the majority of women lack a moral compass, and so therefore their partners, the men, are at great risk.
My Best To You In Your Struggles
-M
Your comments and thoughts are always welcome, - and do please hit the ‘Donate’ button, if you can.
Monday, September 14, 2009
B is for Blogging
I've gone to a nifty blog-listing tool on the left that gives you the blogs I link to in order of their last update, and their most recent post's title. Very Exciting.
Also scary again to me how bloggers in the MRA world turn over, fade out, et-cetera. Saddening to look at a good blog that has been un-updated for half a year... Did they go ghost? Are they just up to their necks? (Usually the case with me). Did they give up ranting about the system - or just give up? Did they kill themselves? One wonders.
-M
Also scary again to me how bloggers in the MRA world turn over, fade out, et-cetera. Saddening to look at a good blog that has been un-updated for half a year... Did they go ghost? Are they just up to their necks? (Usually the case with me). Did they give up ranting about the system - or just give up? Did they kill themselves? One wonders.
-M
Thursday, February 07, 2008
H is for Dr Helen
Wow, I posted a comment on Dr Helen's Pajamas Media post titled Single Men in Never-Neverland and suddenly a small torrent of visitors are giving the hamsters in Blogger's serverland a workout.
But this is exactly what I had hoped for, I hoped that people would come, and read, and learn what can and does happen to men in this country, and learn how our rights have been eroded - almost to nothing.
Welcome, Welcome to Dr Helen visitors.
Please read, check my sources, and think about what you find. It is my prayer that if enough people become informed about the situation that men face in this country today, we may start seeing some real equality between the sexes, and might just reduce the incidence of male suicide, of which 14,850 deaths per year in the US are attributable to the loss of children, financial stability, civil rights and freedoms that come with divorce - for men. With total male suicides running about 22,500/year, the odds are that if you know a man who committed suicide, they are a divorcee. Putting it simply two-thirds of male suicides are divorcees.
...Think of all those children without fathers - oh, but they probably didn't get visitation anyway...
Quoting from my prior post on this subject:
With that said, the text of my comment on Dr Helen's post follows:
MBTYIYS:
-M
But this is exactly what I had hoped for, I hoped that people would come, and read, and learn what can and does happen to men in this country, and learn how our rights have been eroded - almost to nothing.
Welcome, Welcome to Dr Helen visitors.
Please read, check my sources, and think about what you find. It is my prayer that if enough people become informed about the situation that men face in this country today, we may start seeing some real equality between the sexes, and might just reduce the incidence of male suicide, of which 14,850 deaths per year in the US are attributable to the loss of children, financial stability, civil rights and freedoms that come with divorce - for men. With total male suicides running about 22,500/year, the odds are that if you know a man who committed suicide, they are a divorcee. Putting it simply two-thirds of male suicides are divorcees.
...Think of all those children without fathers - oh, but they probably didn't get visitation anyway...
Quoting from my prior post on this subject:
One can only wonder what value the approximately 148,000 men killed by divorce over the last decade would have added to our country if they had not been driven to suicide by our country's misandry.Imagine the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of children growing up over the last decade without fathers; [and the] brothers, sisters and parents bereft of their [brother, or son].
- Men who died for the crime of getting married to the wrong person.
The total loss is mind-numbing.
With that said, the text of my comment on Dr Helen's post follows:
M :
It isn't news to most men that Marriage isn't a cost-effective proposition. But what probably is news, even to men, is how likely it is to end up stripping them of anything resembling rights and disenfranchising them. The financial ruin that follows divorce is credited for the huge rate of male suicide compared to women.
But this is just one element of our society's war on men - even more horrific is how men are punished in an entirely different way by the courts than women are. As a culture we seem to be saying that we don't want men anymore. Don't be suprised if they respond by finding some way to go elsewhere.
-M
MBTYIYS:
-M
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
T is for To Look At
We live in an interesting world.
I apologize for not commenting on it more, but I am busy being a slave to my ex.
Just yesterday, I got yet another missive from the local probation department informing me that they were trying to take more money from me. Never mind that they already were taking the maximum allowable under law, 50-60%, far more than the maximum 10% a convicted criminal would be subject to. If I wasn't living already below the poverty level, it would be laughable. Actually it still is laughable, because there is nothing else to do about it.
Today, like so many days, was spent strugging to be able to support my evil ex, who demands more than I can earn, and figuring out how to keep my home for another few months. You who haven't lived as a divorcee have no idea how horrible it is. I can't imagine ever advising anyone to get married at this point in my life.
The scariest part is that my ex, like many others, insists it isn't personal. Just business. Ruining the rest of my life is just business. While she earns big-bucks, she also gets to take me to the cleaners every week, irregardless of my income or situation. And it is just business. Not personal. She doesn't need it, I can't afford it, but it is just business.
Because the state of New Jersey allows it, and because she can.
Just the practical, day-in-and-day-out business of misandry.
But anyway, things to look at:
Our friend John Doe has coined a good, useful and important word Patriphobia. So many of us are hated, ejected from our lives and families, rejected from the world and society. Why are divorced men so evil? Because divorced women need them to be. I think Patriphobia has a use, but perhaps not exactly the one John Doe is thinking of. I think that what John is pointing to is misandry. Patriphobia is what inspires VAWA, and encourages judges to give temporary restraining orders. Hating men is misandry.
In other news...
Imagine stalking your ex, putting on rubber gloves, a camoflage outfit, getting a high-powered rifle, and then shooting your spouse. What would a man get in terms of sentance if he did that? This woman (Claire Margaret MacDonald) got a license to kill.
As her husband lay bleeding to death on the ground, MacDonald stood over him and berated him for five minutes, telling him how she "hated him for making me do this".
MacDonald then tried to cover up her crime by telling police that a rabbit-shooter had threatened her husband the previous day.
Only when police began questioning her children did MacDonald change her story and claim she was a battered wife.
[...]
During the trial in the Victorian Supreme Court, MacDonald's defence counsel, James Montgomery, told the jury how Mr MacDonald had "totally dominated" his family, and in particular his wife, through "physical, verbal, psychological and sexual intimidation". Unfortunately the allegations could not be tested in court as Mr MacDonald was not around to refute or challenge them.
Imagine a rapist claims to work for the local health department to trick an eight-year-old into letting the rapist into the house. Then the rapist rapes the 8-year-old at knifepoint. Does this person get bail? If she is a woman, and the victim is a boy, the bail is $1500. Anyone see this on the news? No? Gee, wonder why? Didn't happen in some dark part of the 3rd world. It happened in Rochester, NY.
We are all concerned that there are not more male role models in schools, and that boys don't succeed in school in part because there are no men there. Women who have spoken to me cannot imagine how a man would ever take a job in a school given the current environement of misandry. Dr Helen points out that many parents reinforce this problem by requesting female teachers, thus making the man in such a role even more rare.
Hey! The Equal Opportunities Commission is sleeping at the switch! Here is a worksite, (hat tip Eternal Bachelor) without a single woman! I am sure the story is the same at worksites across the US. What's up? Shouldn't construction employers be 'encouraged' to hire a certain percentage of women? Huh?
But I'm not done with the Eternal Bachelor website, no far from it, he informs us that the courts have put men on notice that they may be held responsible in the future for the suicides of women - it's being called 'psychological manslaughter'. Can't make this stuff up. The man in this case was actually tried for it. Nice. Welcome to the gynocracy.
Did you all see this? Men travel far more for business than women do. Twice as much, actually. Gee, wonder why? Think it has ANY impact on that 'wage gap' we keep hearing about?
Or how about this from Mensactivism.org. Apparently it's twice as easy to fire a man as a woman. That just might contribute to the wage gap too. If you can't fire them, you'd better pay them less to make up for their unproductive months, years, decades...
Or how about this widely cheered study that women pretty much outlive men everywhere, including a pithy catchquote: "Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition."
If I celebrated 'the fact' that women lived shorter lives than men, wouldn't that be not only sexist, but just plain evil? I thought so.
My best to you in your struggles
M
Technorati Tags: Fathers Rights, Patriphobia, Parental Alienation, Bias, Wage Gap, Women Murderers, Life Expectancy, Misandry, Equal Rights, Men's Rights
I apologize for not commenting on it more, but I am busy being a slave to my ex.
Just yesterday, I got yet another missive from the local probation department informing me that they were trying to take more money from me. Never mind that they already were taking the maximum allowable under law, 50-60%, far more than the maximum 10% a convicted criminal would be subject to. If I wasn't living already below the poverty level, it would be laughable. Actually it still is laughable, because there is nothing else to do about it.
Today, like so many days, was spent strugging to be able to support my evil ex, who demands more than I can earn, and figuring out how to keep my home for another few months. You who haven't lived as a divorcee have no idea how horrible it is. I can't imagine ever advising anyone to get married at this point in my life.
