cyber_green1
journeyman
Reged: 06/07/09
Posts: 83
|
|
First time poster here. been reading some of the other posts and thought I would try mine..
Me 51 , was computer professional up until about 7years ago.
her 46 , computer professional still,
after 21 years of a good marrige and trying to have kids (we were unable up until about 7 years ago)we finally had a child (special needs) girl, we both decieded that it would be better if one quit the job and stayed home to take care of her, I was chosen and she would continue her carreer.
after the child was born (hard birth c-section) my wife had all sort of problems with her hormones (I guess), she changed, jaw grew, teeth shifted, hair falling out, weird.
anyway I went to raise our child and doing all the things that needed to be done (I was the primary caregiver ). she started going different and getting more violent and started to scare me. I didnt know where to go so I started seeing a marrige counceler. when he suggested we go together I said that would be hard becouse of not having anyone to watch the kid and didnt want to bring the child in with us to hear any type of conflict, so I suggested he talk with her first and that was allright , they made a date for the appoitment and when it came to the date she cancelled.
I went a couple more times and without her attending. the consulore decided we could not go any further. about a year and a half later we had a son who was also special needs. now I have two special needs kids that I take care of full time days.
this goes on for another 3 years and she is getting worse. mean and controlling. I am origanally from Mich and her family is here in Minn.
just before our daughter is born my parents in Mich died and left me with a nice inherantance, so we were able to provide with the kids good.
we comingled the inherantance with our accounts and lived on her saliery and the savings money. payed out all the bills (cars,van, credit cards)execpt for the morgtage
she would travel on sminars and classes for work all the time and I thought nothing of it (at the time) .
then when I went on a fishing trip I came back from the week long vacation and she started questioning me on my fedility. I said there were eight guys and no girls. I have never been unfaithfull to her and never would. why should I ,I had everything I wanted there. the abuse continued and I started seeing the counsler again. to see if it was me that was causing it, he said he had no indication that I was the cause and suggested we get her in to see him. she refused and kept blocking every attemp at any kind of counseling. well he finnaly suggested the marrige was not healthy and suggested we break it off.. I agreed and let her know , she fought me every step of the way , I had the kids that I was taking care of and she was still working , she suggested that I leave and I said she should . so we finally got lawyers and served papers and she suggested to save money I use her lawyer (yea right) ,so when she saw that I was not leaving and still taking care of the kids she took a new tatic . get the kids in daycare so it would look like I was a no job deadbeat. I blocked her every step. this went on for a while and she finally started using the law on me . long story story shory she put a bruse on her arm and blamed me for it , got a restaining order against me and had me thrown out. when it came time for the restaining order and tempory custody case. the judge believed I put the bruse on her arm but said she was not afaid of me at all. so he said I should still be able to see the kids and go to the house on a scheduld (when I was there she would go)and only talk about the kids.also he award me spocial support 400. a month and use of the home and she had to keep up on insurance and allmost everything else. that worked out for about 9 months, when the order was about to give out she was ferious and gave me a sommons saying i violated the order. all sorts of crap abuse,harrasment,on and on and on.
and asking that the order be extended another 2 years.
went to court with another judge who had no Idea about our case. and found in here favor. but limited it to 6mo and to stay out of the house..
well in the meantime we went to classes and mediation,and custody evaluation.
I got a job and an appartment. she would not pay the support and giving me a real diffucult time seeing the kids.
after we got the judges order I went to child servives and filled out to papperwork for garnishment of her wages , by that time it was up to about 4500. they granted it and she was furious.. but nothing her or her lawyer could do.
Now I am at the last 30 days of the order and we have a pre-trial date in Aug she says she wants the house but hasnt payed anything for it yet. she wants 100 percent costudy and I want 50-50. and to top it off I grabbed all the papper work (and anything else I could)when I left the house . and just going through it I found a credit report she had from after our girl was born and that looked allright up until the last page , it had the addresses that we lived at and then there was an appartment address that I never heard of on it. it made me wonder?
well Im going to give it to my lawyer and see during this pre trial if we can get her to admit to it and who was on the lease what it was for so on and so on.
what do you think?
--------------------
just sorta rambling, dont take my word for it I'm mostly wrong.
|
datdo
recently joined
Reged: 06/10/09
Posts: 3
|
|
sounds like you might deserve to get your 50 50 cust
about the same thing happened to me
good luck
|
datdo
recently joined
Reged: 06/10/09
Posts: 3
|
|
For those that don’t know, you have landed on a known, militant feminist site. We call them femin azis.
They will attempt to chase off anyone that disagrees with them (and their lies).
They will denigrate those that refuse to leave.
They will gang up on you and if that does not work, they will collude (yes , this is illegal), lie about you and try to get Divorce Source to ban you. Unless you know how to counter this, Divorce Source takes the easy way out and accepts their lies instead of investigating the truth.
They hate the members of Fathers’ Integrity & Rights Movement (F IRM) because they have tried for over 10 years to rid this board of us.
For over 10 years, they have NEVER proved us wrong on ANY post except once. And, that was because of a new law that passed in the state of GA that we were not aware of, but do thank them for pointing it out.
Many times you will see the following message or similar to it because we have found that it does not matter what is stated, they will lie, twist it and do their best to denigrate the poster.
Some say to just ignore them. We have. We have for over 6 months at a time and they never relent.
What you will find is that the most ardent femin azis are also Canadian. They are part of the Status of Women, Canada (SOWs) . The SOW are financed by Canada to monitor and to report back any hate speech for them to counter. Of course, if you disagree with them, then, that is considered hate speech.
If you will TAKE CAREFUL NOTICE, they only attack our character and their lies about our character have escalated over the years to even now (no pun intended), they accuse SuperEric of being a child molester. But, if you look at what they post, they NEVER disagree with the posts. They cannot. They cannot because we back what we say with facts and figures including law and quantitative analysis.
There are two main femin azis of this site:
Gecko (Cheryle Bammel)
Runs With Scissors (Caroline Rogers)
Oh, they have their many drones, but most of them are just a different screen name for both of these “leaders” as they post as males and females to “sway” their points and to prove that “men” also believe their aberrant and sick ways…
They have another group that has “special members” to audit this site and they discuss how to control and “correct the thinking” of others. How do we know this? They were infiltrated! We were sent the postings and know EXACTLY what they are up to.
We try to start everyday fresh. We don’t attack unless attacked. Enevitably, they will attack. So, we just have a simple statement that we attach after they have posted whether or not, in the forum or the thread that they are posting in once they have attacked us within the previous 24 hours.
You will see many posts like this after they have attacked us:
"Beware:
This is a known liar and disrupter of posts.
This is a known bully.
This is a known femin azi.
This is a known troll poster.
Therefore, whatever she states should be regarded with caution and suspect due to her repeated lies, misinformation and posts in multiple names/genders along with just being an "icky" type subhuman."
Again, we have NEVER BEEN PROVED WRONG, BUT WE MOST ASSUREDLY HAVE PROVEN THEM WRONG ABOUT A GAZILLION TIMES.
We hope that this explains what is going on and, if you think we are attacking you, just look at who is responded to in the gray areas of the responses because it will show the name of the person that we are defending our integrity from…
You as a newbie, may think that there may be another approach. Feel free to comment. However, we can attest that we have tried eveything that we know how to try to no avail.
One thing we can say for sure about the Na zis is that their lies worked, for awhile...with this motto:
Hitler said in "Mein Kampf" that if you tell a lie for the purpose of propaganda, tell a big one! Because the bigger the lie is, the more people are apt to believe it, because they can't believe you would dare to tell such a big lie unless it was the truth!
It seems that some have a difficulty with the term, "femin azi." So much so, that they can only reflect upon the members of F_IRM (Fathers Integrity & Rights Movement-named by a woman, btw...).
Well, this misconception is totally wrong yet continues to be propagated by...guess who...the femin azi PIGS.
In fact, the term femin azi is so colloquial, all mainstream dictionaries have a definition of what a femin azi is:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/femin azi
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/femin azi
Hell, even the encyclopedias have their say too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Femin azi
This is certainly not a new term and is certainly MAINSTREAM.
But, natch, the person that really describes the term for what it really means is SuperEric:
"Femin azi is a term to describe a select group of women. Not all women. Not feminists. It describes militant type feminists that use the doctrines and dogmas of Marxism/communism, believes in the eradication of the family unit and more specifically, men, to believe a female over a male when encountering law enforcement & courts and to put women in a group that is "more equal." They use the techniques culled from the N azi ideology to accomplish their goals."
Others broach the subject:
by Carey Roberts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When persons call for the decimation of half the world's population, that grabs my attention. This is what I'm talking about:
"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." -- Sally Miller Gearhart, in The Future - If There Is One - Is Female.
"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." --Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.
These proposals are disturbing in their own right. What is even more troubling is that no feminist has ever repudiated them.
When feminists call for global "decontamination" by phasing-out men, I can't help but think of the lies and accusations leveled against the Jews in [censored] Germany, and the similarities to contemporary gender feminism:
1. Biological superiority: The National Socialists preached the genetic superiority of the Aryan race. Now, a feminist-oriented World Health Organization website claims that women enjoy an "inherent biological advantage."
2. Sub-human: In the 1930s, the Jews were called vermin and "Judensau" (Jew-pig). Thirty years later, feminists referred to men as "male chauvinist pigs."
3. Conspiracy theory: The Jews were often accused of "working together" to pollute German culture. Now, feminists refer to the so-called conspiracy against women as "the patriarchy."