The scariest part is that my ex, like many others, insists it isn't personal. Just business. Ruining the rest of my life is just business. While she earns big-bucks, she also gets to take me to the cleaners every week, irregardless of my income or situation. And it is just business. Not personal. She doesn't need it, I can't afford it, but it is just business.
Because the state of New Jersey allows it, and because she can.
Just the practical, day-in-and-day-out business of misandry.
But anyway, things to look at:
Our friend John Doe has coined a good, useful and important word Patriphobia. So many of us are hated, ejected from our lives and families, rejected from the world and society. Why are divorced men so evil? Because divorced women need them to be. I think Patriphobia has a use, but perhaps not exactly the one John Doe is thinking of. I think that what John is pointing to is misandry. Patriphobia is what inspires VAWA, and encourages judges to give temporary restraining orders. Hating men is misandry.
In other news...
Imagine stalking your ex, putting on rubber gloves, a camoflage outfit, getting a high-powered rifle, and then shooting your spouse. What would a man get in terms of sentance if he did that? This woman (Claire Margaret MacDonald) got a license to kill.
As her husband lay bleeding to death on the ground, MacDonald stood over him and berated him for five minutes, telling him how she "hated him for making me do this".
MacDonald then tried to cover up her crime by telling police that a rabbit-shooter had threatened her husband the previous day.
Only when police began questioning her children did MacDonald change her story and claim she was a battered wife.
[...]
During the trial in the Victorian Supreme Court, MacDonald's defence counsel, James Montgomery, told the jury how Mr MacDonald had "totally dominated" his family, and in particular his wife, through "physical, verbal, psychological and sexual intimidation". Unfortunately the allegations could not be tested in court as Mr MacDonald was not around to refute or challenge them.
Imagine a rapist claims to work for the local health department to trick an eight-year-old into letting the rapist into the house. Then the rapist rapes the 8-year-old at knifepoint. Does this person get bail? If she is a woman, and the victim is a boy, the bail is $1500. Anyone see this on the news? No? Gee, wonder why? Didn't happen in some dark part of the 3rd world. It happened in Rochester, NY.
We are all concerned that there are not more male role models in schools, and that boys don't succeed in school in part because there are no men there. Women who have spoken to me cannot imagine how a man would ever take a job in a school given the current environement of misandry. Dr Helen points out that many parents reinforce this problem by requesting female teachers, thus making the man in such a role even more rare.
Hey! The Equal Opportunities Commission is sleeping at the switch! Here is a worksite, (hat tip Eternal Bachelor) without a single woman! I am sure the story is the same at worksites across the US. What's up? Shouldn't construction employers be 'encouraged' to hire a certain percentage of women? Huh?
But I'm not done with the Eternal Bachelor website, no far from it, he informs us that the courts have put men on notice that they may be held responsible in the future for the suicides of women - it's being called 'psychological manslaughter'. Can't make this stuff up. The man in this case was actually tried for it. Nice. Welcome to the gynocracy.
Did you all see this? Men travel far more for business than women do. Twice as much, actually. Gee, wonder why? Think it has ANY impact on that 'wage gap' we keep hearing about?
Or how about this from Mensactivism.org. Apparently it's twice as easy to fire a man as a woman. That just might contribute to the wage gap too. If you can't fire them, you'd better pay them less to make up for their unproductive months, years, decades...
Or how about this widely cheered study that women pretty much outlive men everywhere, including a pithy catchquote: "Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition."
If I celebrated 'the fact' that women lived shorter lives than men, wouldn't that be not only sexist, but just plain evil? I thought so.
My best to you in your struggles
M
Technorati Tags: Fathers Rights, Patriphobia, Parental Alienation, Bias, Wage Gap, Women Murderers, Life Expectancy, Misandry, Equal Rights, Men's Rights
Monday, May 08, 2006
CM is for Cuban Men
If you know a Male Suicide victim, it is very likely (about a 66% chance) that this person who killed themselves was also a victim of divorce. This is not a reflection on the 'instability' of men, but rather a reflection of how "The courts in the United States are in a position now whereby money is given to the woman, [and] the man is forced to pay alimony, child support. The man is also asked, in some cases, to vacate the house. [...] If a man loses custody of the children and the woman keeps those children, there are situations whereby she may not allow the man to see the children, and that causes some depression," (Augustine Kposowa speaking to CBS News, 2000)Well today, we have word via Babalu Blog that men wear divorce even more painfully in Cuba. Babalu Blog refers us to Wall Street Cafe which tells us that 2.6 men kill themselves for every woman. The message of Wall Street Cafe and Babalu is political - they blame communism for the plight of Cuban men - and I am sure that they are at least partly right. - Men, who are supposed to support the family, are put in a difficult to impossible situation in a country where captialism, the ability to work harder to achieve greater income, is illegal.
According to the Basic Health Indicators of a 2005 report by the OPS, Cuba had an18,1 rate of suicides in each 100.000 inhabitants during the 2000-2005 period, far from the second place occupied by Uruguay with 15,9 and very far from countries like Peru with 2,3 and Guatemala with 1.9.
Cubans suicides index for 2005 in 26.4 for the men and 9.8 for the women. In absolute numbers, the greatest amount of suicides which take place in Cuba affects the 25 – 34 age group, followed by the 35-44 group.
“By the hopelessness, the social atmosphere without horizons, a sort of collective depression that impels to escape via the suicide route”, assured to the New Herald a sociologist Cuban investigator who works for the ministry of Public Health.
Is there a divorce factor too? What is divorce like in Cuba?
Well, first of all, Cuba has a high divorce rate, 3.54 divorces per 1,000 inhabitants - (the US has 4.1 divorces per 1,000). Although the rate per individual sounds lower than the US, the rate per marriage is higher - About 70% of marriages end in divorce.
But divorce itself should not lead to increased suicide, if men are treated fairly and allowed access to their children. The word on the street though, is that Cuban men are not - they lose their houses, their assets are split 50/50 with their ex, and their incomes are nipped down about 10% per child. Add to that that divorces can be had for as little as 5 pesos by a notary public, with no hassle, and you have a situation where women can put already hard-pressed men into a hopeless situation.
This may have led to an interesting twist - Cuban women are complaining that their men are only interested with women with good jobs - i.e. women who would bring something to a marriage, and who might have something to lose in a divorce (hat tip La Neuva Cuba):
Still single, she[Maricel Acebo] does have complaints about men. Too many care only about money, she said. "The men say, 'What do you do?' And if you say you're a housewife, they shrink back and won't talk to you. But if you say you work for a good company, then it's, 'Yeah, that's the woman I want,' " said Ms. Acebo, a night security guard who earns $7.69 per month in a country where the average monthly salary is $12.
Somehow, men waking up to the fact that their wife MUST work so that they don't get destroyed financially in a divorce and focusing on that financial aspect seems darkly amusing. Turnabout IS fair play, no?
My best to you in your struggles
M
Drilling a bit deeper: from Dominican Today: Anguish Drives Cubans to suicide
Related posts:
On Suicide:
S is for Suicide - Revisited
S is for Slavery
B is for Bravery
R is for Relentless Persuit
D is for Dynamite
O is for Over the Edge
On The Evil that is done to Men in Divorce:
Why Alimony is Wrong
Other Ways Alimony is Like Slavery
Further Bankruptcy Rights Revoked for Men - Making Divorce Even More Like Debt Servitude
P is for Paternity - or how to catch yourself a slave
D is for Divorce - 'the financial haircut club for men'
D is for Dance of Death - a bit on Perry Manley and others
Technorati Tags: , Men's Rights Gender Bias Gynocracy Divorce Suicide
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
O is for Over the Edge
Broken Bread directs us to yet another man (Herbert Chalmers) driven mad by the hopelessly abusive family-destroying court system.
We must all say we don't condone his behavior (he murdered 4 and raped a woman in his rampage), but we cannot forget that he was without hope in a system that gives no quarter. A 'clerical error' caused 50% of his paycheck to be withheld since his monthly support number was increased by 540% in what is being called a 'clerical error' .
This article indicates that the amount of arrears that Chalmers had in 1977 was entered as his monthly support number in 1998. He normally had to pay $133, and this was increased to $724.92 . Apparently that error went uncorrected from 1998 on.
Hm. More of mine is withheld than that... Guess his state is not as cruel as NJ. Happily, I don't feel any urge to freak out, but then, I haven't been abused by the state since 1998, like Chalmers was.