4. Excessive influence: Seventy years ago, Jews were accused of controlling the German economy. Now, men are accused of "having all the power."
5. Threat to the greater welfare: The Jews were blacklisted as toxic to German culture. In the present era, Gloria Steinem writes, "The most dangerous situation for a woman is....a husband or lover in the isolation of their own home."
6. Faulty science: Just as Hitler's propagandists once dismissed Albert Einstein's discoveries as "Jewish physics," feminist scholars now ridicule male scientific breakthroughs as the product of "linear" and "hierarchical" thinking.
7. Spread of a dread disease: In [censored] Germany, Jews were falsely accused of spreading of untreatable syphilis. Now, UNICEF director Carol Belamy unfairly blames men for the spread of AIDS in Africa.
8. Sexual contact: Hitler was obsessed with keeping Jewish men from "defiling" the racial purity of Aryan women. Now, according to Catherine McKinnon, "In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape."
But the most fascinating parallel between Germany in the 1930s and the current era lies in the conscious use of deception to sway public opinion.
In her brilliant exposé, Who Stole Feminism?, Christina Hoff Sommers documents the many fabrications of gender feminism. Indeed, the entire ideological foundation of feminism rests on what columnist Wendy McElroy calls the "Great Lie" -- the wrong-headed notion that women are the eternal victims of male-dominated culture.
The feminist Great Lie echoes the infamous passage from Mein Kampf that says, "The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed....The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one."
The effect of the [censored] accusations was to convince the German public and the world at large that Jews were not part of humanity, and thus not deserving of fundamental human rights.
Once the dehumanization and demoralization of the Jews was complete, the stage was set for the horrors that were to commence in 1939.
So what does the future hold for the male species?
Carey Roberts
Carey Roberts is a researcher and consultant who tracks gender bias in the mainstream media.
Still, others try to make it more specific:
by Angry Harry <mailto:admin@angryharry.com>
30 Reasons Why Feminists Really Are 'Feminazis'
Nope. AH has not yet written Part III of his explanation of how it is that multi-cellular organisms and multi-peopled organisations are so amazingly similar.
He has been far too busy!
And he keeps being distracted from writing it.
And one major recent distraction was caused by an email from T who wanted to know why anti-feminists keep insisting that feminism and N azism are very similar.
Well. The reason is this.
The N azis were around well before the heavy-duty violence and the gas chambers. And for quite some time they operated in a manner that paralleled in many ways the more recent activities of feminists.
Furthermore, feminist and N azi ideology have a lot in common.
AH very occasionally receives an email saying that it is outrageous to compare feminism with Na zism - because it somehow trivialises the terrible experiences of the Jews in the Germany of the 1930s.
But making the comparison does not do this at all.
It does the opposite.
It brings to the attention of people the kind of forces that gave rise to Na zism and, as far as men are concerned - particularly the white ones - it makes them understand a little better the horribleness of discrimination and demonisation.
Furthermore, most Jewish groups do not actually highlight the holocaust in order to gain everybody's sympathy.
They do it so that people can LEARN!
They do it so that people can see if something heinous is creeping up on us.
Anyway.
Here are 30 similarities between feminism and 'early' N azism.
Feminism and N azism have both ...
discriminated against individuals on the basis of their genetic code.
promoted the view that the targeted group was inferior genetically and behaviourally, e.g. see AH's Men Bear a Striking Resemblance to Slugs. <esmenbearastrikingresemblancetoslugs.htm>
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being labeled as 'parasites', e.g. see AH's Steven Jones - A Parasite? <esstevenjones.htm>
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being constantly ridiculed e.g. see Incredible Shrinking Y <http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0F1EFD39590C7A8CDDAE0894DB404482> by Maureen Dowd
promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being laughed at even when mutilated e.g. Bobbit jokes.
demonised the target group by labeling them as perverts and sexual criminals, e.g. see Put Up or Shut Up <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,57209,00.html> by Wendy McElroy
sought to break the target group away from their families e.g. see The Federal Bureau of Marriage? <http://www.fathersforlife.org/articles/Baskerville/marriage-expose_1.htm> by Professor Stephen Baskerville.
promoted the view that the targeted group was responsible for most of the major ills in society.
disseminated lies and disinformation about the targeted group in order to further promote their own ideology, e.g. see Msinformation <tgMsinformation.htm> by Professor Christina Hoff Sommers.
disseminated lies and disinformation about historical matters, e.g. see AH's Did Women Really Want To Go Out To Work? <esDidWomenReallyWantToGoOutToWork.htm>
used intimidation, threats and coercion to prevent their opponents from speaking out e.g. see AH's Feminists are nasty things <esFeministsarenastythings.htm>.