Broken Bread comments: "[...] try living on 50% of your after-tax salary sometime. I had to do it for three months, eating rice and beans and charging groceries on my credit card while I watched my daughter go with her mother to Paris for two weeks. To live like that is to live in a constant state of rage. Chalmers obviously couldn't make ends meet, had no way of reaching child support enforcement officials, and couldn't see any way out. "
This is the thing that drives so many men to suicide, murder and worse. You are put in an untenable situation, and the state keeps taking more, and more. You automatically become a felon if you flee to another state, and of course you lose your kids. Your passport is likely revoked, so leaving the country is hard too, assuming you have any assets to do that with. It is almost exactly like being a black slave in the Antibellum US South.
Some knuckle down under the pressure, and scrape along, and somehow, some way, make it work.
Some fail at that and spend months in jail as a deadbeat dad, until some family member or friend pays the state-sponsored blackmail to get them out.
Others spin out of control or eventually snap, and it is no suprise that the behaviors, violence and criminal acts that follow are not rational.
How do you expect anything to behave when you back it into a corner and give it no way out. You may start with a rational, moral, normal person, but you can end up with a desparate animal.
Was what Herbert did ok? No.
Was it the right thing to do? No.
Do we understand how he got there? Yes. It is very, sadly, very clear how he got there.
Some will claim that this man was just a criminal and nothing more. Probably people saying this have never been enslaved. Not everyone can take it.
No matter how you view this case, one must admit that without state-enforced slavery to ex-spouses, Herbert Chalmers would likely still be alive, along with the four people he murdered,
-and one woman would not be suffering from the trauma of rape.
-M
Update 26-Apr-06: MensActivism.Org points us to This Article - which tells us that Chalmer's kids WERE ALL GROWN AND EMANCIPATED. Which just goes to show what I have been told so many times - there is no escape, ever. Here his kids were all grown, and he is still a slave, with his payments increasing yearly, living on $200 every two weeks.
Update 26-Apr-06: I see the following from the St Louis Post-Dispatch that strikes me as interesting to men:
Citing confidentiality concerns, the Department of Social Services has blocked reporters’ requests for information about Chalmers’ case, though a St. Louis judge opened a narrow window Thursday by agreeing to unseal part of the court record.
[...]
State records obtained by the Post-Dispatch indicate that a payment of $600 in back child support was received on his account with the state on March 30, with a $75 payment on March 7 and a $10 payment on Jan. 10.
Haynes was due to receive all of that money. A $600 check was cut or sent March 31, and a $10 check was dated Jan. 11. State records showed one more check, for $75, dated April 24, 2006 — six days after Haynes’ death.
So the portion of the record released shows a very good correspondence between what Chambers paid, and what Haynes recieved. So for the brief period that the court has let us see, there is no fraud in the payment system. Men have often complained that payments made to child support services do not reach their ex-wives.
Another thought has occurred to me though - here we have a man who has claimed that some of the children that he was being charged support for, and had been charged support for for many years, were not his. And here we have payments inappropriately being taken from him, and made to the mother of these children, long after the children have reached majority.
Sooo, what does the ethical person do when they recieve payments that they do not deserve, especially payments that they know come from someone who can ill afford it? Yes, I am blaming one of the victims: Chamber's ex-partner who was content to accept the enslavement of her ex-partner well beyond even what our misandrous courts had ruled. Did she deserve to die? I cannot bring myself to say that, but I do expect that she is in hell now, and well deserving of it.
Technorati Tags:
Chalmers
Slavery
Child Support
Suicide
Men's Rights
We must all say we don't condone his behavior (he murdered 4 and raped a woman in his rampage), but we cannot forget that he was without hope in a system that gives no quarter. A 'clerical error' caused 50% of his paycheck to be withheld since his monthly support number was increased by 540% in what is being called a 'clerical error' .
This article indicates that the amount of arrears that Chalmers had in 1977 was entered as his monthly support number in 1998. He normally had to pay $133, and this was increased to $724.92 . Apparently that error went uncorrected from 1998 on.
Hm. More of mine is withheld than that... Guess his state is not as cruel as NJ. Happily, I don't feel any urge to freak out, but then, I haven't been abused by the state since 1998, like Chalmers was.
Broken Bread comments: "[...] try living on 50% of your after-tax salary sometime. I had to do it for three months, eating rice and beans and charging groceries on my credit card while I watched my daughter go with her mother to Paris for two weeks. To live like that is to live in a constant state of rage. Chalmers obviously couldn't make ends meet, had no way of reaching child support enforcement officials, and couldn't see any way out. "
This is the thing that drives so many men to suicide, murder and worse. You are put in an untenable situation, and the state keeps taking more, and more. You automatically become a felon if you flee to another state, and of course you lose your kids. Your passport is likely revoked, so leaving the country is hard too, assuming you have any assets to do that with. It is almost exactly like being a black slave in the Antibellum US South.
Some knuckle down under the pressure, and scrape along, and somehow, some way, make it work.
Some fail at that and spend months in jail as a deadbeat dad, until some family member or friend pays the state-sponsored blackmail to get them out.
Others spin out of control or eventually snap, and it is no suprise that the behaviors, violence and criminal acts that follow are not rational.
How do you expect anything to behave when you back it into a corner and give it no way out. You may start with a rational, moral, normal person, but you can end up with a desparate animal.
Was what Herbert did ok? No.
Was it the right thing to do? No.
Do we understand how he got there? Yes. It is very, sadly, very clear how he got there.
Some will claim that this man was just a criminal and nothing more. Probably people saying this have never been enslaved. Not everyone can take it.
No matter how you view this case, one must admit that without state-enforced slavery to ex-spouses, Herbert Chalmers would likely still be alive, along with the four people he murdered,
-and one woman would not be suffering from the trauma of rape.
-M
Update 26-Apr-06: MensActivism.Org points us to This Article - which tells us that Chalmer's kids WERE ALL GROWN AND EMANCIPATED. Which just goes to show what I have been told so many times - there is no escape, ever. Here his kids were all grown, and he is still a slave, with his payments increasing yearly, living on $200 every two weeks.
Update 26-Apr-06: I see the following from the St Louis Post-Dispatch that strikes me as interesting to men:
Citing confidentiality concerns, the Department of Social Services has blocked reporters’ requests for information about Chalmers’ case, though a St. Louis judge opened a narrow window Thursday by agreeing to unseal part of the court record.
[...]
State records obtained by the Post-Dispatch indicate that a payment of $600 in back child support was received on his account with the state on March 30, with a $75 payment on March 7 and a $10 payment on Jan. 10.
Haynes was due to receive all of that money. A $600 check was cut or sent March 31, and a $10 check was dated Jan. 11. State records showed one more check, for $75, dated April 24, 2006 — six days after Haynes’ death.
So the portion of the record released shows a very good correspondence between what Chambers paid, and what Haynes recieved. So for the brief period that the court has let us see, there is no fraud in the payment system. Men have often complained that payments made to child support services do not reach their ex-wives.
Another thought has occurred to me though - here we have a man who has claimed that some of the children that he was being charged support for, and had been charged support for for many years, were not his. And here we have payments inappropriately being taken from him, and made to the mother of these children, long after the children have reached majority.
Sooo, what does the ethical person do when they recieve payments that they do not deserve, especially payments that they know come from someone who can ill afford it? Yes, I am blaming one of the victims: Chamber's ex-partner who was content to accept the enslavement of her ex-partner well beyond even what our misandrous courts had ruled. Did she deserve to die? I cannot bring myself to say that, but I do expect that she is in hell now, and well deserving of it.
Technorati Tags:
Chalmers
Slavery
Child Support
Suicide
Men's Rights
Thursday, March 16, 2006
D is for Dynamite
The following is based on this post at Richard's Midlife Crisis.
Imagine eight young people graduate, four girls and four boys.
G B
G B
G B
G B
Reasonably, their skill levels are different. Statistics on the variability of people's intelligence are available on the web, and most people understand that there is a 'bell curve' of abilities. Let's assume that our population of Boys and Girls is like this.
Lets also assume that the girls are just as effective in the workforce as boys.
Then let's say that our top performers are the kind who will test in about the 85th percentile (15% below perfect) and our bottom peformers will are 15% above the bottom - the 15th percentile. The middle two tiers we will make 65% and 35% - Just 15% on either side of the 50% average.
G(85%) B(85%)
G(65%) B(65%)
G(35%) B(35%)
G(15%) B(15%)
Now, we all know that there are only a few 'top jobs'. Affirmative Action for Women would mean that half of those jobs go to women. Let's say that half of our graduates can nail these jobs.
G(85%) B(85%)
G(65%) B(65%) Working at Top Job
-----------------------
G(35%) B(35%) Didn't get a Top Job
G(15%) B(15%)
Note that the full top job workforce contributes 300 percentile points to their employers.
Now, imagine that our top performers age - everyone does - and most women at some point decide to have children. What does this do to the equation? Well, obviously these women leave the workforce for some period of time. In the interim, their male ex-co-workers have to take up some of the slack. Additionally, the top jobs must be filled with other women to maintain the 50% quota:
G(35%) B(85%)
G(15%) B(65%) Working at Top Job
-----------------------
B(35%) Didn't get a Top Job
B(15%)
-----------------------
G(85%) Home with kids
G(65%)
Note that the full top job workforce now contributes 200 percentile points to their employers.
So, our average Girl-employee has a skill level in the 25th percentile,
-they contribute a total of 50 skill points.
Our average Boy-employee has a skill level in the 75th percentile, .
-they contribute a total of 150 skill points.
So with enforced full equality, effectively a man has to be three times (300%) as skillful, work three times as hard as a woman to compete for the same job.
If the corporate that has the top jobs actually requires those 300 percentile-based skill points to get the work done, then the men in the top jobs have to come up with, in addition to their current 150 points, an additional 100 points to make the corporate whole. That would bring the men's average output to 125%.
So to keep the corporates going, the men on the job have to put out an average performance that is five times (125%/25%) that of the women on the job. One might try and distribute some of this to the new women on the job, but remember, they are trainees, and have less skill to start with. Demanding an extra 25% from a worker who is starting at an average 25th percentile, and who is new on the job is just not going to make up the shortfall.
But perhaps you say 'well, eventually the women who left the workforce return.' Most of them don't, not until their kids are a few years into school, and when they do they generally do not choose jobs that are at the 'top firms', instead choosing jobs that are closer to home, require less hours, and the like.
The real losers are the men, who want to work, but can't compete for jobs that are slated for women. Every bit as skillful, or more skillful than the women who pick up those jobs, no, ENTITLEMENTS, these men sit on the sidelines, perhaps work retail, and learn how to ask if their clients would 'like fries with that'.
Also losers are those men who have the jobs, who have to work 500% as hard as their female counterparts. They never see their families, - if they can afford the time to build families.
As all of this sounds frighteningly familiar to me, let me add the next piece. Imagine one of the men has a family. Well, his wife gets tired of his not being around at all, and he finds himself divorced. Windfall for the wife, for she now gets half of his output from his job where he is putting in that 500% effort to make up the slack.
Of course he can't quit, he is now locked into the rat race, with the full weight of the US Government forcing him to continue slaving at his 500% effort job until he dies.
(A voluntary reduction in income is no grounds to reduce alimony or child support.)
- And his passing falls suprisingly at an age that for no apparent reason, is much younger on average than women die.
Gee, wonder why.
(All of this is assuming he doesn't just commit suicide.)
How very, very fair.
-M
Imagine eight young people graduate, four girls and four boys.
G B
G B
G B
G B
Reasonably, their skill levels are different. Statistics on the variability of people's intelligence are available on the web, and most people understand that there is a 'bell curve' of abilities. Let's assume that our population of Boys and Girls is like this.
Lets also assume that the girls are just as effective in the workforce as boys.
Then let's say that our top performers are the kind who will test in about the 85th percentile (15% below perfect) and our bottom peformers will are 15% above the bottom - the 15th percentile. The middle two tiers we will make 65% and 35% - Just 15% on either side of the 50% average.
G(85%) B(85%)
G(65%) B(65%)
G(35%) B(35%)
G(15%) B(15%)
Now, we all know that there are only a few 'top jobs'. Affirmative Action for Women would mean that half of those jobs go to women. Let's say that half of our graduates can nail these jobs.
G(85%) B(85%)
G(65%) B(65%) Working at Top Job
-----------------------
G(35%) B(35%) Didn't get a Top Job
G(15%) B(15%)
Note that the full top job workforce contributes 300 percentile points to their employers.
Now, imagine that our top performers age - everyone does - and most women at some point decide to have children. What does this do to the equation? Well, obviously these women leave the workforce for some period of time. In the interim, their male ex-co-workers have to take up some of the slack. Additionally, the top jobs must be filled with other women to maintain the 50% quota:
G(35%) B(85%)
G(15%) B(65%) Working at Top Job
-----------------------
B(35%) Didn't get a Top Job
B(15%)
-----------------------
G(85%) Home with kids
G(65%)
Note that the full top job workforce now contributes 200 percentile points to their employers.
So, our average Girl-employee has a skill level in the 25th percentile,
-they contribute a total of 50 skill points.
Our average Boy-employee has a skill level in the 75th percentile, .
-they contribute a total of 150 skill points.
So with enforced full equality, effectively a man has to be three times (300%) as skillful, work three times as hard as a woman to compete for the same job.
If the corporate that has the top jobs actually requires those 300 percentile-based skill points to get the work done, then the men in the top jobs have to come up with, in addition to their current 150 points, an additional 100 points to make the corporate whole. That would bring the men's average output to 125%.
So to keep the corporates going, the men on the job have to put out an average performance that is five times (125%/25%) that of the women on the job. One might try and distribute some of this to the new women on the job, but remember, they are trainees, and have less skill to start with. Demanding an extra 25% from a worker who is starting at an average 25th percentile, and who is new on the job is just not going to make up the shortfall.
But perhaps you say 'well, eventually the women who left the workforce return.' Most of them don't, not until their kids are a few years into school, and when they do they generally do not choose jobs that are at the 'top firms', instead choosing jobs that are closer to home, require less hours, and the like.
The real losers are the men, who want to work, but can't compete for jobs that are slated for women. Every bit as skillful, or more skillful than the women who pick up those jobs, no, ENTITLEMENTS, these men sit on the sidelines, perhaps work retail, and learn how to ask if their clients would 'like fries with that'.
Also losers are those men who have the jobs, who have to work 500% as hard as their female counterparts. They never see their families, - if they can afford the time to build families.
As all of this sounds frighteningly familiar to me, let me add the next piece. Imagine one of the men has a family. Well, his wife gets tired of his not being around at all, and he finds himself divorced. Windfall for the wife, for she now gets half of his output from his job where he is putting in that 500% effort to make up the slack.
Of course he can't quit, he is now locked into the rat race, with the full weight of the US Government forcing him to continue slaving at his 500% effort job until he dies.
(A voluntary reduction in income is no grounds to reduce alimony or child support.)
- And his passing falls suprisingly at an age that for no apparent reason, is much younger on average than women die.
Gee, wonder why.
(All of this is assuming he doesn't just commit suicide.)
How very, very fair.
-M
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
S is for Suicide - Revisited
This blog entry is based on one composed for MIsForMalevolent on Thursday, August 18, 2005, but which needed revisiting due to the criticality of the subject matter. I have revised the original post quite a bit to make the points clearer, and added a lot of emphasis and even some math. Don't be scared. Just adding, subtracting, and multiplying. ...Take deep breaths... You'll be fine.
If you are moderately familiar with the topic at hand...
...which is the treatment of men by our society...
- you probably have wondered how men can survive the crushing depression that they must feel while struggling with a strongly biased legal system that is eager to enslave them.
Well, many men don’t survive it.
Suicide rates for men and boys are already much higher than those for women and girls – with 75% of all suicides being committed by men - over 22,000 men per year. (The rate is 80% in Canada, perhaps reflecting their system, which is often even more abusive of men. )
And suicide rates for divorced men are even higher than that - divorced and separated men are TWICE AS LIKELY to commit suicide as other men, per the study "Marital Status and Suicide in the National Longitudinal Mortality Study" by Augustine J. Kposowa, Ph.D., at the University of California at Riverside. CBS News covered the report in some detail here.
The study showed that being single versus being married made no difference in suicide rates.
- Simply 'being married' does not provide singificant mental health benefits relating to suicide.
Even more tellingly, for women marital status, married, single, separated or divorced, made NO STATISTICAL DIFFERENCE in suicide rates.
- So somehow, divorce affects men in a much more significant way than women. One wonders what that way could be...
Previous to this study, increased rates of suicide for men had been explained away by claiming that significant mental and physical health benefits were to be had from married life, and by 'congitive differences' between men and women - women purportedly spending more time 'processing' their problems and thinking more 'inclusively' than men, Well Dr. Kposowa's research has exposed that canard, (wait, let me speak plainly:) that misandrous, shovenist tripe for what it is.
Let's take a moment and really reveiw those numbers, which we will extrapolate using the published rough perecentages in the CBS news article:
Total Suicides: 30,000 per year
Men's Suicides: 22,500 per year
Women's Suicides: 7,500 per year
Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 14,850 per year.
Hmm. I wonder how many men committed suicide outside of a divorce/separation.
...Well, I know how to subtract, lets see...
Non Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 7,650 per year.
Wait... that's approximately equal to the number of suicides for women.