promoted the lie that the privileged group consisted of innocent 'victims' of the targeted group e.g. "women have been oppressed throughout history."
demanded special privileges in the workplace for members of the privileged group e.g. preferential job placements for women.
discriminated against the targeted group in educational matters and in the workplace e.g. see AH's Well Done the Girls? <esWellDonetheGirls.htm>
perverted the justice system so that members of the targeted group were easily discriminated against in the law e.g. in family courts.
arranged matters so that accusers from the privileged group could be shielded by anonymity in the courtroom e.g. in sex-assault cases.
arranged matters so that defendants from the targeted group had to 'prove' their innocence e.g. in sex-assault and domestic violence cases.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define what, legally, was to be deemed 'a crime', e.g. where nowadays the 'feelings' of women rather than the behaviours of men are the determinants of what constitutes 'a crime' e.g. see The Real Goal Of Feminism <tgTheRealGoalOfFeminism.htm> by Antonia Feitz - 18 min.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define how the law was to view certain matters e.g. a fetus inside a woman can now be deemed by her - at her whim - to be a worthless piece of tissue or a prospective baby - with all the ramifications of this - regardless of how the father might feel about it all e.g. see AH's Rant Against the Child Support Agency <esRantAgainsttheCSA.htm>. (Also sexual harassment etc.)
arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group more severely than members of the privileged group for the very same crime e.g. in domestic violence and murder cases.
arranged matters so that members of the targeted group were made responsible for the choices and behaviours of members of the privileged group e.g. in paternity fraud cases where duped fathers still have to pay child support.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group who harmed, or even murdered, members of the targeted group were shown undue leniency - and were often actually applauded for their actions, e.g. see Killer given domestic violence award <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1651234.stm> and AH's Loose Women <meLooseWomen.htm>.
arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group severely for even trivial offences - e.g. domestic violence, sexual harassment.
arranged matters so that members of the privileged group earned a right to the property of members of the targeted group for no other reason than that they were members of the privileged group e.g. alimony, child custody.
arranged matters so that certain speech or attitudes directed against the privileged group were criminalised e.g. biased 'hate speech' laws.
demanded subservience to the prevailing ideology and to the government.
effectively controlled the mainstream media and the academic institutions and arranged for them to present a dishonest and dishonourable point of view in support of their ideology.
consistently highlighted and exaggerated the achievements and the suffering of the privileged group while downplaying the achievements and the suffering of the targeted group e.g. see Human Rights are not for Men <tgHumanRightsarenotforMen.htm> by Melanie Phillips.
ran government-funded educational courses in universities (e.g. Women's Studies, Title IX) and in schools to promote the privileged group at the expense of the targeted group.
persisted in a long term campaign of hatred toward the targeted group, e.g. "Women need men like a fish needs a bicycle." "Men think about sex every 15 seconds." etc. Also see AH's Permanent Menstrual Tension <esPermanentMenstrualTension.htm>.
Bar the heavy violence and the gas chambers - which came towards the end of the Na zis hold on power - feminism and early Na zism are surely very similar indeed!
But, SuperEric (as normal) hits the proverbial femin azi PIG on the head:
Femin azi is a term to describe a select group of women. Not all women. Not feminists. It describes militant type feminists that use the doctrines and dogmas of Marxism/communism, believes in the eradication of the family unit and more specifically, men, to believe a female over a male when encountering law enforcement & courts and to put women in a group that is "more equal." They use the techniques culled from the [censored] ideology to accomplish their goals.
Another thing that is not often mentioned is:
Hitler said in "Mein Kampf" that if you tell a lie for the purpose of propaganda, tell a big one! Because the bigger the lie is, the more people are apt to believe it, because they can't believe you would dare to tell such a big lie unless it was the truth!
|
jaybeedee619
recently joined
Reged: 06/07/09
Posts: 6
Loc: MN
|
|
You have a lot on your plate. I don't know how to advise. I hope that you can keep your dignity and relationship with your children intact. Sometimes I just focus on what matters most and sometimes knowing everything that happened in the past doesn't matter most.
|
cyber_green1
journeyman
Reged: 06/07/09
Posts: 83
|
|
well 7 days until the order of protection is off of me and just some thoughts that I still love her but its been a year since Ive been able to talk to her . dont really know what to say or how to act(typical man thing I guess). I had the kids this weekend and we had a great time, when she picked up the kids she seemed happy and so did I , I wrote her a note that tried to explain my feelings that I still wanted her as a friend and that the reason for the divorce was my fault but I didnt give it to her yet. I just dont know how to proceed should I let her know or try to win her back, If i try too hard Ill look like a wimp but if I dont try I feel like i kicked myself in the ass. I would like this whole divorce thing to just go away and be happy with a family again .
--------------------
just sorta rambling, dont take my word for it I'm mostly wrong.
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