So it seems reasonable to guess, that if it were not for the way men are treated in divorce, those 14,850 men PER YEAR would still be alive.
One can only wonder what value the approximately 148,000 men killed by divorce over the last decade would have added to our country if they had not been driven to suicide by our country's misandry.
Imagine the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of children growing up over the last decade without fathers, brothers, sisters and parents bereft of their son or brother. Men who died for the crime of getting married to the wrong person.
The total loss is mind-numbing.
Dr. Kposowa's study; the first study that cared enough about men to look at the details of why men kill themselves; shows us that if you hear about a man committing sucide the odds are better than 2:1 that he is either a divorcee or going through a divorce.
Suicide is a dramatic and extreme way out of a very bad situation. -A way out that few would choose.
The significant increase (2:1) in suicides following a divorce for men is very significant.
These men are the canaries in the coal-mine of our family court system. They are literally dying to tell us something, and apparently that something is about... Divorce.
SO NOW COMES THE BIG QUESTION:
What is so terrible about divorce that men would kill themselves to escape it?
The answer is simple: Slavery. To quote Adrian Banks' article on suicide and divorce:
So what is the main cause of [divorced male] suicide? […] The answer to this question is not that difficult, but before someone can accept the truth of the main causes of suicide, one must first accept the truth that slavery is just as much an institution today as it has been throughout history. The more oppressive and cruel the enslavement, the more suicides there will be among the enslaved classes of society. Why do you think that, in pre civil war times, slaves were kept in the holes of ships and not allowed on the decks? Simple, it kept the slave trader's precious cargo of labor from jumping into the ocean. As Winston Churchill stated during World War II, "it is better to perish that to live as slaves." […] In a divorce situation today, there need not be any legitimate grounds thanks to no fault divorce. A man can be a hard working fellow who supports his family and loves his children, but if his wife decides to divorce him, there is nothing he can do.
Kposowa cites "financial obligations," in explaining the preponderance of divorcees amongst male suicides noting that "The courts in the United States are in a position now whereby money is given to the woman, or the man is forced to pay alimony, child support. The man is also asked, in some [perhaps most] cases, to vacate the house."
If you are moderately familiar with the topic at hand...
...which is the treatment of men by our society...
- you probably have wondered how men can survive the crushing depression that they must feel while struggling with a strongly biased legal system that is eager to enslave them.
Well, many men don’t survive it.
Suicide rates for men and boys are already much higher than those for women and girls – with 75% of all suicides being committed by men - over 22,000 men per year. (The rate is 80% in Canada, perhaps reflecting their system, which is often even more abusive of men. )
And suicide rates for divorced men are even higher than that - divorced and separated men are TWICE AS LIKELY to commit suicide as other men, per the study "Marital Status and Suicide in the National Longitudinal Mortality Study" by Augustine J. Kposowa, Ph.D., at the University of California at Riverside. CBS News covered the report in some detail here.
The study showed that being single versus being married made no difference in suicide rates.
- Simply 'being married' does not provide singificant mental health benefits relating to suicide.
Even more tellingly, for women marital status, married, single, separated or divorced, made NO STATISTICAL DIFFERENCE in suicide rates.
- So somehow, divorce affects men in a much more significant way than women. One wonders what that way could be...
Previous to this study, increased rates of suicide for men had been explained away by claiming that significant mental and physical health benefits were to be had from married life, and by 'congitive differences' between men and women - women purportedly spending more time 'processing' their problems and thinking more 'inclusively' than men, Well Dr. Kposowa's research has exposed that canard, (wait, let me speak plainly:) that misandrous, shovenist tripe for what it is.
Let's take a moment and really reveiw those numbers, which we will extrapolate using the published rough perecentages in the CBS news article:
Total Suicides: 30,000 per year
Men's Suicides: 22,500 per year
Women's Suicides: 7,500 per year
Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 14,850 per year.
Hmm. I wonder how many men committed suicide outside of a divorce/separation.
...Well, I know how to subtract, lets see...
Non Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 7,650 per year.
Wait... that's approximately equal to the number of suicides for women.
So it seems reasonable to guess, that if it were not for the way men are treated in divorce, those 14,850 men PER YEAR would still be alive.
One can only wonder what value the approximately 148,000 men killed by divorce over the last decade would have added to our country if they had not been driven to suicide by our country's misandry.
Imagine the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of children growing up over the last decade without fathers, brothers, sisters and parents bereft of their son or brother. Men who died for the crime of getting married to the wrong person.
The total loss is mind-numbing.
Dr. Kposowa's study; the first study that cared enough about men to look at the details of why men kill themselves; shows us that if you hear about a man committing sucide the odds are better than 2:1 that he is either a divorcee or going through a divorce.
Suicide is a dramatic and extreme way out of a very bad situation. -A way out that few would choose.
The significant increase (2:1) in suicides following a divorce for men is very significant.
These men are the canaries in the coal-mine of our family court system. They are literally dying to tell us something, and apparently that something is about... Divorce.
SO NOW COMES THE BIG QUESTION:
What is so terrible about divorce that men would kill themselves to escape it?
The answer is simple: Slavery. To quote Adrian Banks' article on suicide and divorce:
So what is the main cause of [divorced male] suicide? […] The answer to this question is not that difficult, but before someone can accept the truth of the main causes of suicide, one must first accept the truth that slavery is just as much an institution today as it has been throughout history. The more oppressive and cruel the enslavement, the more suicides there will be among the enslaved classes of society. Why do you think that, in pre civil war times, slaves were kept in the holes of ships and not allowed on the decks? Simple, it kept the slave trader's precious cargo of labor from jumping into the ocean. As Winston Churchill stated during World War II, "it is better to perish that to live as slaves." […] In a divorce situation today, there need not be any legitimate grounds thanks to no fault divorce. A man can be a hard working fellow who supports his family and loves his children, but if his wife decides to divorce him, there is nothing he can do.
Kposowa cites "financial obligations," in explaining the preponderance of divorcees amongst male suicides noting that "The courts in the United States are in a position now whereby money is given to the woman, or the man is forced to pay alimony, child support. The man is also asked, in some [perhaps most] cases, to vacate the house."
Kposowa also notes: "If a man loses custody of the children and the woman keeps those children, there are situations whereby she may not allow the man to see the children, and that causes some depression." -No kidding.
Suicidal divorced men are merely slaves leaping from the decks
– consider the facts:
- Most marriages end in divorce – over 60% by my numbers.
- 66% of these are initiated by the wife and few of them for abuse or any real fault. -No-fault divorces are initiated by women three times as often as by men.
- The courts award physical custody to the man about 3% of the time – the odds are 40 to 1 against the man winning physical custody.
- Truly shared custody is so rare that the courts don’t even know how to calculate support for it – their spreadsheets don’t support it. They have to fill out one for the father as primary, and one for the mother, and then average the two. - I believe that loss of access to one’s children and alienation are key factors in male suicide.
- Women commonly interfere with the visitation rights of the ex husband. 75% of men complain of this behavior, and 40% of women admit it. If one assumes complaints are lower than the actual number of abuses, the numbers must be staggering.
- Add the loss of the vast majority of the marital assets and the house, and everything that the man has worked for, financial contributions being where men are expected to excel, and what they are supposed to judge themselves by, and you have taken away a lot of the reasons that men have to live.
- Add alimony and child support, all while not being allowed to co-parent your own children.
- Add to all this the fact that the state’s machinery grinds very finely – loss of a job, ‘underemployment’, and bankruptcy are good enough reasons to lose almost any debt, but not alimony and child support, no, these continue unabated, plus penalties and legal fees.
- And if our poor man is unlucky enough to lose his job, or become ‘underemployed’, then the legal system in many of our states, including NJ, will take 60-65% of his income, even unemployment, irregardless of what his spouse is earning. Imagine, a spouse with a $150,000 salary, collecting 65% of the income of a man scratching by on $405 per week unemployment, or a $40,000/year job. NJ would do it in a heartbeat. I bet they already have.
So divorced men have good reason to be casting themselves from the decks.
Having lost their wives, their children, their assets, and finally their ability to earn a living, and being relegated to permanent poverty, divorced men are killing themselves in record numbers - over 15,000 men per year, killed by divorce.
Our job is to support them, and encourage our government to notice, and care.
-M
(simulposted on Hate Male Post - oh, and it wasn't really posted at 9am, I just knew I would be OOT today.)
Related posts:
Why Alimony is Wrong
Other Ways Alimony is Like Slavery
Further Bankruptcy Rights Revoked for Men - Making Divorce Even More Like Debt Servitude
P is for Paternity - or how to catch yourself a slave
D is for Divorce - 'the financial haircut club for men'
D is for Dance of Death - a bit on Perry Manley and others
See The State of Fatherhood for more information
If you feel suicidal, the divorce info page on suicide might be a good place to look.
I also recommend looking at Swallowed by a Snake.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
D is for the Dance of Death
Rosa Lee Parks has passed on at 92.
We all are familiar with her simple story, and how it helped to change the US, and the world by by helping to break down laws that discriminated against a whole group of citizens based on their color. The bravery of this woman strikes me, and how her weakness made her strong.
Michelle Malkin has a post on her here.
I think that men similarly are weak, but strangely are seen as strong, even as our last rights are being taken away. We need to find and hold up our own Rosa Parks-like people, persuade them to make themselves visible. Unfortunately so many pass on in despair and hopelessness - finally dying rather than lose their entire life to court-enforced slavery.
It's a strange team of martyrs and saints here in the men's rights pantheon:
Perry Manley comes to mind. A man who fought for years against an unfair system, and finally gave his life in an act of protest in Seattle. Most striking to me in retrospect the interviews with his ex-wife and her deadpan lack of any apparent sense of her part in his death. 'It was really about the money'. Yes it was, wasn't it. Notice how neatly the reporters wrap it up, without really touching at all on the issues of men's rights, casting Manley as a crackpot. The word 'Garnishment' is never mentioned in the news report. Instead we hear his ex saying how he selfishly quit his high-paying job, and how in the end, it was just mean-ness that lead him to seek death at the hands of Seattle's police. We hear less about the real man and his cause. I like the comment in this article by a friend, who said that Manley was about to do something drastic, a comment that rings so true:
Tom Swanson, who accompanied Manley to the flag burning and shares Manley's belief that child support is illegal, said Manley had promised that if the flag burning didn't attract enough attention to his plight, he was going to do something "more drastic."
"Nobody would listen to us," said Swanson, who lives in his car in Tacoma and was reached by cellphone.
Nothing speaks more poignantly to the desparation of men than this simple comment of a man who now lives in his car - perhaps tied to the fact that suicide rates for divorced men dwarf any other demographic division. - A suicide EPIDEMIC, linked directly to the rulings of family courts by Augustine Kposowa of the University of California in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. (abstract)
Others come to mind...
Darrin White, who was driven to despair after being driven from his home, denied all contact with his three children, and ordered to pay twice his annual income in alimony and support. Darrin hung himself from a tree in March 2000. No evidence of any wrongdoing was ever presented against him, and a supreme court judge commented that “There is nothing unusual about this judgment”. All too common. Other links here, here,
Other heroes:
Our various spider men and the like...(Ron Davis for example)
Or Stephen Baskerville, Phd (he even has a wiki entry), for his voice of activism and reason, and Augustine Kposowa or any of the hundreds and hundreds of other researchers who have spoken the truth to power, the truth that men do not leave, do not abuse, and that fathers are actually the least likely to harm children in any way.
and more....
How about that kid (Rylan Nitzschke) who had to pay his own child support?
Or the Granny whose life savings where seized to pay for her son's 'support debts'.
Or the juveniles who were raped and ordered to pay child support to their rapists.
Or that 85-year-old man who was raped by his housekeeper, who was ordered to pay support to his rapist for the offspring that she had, and had his pension garnished.
(see here for these and more)
There certainly are enough candidates...
I guess the thing is, to get the media to start being able to pick up the notes of the melody that is playing...
-It's a death-march for marriage and family, and it is being directed by the gender-feminists, the knee-jerk-women's-rights-legislators, greedy spouses, and the divorce industry.
I just hope people realize that it's a Danse Macabre before it is too late.
...It may already be.
-M
(Simulposted on HateMalePost. See Here and Here for more on the Danse Macabre)
We all are familiar with her simple story, and how it helped to change the US, and the world by by helping to break down laws that discriminated against a whole group of citizens based on their color. The bravery of this woman strikes me, and how her weakness made her strong.
Michelle Malkin has a post on her here.
I think that men similarly are weak, but strangely are seen as strong, even as our last rights are being taken away. We need to find and hold up our own Rosa Parks-like people, persuade them to make themselves visible. Unfortunately so many pass on in despair and hopelessness - finally dying rather than lose their entire life to court-enforced slavery.
It's a strange team of martyrs and saints here in the men's rights pantheon:
Perry Manley comes to mind. A man who fought for years against an unfair system, and finally gave his life in an act of protest in Seattle. Most striking to me in retrospect the interviews with his ex-wife and her deadpan lack of any apparent sense of her part in his death. 'It was really about the money'. Yes it was, wasn't it. Notice how neatly the reporters wrap it up, without really touching at all on the issues of men's rights, casting Manley as a crackpot. The word 'Garnishment' is never mentioned in the news report. Instead we hear his ex saying how he selfishly quit his high-paying job, and how in the end, it was just mean-ness that lead him to seek death at the hands of Seattle's police. We hear less about the real man and his cause. I like the comment in this article by a friend, who said that Manley was about to do something drastic, a comment that rings so true:
Tom Swanson, who accompanied Manley to the flag burning and shares Manley's belief that child support is illegal, said Manley had promised that if the flag burning didn't attract enough attention to his plight, he was going to do something "more drastic."
"Nobody would listen to us," said Swanson, who lives in his car in Tacoma and was reached by cellphone.
Nothing speaks more poignantly to the desparation of men than this simple comment of a man who now lives in his car - perhaps tied to the fact that suicide rates for divorced men dwarf any other demographic division. - A suicide EPIDEMIC, linked directly to the rulings of family courts by Augustine Kposowa of the University of California in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. (abstract)
Others come to mind...
Darrin White, who was driven to despair after being driven from his home, denied all contact with his three children, and ordered to pay twice his annual income in alimony and support. Darrin hung himself from a tree in March 2000. No evidence of any wrongdoing was ever presented against him, and a supreme court judge commented that “There is nothing unusual about this judgment”. All too common. Other links here, here,
Other heroes:
Our various spider men and the like...(Ron Davis for example)
Or Stephen Baskerville, Phd (he even has a wiki entry), for his voice of activism and reason, and Augustine Kposowa or any of the hundreds and hundreds of other researchers who have spoken the truth to power, the truth that men do not leave, do not abuse, and that fathers are actually the least likely to harm children in any way.
and more....
How about that kid (Rylan Nitzschke) who had to pay his own child support?
Or the Granny whose life savings where seized to pay for her son's 'support debts'.
Or the juveniles who were raped and ordered to pay child support to their rapists.
Or that 85-year-old man who was raped by his housekeeper, who was ordered to pay support to his rapist for the offspring that she had, and had his pension garnished.
(see here for these and more)
There certainly are enough candidates...
I guess the thing is, to get the media to start being able to pick up the notes of the melody that is playing...
-It's a death-march for marriage and family, and it is being directed by the gender-feminists, the knee-jerk-women's-rights-legislators, greedy spouses, and the divorce industry.
I just hope people realize that it's a Danse Macabre before it is too late.
...It may already be.
-M
(Simulposted on HateMalePost. See Here and Here for more on the Danse Macabre)
Thursday, September 08, 2005
R is for Relentless Persuit
I have just discovered Hate Male, a blog from someone who has clearly encountered our Family Court justice system at some level, and I can't help but be fascinated by the posts there. One remarkable post tells a story detailing how many states (including NJ) have outsourced their probate process relating to support to a firm called Maximus, which perhaps should be called Misandrous Maximus. (It would be a joke name, if it's actions were funny.) Misandrous Maximus falsifies documents, and works the system, taking out orders against their victims in this state and that state irregardless of merit or legality, and the judicial system supports them almost every step of the way irregardless of the facts, while the purported beneficiaries of the orders, (when they exist), claim not to have seen most of the payments. This story ends up in NJ, which is no surprise to us. They couldn't have picked a better state if they were looking for a state to rubberstamp their every and any legal action taken against a man.
From the post:
Child Support Enforcement routinely does business this way. They create arrearages that have no basis in fact and then abuse the fathers to the point that they have no hope. The only way out for all too many of them is suicide. [M-no suprise to us] Then Child Support Enforcement tries to force the obligor's survivors to pay for the "outstanding debt" and they are soon driven to despair as well. [M-remember, child support debts are good against your estate too - even death is not an excuse for non-payment] See the post for the horrifying details.
This all comes home to me though -
In NJ, if a woman REQUESTS that payments be done through probate, that request MUST BE GRANTED. Up until I lost my job, I made my payments by hand though, and now that I am re-employed garnishment is being started, and I am VERY AFRAID that some organization like Misandrous Maximus may now attach to me.
Be afraid, be very afraid.
-M
From the post:
Child Support Enforcement routinely does business this way. They create arrearages that have no basis in fact and then abuse the fathers to the point that they have no hope. The only way out for all too many of them is suicide. [M-no suprise to us] Then Child Support Enforcement tries to force the obligor's survivors to pay for the "outstanding debt" and they are soon driven to despair as well. [M-remember, child support debts are good against your estate too - even death is not an excuse for non-payment] See the post for the horrifying details.
This all comes home to me though -
In NJ, if a woman REQUESTS that payments be done through probate, that request MUST BE GRANTED. Up until I lost my job, I made my payments by hand though, and now that I am re-employed garnishment is being started, and I am VERY AFRAID that some organization like Misandrous Maximus may now attach to me.
Be afraid, be very afraid.
-M
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
S is for Slavery
In prior posts we have established (to most men's satisfaction, if not the courts) that Alimony is Slavery based on the Constitution of the United States, and that it was also involuntary and debt servitude based on the US Code, and we have discussed the fact that divorce hugely increases odds of male suicide, and linked that back to the hopelessness of the slavery and theft of ones children and assets that regularly occurs in divorce.
There are a variety of other ways in which the parallels with slavery are interesting.
First of all, apparently men don't have civil rights:
Jessica Weiler, assistant Michigan attorney general indicated that: "A claim of a debtor's prison punishment is not legitimate in a child support case." in a case where a man was claiming that he was being forced into debt-servitude.
Secondly, the enslaving government of the US has enacted a modern day version of the 'Dred Scott' decision - for those of you whose knowledge of the history of slavery has faded, Dred Scott was a slave who sued for his freedom (and that of his wife) based on the fact that he had resided in states where slavery was illegal, and should have been freed at that point, and should have remained free. The Supreme Court of the US issued an extremely ignorant opinion which basically enforced the rights of slave-holders over their escaped slaves everywhere. Similarly, as men were escaping from 'modern slave states' such as New York, New Jersey, California and Massachusetts to other, free states, the federal government created the 'Bradley Amendment' - which literally forced all states to revoke due process for any man who falls behind on their support and alimony payments, and required them to sieze assets and income of these men, and forbade them from forgiving these debts no matter what the circumstances. Somehow it seems appropriate that the sponsor of this bill, Bill Bradley, was Democratic Senator from my misandrous state, NJ.
We actually have TWO Dred Scott laws, because president Clinton signed a law (the 'deadbeat parents punishment act') making it a FELONY to cross state lines to escape slavery (see here for a summary of Clinton's wrongheaded work against men, set in glowing terms, and with lots of misleading statistics) Clinton also worked to be sure that 'deadbeat' fathers could be quickly identified if those fathers sought work in their new state, and force mothers to identify some male to foot the bills for their support.
Well, in yet another parallel with slavery, there is apparently an Underground Railroad for men: an organization called 'PAFE - the Planetary Alliance for Fathers in Exile which assists men locked into slavery in their home countries in escaping overseas. The Western Standard (registration required, but very worth it), discusses this organization and the flight of educated men from the slave states of North America. The article takes up the story of a Canadian tapped for $22,000 per year in support for children that he wasn't allowed to see. With some cloak-and-dagger and secured emails he is guided in escaping the country. Suddenly. Without notice. Secretly.
PAFE claims that 100,000 men per year abandon the United States alone due to the draconian divorce/support/alimony laws that are in place here. PAFE is quoted as saying "The number of men forced into illegal [...] debtor's prisons in America stands at a quarter of a million" and that many more continue paying into it just to be able to see their children and stay 'safe' day to day. PAFE also indicates that almost 100,000 men have similarly escaped Great Britain, and 137,000 from Australia, moving to Europe and changing their identities.
One father is quoted as saying "I figured [...] either I don't see [my children] from jail, or I don't see them from the U.K. So I chose not to see them from the U.K."
The head of PAFE, a doctor, states that he got into this business when another doctor approached him about doing something to reduce suicide rates among divorced men. It is no surprise to us that he was able to see the link between the misandry of the courts and the suicide rate. As of today, he has helped 4,700 men escape slavery and find safety in exile. If each of these 4,700 is a professional, they may represent over 9 billion dollars in lost skills and future income to Canada - and if the 100,000 number for the US can be believed, (and I think it is low), we may be losing over a quarter of a trillion dollars in future income every year.
So I wonder - how extreme does the enslavement of divorced men have to become before someone in the government starts reigning in our out-of-control divorce industry? The article suggests that few legislators care. Those men wouldn't have voted for them anyway.
-M
There are a variety of other ways in which the parallels with slavery are interesting.
First of all, apparently men don't have civil rights:
Jessica Weiler, assistant Michigan attorney general indicated that: "A claim of a debtor's prison punishment is not legitimate in a child support case." in a case where a man was claiming that he was being forced into debt-servitude.
Secondly, the enslaving government of the US has enacted a modern day version of the 'Dred Scott' decision - for those of you whose knowledge of the history of slavery has faded, Dred Scott was a slave who sued for his freedom (and that of his wife) based on the fact that he had resided in states where slavery was illegal, and should have been freed at that point, and should have remained free. The Supreme Court of the US issued an extremely ignorant opinion which basically enforced the rights of slave-holders over their escaped slaves everywhere. Similarly, as men were escaping from 'modern slave states' such as New York, New Jersey, California and Massachusetts to other, free states, the federal government created the 'Bradley Amendment' - which literally forced all states to revoke due process for any man who falls behind on their support and alimony payments, and required them to sieze assets and income of these men, and forbade them from forgiving these debts no matter what the circumstances. Somehow it seems appropriate that the sponsor of this bill, Bill Bradley, was Democratic Senator from my misandrous state, NJ.
We actually have TWO Dred Scott laws, because president Clinton signed a law (the 'deadbeat parents punishment act') making it a FELONY to cross state lines to escape slavery (see here for a summary of Clinton's wrongheaded work against men, set in glowing terms, and with lots of misleading statistics) Clinton also worked to be sure that 'deadbeat' fathers could be quickly identified if those fathers sought work in their new state, and force mothers to identify some male to foot the bills for their support.
Well, in yet another parallel with slavery, there is apparently an Underground Railroad for men: an organization called 'PAFE - the Planetary Alliance for Fathers in Exile which assists men locked into slavery in their home countries in escaping overseas. The Western Standard (registration required, but very worth it), discusses this organization and the flight of educated men from the slave states of North America. The article takes up the story of a Canadian tapped for $22,000 per year in support for children that he wasn't allowed to see. With some cloak-and-dagger and secured emails he is guided in escaping the country. Suddenly. Without notice. Secretly.
PAFE claims that 100,000 men per year abandon the United States alone due to the draconian divorce/support/alimony laws that are in place here. PAFE is quoted as saying "The number of men forced into illegal [...] debtor's prisons in America stands at a quarter of a million" and that many more continue paying into it just to be able to see their children and stay 'safe' day to day. PAFE also indicates that almost 100,000 men have similarly escaped Great Britain, and 137,000 from Australia, moving to Europe and changing their identities.
One father is quoted as saying "I figured [...] either I don't see [my children] from jail, or I don't see them from the U.K. So I chose not to see them from the U.K."
The head of PAFE, a doctor, states that he got into this business when another doctor approached him about doing something to reduce suicide rates among divorced men. It is no surprise to us that he was able to see the link between the misandry of the courts and the suicide rate. As of today, he has helped 4,700 men escape slavery and find safety in exile. If each of these 4,700 is a professional, they may represent over 9 billion dollars in lost skills and future income to Canada - and if the 100,000 number for the US can be believed, (and I think it is low), we may be losing over a quarter of a trillion dollars in future income every year.
So I wonder - how extreme does the enslavement of divorced men have to become before someone in the government starts reigning in our out-of-control divorce industry? The article suggests that few legislators care. Those men wouldn't have voted for them anyway.
-M
Thursday, August 18, 2005
S is also for Suicide
(Updated November 1st, 2005)
If you are moderately familiar with the topic at hand, which is the treatment of men by our society, you probably have wondered how men can survive the crushing depression that they must feel while struggling with a strongly biased legal system that is eager to enslave them.
Well, many of men don’t survive it.
Suicide rates for men and boys are already much higher than those for women and girls – with 75% of all suicides being committed by men - over 22,000 men per year. (The rate is 80% in Canada, perhaps reflecting their system, which is often even more abusive of men. )
And suicide rates for divorced men are even higher than that - divorced and separated men are TWICE AS LIKELY to commit suicide as other men, per the study "Marital Status and Suicide in the National Longitudinal Mortality Study" by Augustine J. Kposowa, Ph.D., at the University of California at Riverside. CBS News covered the report here.
The study showed that being single versus being married made no difference in suicide rates.
- Simply 'being married' does not provide singificant mental health benefits relating to suicide.
Even more tellingly, for women marital status, married, single, separated or divorced, made NO STATISTICAL DIFFERENCE in suicide rates.
- So somehow, divorce affects men in a much more significant way than women. One wonders what that way could be...
Previous to this study, increased rates of suicide for men had been explained away by claiming that significant mental and physical health benefits were to be had from married life, and by 'congitive differences' between men and women - women purportedly spending more time 'processing' their problems and thinking more 'inclusively' than men, Well Dr. Kposowa's research has exposed that canard, (wait, let me speak plainly:) that misandrous, shovenist tripe for what it is.
Let's take a moment and really reveiw those numbers, which we will extrapolate using the published rough perecentages in the CBS news article:
Total Suicides: 30,000 per year
Men's Suicides: 22,500 per year
Women's Suicides: 7,500 per year
Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 14,850 per year.
Hmm. I wonder how many men committed suicide outside of a divorce/separation situation. Well, I know how to subtract, lets see...
Non Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 7,650 per year.
Approximately equal to the number for women.
So it seems reasonable to guess, that if it were not for the way men are treated in divorce, those 14,850 men PER YEAR would still be alive.
Dr. Kposowa's study; the first study that cared enough about men to look at the details of why men kill themselves; shows us that if you hear about a man committing sucide the odds are better than 2:1 that he is either a divorcee or going through a divorce.
Suicide is a dramatic and extreme way out of a very bad situation. -A way out that few would choose.
The significant increase (2:1) in suicides following a divorce for men is very significant.
These men are the canaries in the coal-mine of our family court system. They are literally dying to tell us something, and apparently that something is about... Divorce.
SO NOW COMES THE BIG QUESTION:
What is so terrible about divorce that men would kill themselves to escape it?
The answer is simple: Slavery. To quote Adrian Banks' article on suicide and divorce:
So what is the main cause of [divorced male] suicide? […] The answer to this question is not that difficult, but before someone can accept the truth of the main causes of suicide, one must first accept the truth that slavery is just as much an institution today as it has been throughout history. The more oppressive and cruel the enslavement, the more suicides there will be among the enslaved classes of society. Why do you think that, in pre civil war times, slaves were kept in the holes of ships and not allowed on the decks? Simple, it kept the slave trader's precious cargo of labor from jumping into the ocean. As Winston Churchill stated during World War II, "it is better to perish that to live as slaves." […] In a divorce situation today, there need not be any legitimate grounds thanks to no fault divorce. A man can be a hard working fellow who supports his family and loves his children, but if his wife decides to divorce him, there is nothing he can do.
Kposowa cites "financial obligations," in explaining the preponderance of divorcees amongst male suicides noting that "The courts in the United States are in a position now whereby money is given to the woman, or the man is forced to pay alimony, child support. The man is also asked, in some [perhaps most] cases, to vacate the house."
If you are moderately familiar with the topic at hand, which is the treatment of men by our society, you probably have wondered how men can survive the crushing depression that they must feel while struggling with a strongly biased legal system that is eager to enslave them.
Well, many of men don’t survive it.
Suicide rates for men and boys are already much higher than those for women and girls – with 75% of all suicides being committed by men - over 22,000 men per year. (The rate is 80% in Canada, perhaps reflecting their system, which is often even more abusive of men. )
And suicide rates for divorced men are even higher than that - divorced and separated men are TWICE AS LIKELY to commit suicide as other men, per the study "Marital Status and Suicide in the National Longitudinal Mortality Study" by Augustine J. Kposowa, Ph.D., at the University of California at Riverside. CBS News covered the report here.
The study showed that being single versus being married made no difference in suicide rates.
- Simply 'being married' does not provide singificant mental health benefits relating to suicide.
Even more tellingly, for women marital status, married, single, separated or divorced, made NO STATISTICAL DIFFERENCE in suicide rates.
- So somehow, divorce affects men in a much more significant way than women. One wonders what that way could be...
Previous to this study, increased rates of suicide for men had been explained away by claiming that significant mental and physical health benefits were to be had from married life, and by 'congitive differences' between men and women - women purportedly spending more time 'processing' their problems and thinking more 'inclusively' than men, Well Dr. Kposowa's research has exposed that canard, (wait, let me speak plainly:) that misandrous, shovenist tripe for what it is.
Let's take a moment and really reveiw those numbers, which we will extrapolate using the published rough perecentages in the CBS news article:
Total Suicides: 30,000 per year
Men's Suicides: 22,500 per year
Women's Suicides: 7,500 per year
Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 14,850 per year.
Hmm. I wonder how many men committed suicide outside of a divorce/separation situation. Well, I know how to subtract, lets see...
Non Divorced/Separated Men's Suicides: 7,650 per year.
Approximately equal to the number for women.
So it seems reasonable to guess, that if it were not for the way men are treated in divorce, those 14,850 men PER YEAR would still be alive.
Dr. Kposowa's study; the first study that cared enough about men to look at the details of why men kill themselves; shows us that if you hear about a man committing sucide the odds are better than 2:1 that he is either a divorcee or going through a divorce.
Suicide is a dramatic and extreme way out of a very bad situation. -A way out that few would choose.
The significant increase (2:1) in suicides following a divorce for men is very significant.
These men are the canaries in the coal-mine of our family court system. They are literally dying to tell us something, and apparently that something is about... Divorce.
SO NOW COMES THE BIG QUESTION:
What is so terrible about divorce that men would kill themselves to escape it?
The answer is simple: Slavery. To quote Adrian Banks' article on suicide and divorce:
So what is the main cause of [divorced male] suicide? […] The answer to this question is not that difficult, but before someone can accept the truth of the main causes of suicide, one must first accept the truth that slavery is just as much an institution today as it has been throughout history. The more oppressive and cruel the enslavement, the more suicides there will be among the enslaved classes of society. Why do you think that, in pre civil war times, slaves were kept in the holes of ships and not allowed on the decks? Simple, it kept the slave trader's precious cargo of labor from jumping into the ocean. As Winston Churchill stated during World War II, "it is better to perish that to live as slaves." […] In a divorce situation today, there need not be any legitimate grounds thanks to no fault divorce. A man can be a hard working fellow who supports his family and loves his children, but if his wife decides to divorce him, there is nothing he can do.
Kposowa cites "financial obligations," in explaining the preponderance of divorcees amongst male suicides noting that "The courts in the United States are in a position now whereby money is given to the woman, or the man is forced to pay alimony, child support. The man is also asked, in some [perhaps most] cases, to vacate the house."
Kposowa also notes: "If a man loses custody of the children and the woman keeps those children, there are situations whereby she may not allow the man to see the children, and that causes some depression." -No kidding.
Suicidal divorced men are merely slaves leaping from the decks
– consider the facts:
- Most marriages end in divorce – over 60% by my numbers.
- 66% of these are initiated by the wife and few of them for abuse or any real fault. -No-fault divorces are initiated by women three times as often as by men.
- The courts award physical custody to the man about 3% of the time – the odds are 40 to 1 against the man winning physical custody.
- Truly shared custody is so rare that the courts don’t even know how to calculate support for it – their spreadsheets don’t support it. They have to fill out one for the father as primary, and one for the mother, and then average the two. - I believe that loss of access to one’s children and alienation are key factors in male suicide.
- Women commonly interfere with the visitation rights of the ex husband. 75% of men complain of this behavior, and 40% of women admit it. If one assumes complaints are lower than the actual number of abuses, the numbers must be staggering.
- Add the loss of the vast majority of the marital assets and the house, and everything that the man has worked for, financial contributions being where men are expected to excel, and what they are supposed to judge themselves by, and you have taken away a lot of the reasons that men have to live.
- Add alimony and child support, all while not being allowed to co-parent your own children.
- Add to all this the fact that the state’s machinery grinds very finely – loss of a job, ‘underemployment’, and bankruptcy are good enough reasons to lose almost any debt, but not alimony and child support, no, these continue unabated, plus penalties and legal fees.
- And if our poor man is unlucky enough to lose his job, or become ‘underemployed’, then the legal system in many of our states, including NJ, will take 60-65% of his income, even unemployment, irregardless of what his spouse is earning. Imagine, a spouse with a $150,000 salary, collecting 65% of the income of a man scratching by on $405 per week unemployment, or a $40,000/year job. NJ would do it in a heartbeat. I bet they already have.
So divorced men have good reason to be casting themselves from the decks.
Having lost their wives, their children, their assets, and finally their ability to earn a living, and being relegated to permanent poverty, divorced men are killing themselves in record numbers - over 15,000 men per year, killed by divorce.
Our job is to support them, and encourage our government to notice, and care.
-M
See The State of Fatherhood for more information... If you feel suicidal, the divorce info page on suicide might be a good place to look.
I also recommend looking at Swallowed by a Snake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
